|
AT&T Tries To ReWrite Contract |
|
Wednesday, 29 March 2006 |
|
The CWA National filed charges at the NLRB stating the company bargained in bad faith around several of the provisions in the job security letter in the new 2005 Contract. The Union wants to see jobs filled by full-time regular employees and Member’s of the CWA Bargaining Committee who worked on this language are completely frustrated with what is going on with this. The surplus was declared before the company bargained or even reviewed the new 60-day clock with our Union. The company was told over and over during bargaining that there would be no agreement unless these issues were addressed. The language is clear. It is outrageous that they are not implementing it.
One of the things we all thought was wrong with the company's plan is that it requires our Members’ to decide on ECO (Skills match) BEFORE they even knew what was available under JOG (Job Offer Guarantee) and it requires them to give up their ECO rights if they take JOG. There is no recourse to retreat to ECO if they don't want the job offered. One of the reasons for the NLRB charge is that the company unilaterally declared the surplus before they bargained the procedure with our Union. The Union never saw the plan or the schedule until our Member’s were job claimed on Friday and they sent a copy of their paper work to us. That was the first time the Union saw this new timetable. This is outrageous. Our Member’ must give up ECO so they can obtain a job, but it is unjust that they should have to make that decision without adequate information and in such an unreasonable time frame. It is completely unreasonable that people should have to decide on the JOG offer the minute they are made the offer (which is what the package says). At least with job claiming, you know in advance what your choices and location will be. The charge at the NLRB is like an injunction; if we prevail, the remedy we are requesting is that the company must halt the surplus until these issues are resolved in the bargaining process. Testimony by the CWA Bargaining Committee and the National on these issues was presented to the NLRB on Tuesday, March 28, 2006 in Baltimore, Md. As usual with an NLRB case, the answer will not be given over night and we are hoping that we will be able to agree on the implementation of the job security process language before that. We will keep you informed of the progress of these charges.
|
