A good read and may answer a few of your questions.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/collective+bargaining
FedEx Freight | STK has filed with the NLRB
- Thread starter The Point
- Start date
- Status
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/collective+bargaining
Jim Carville
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 0
Thank you for that. Saving to favorite places and will read it over. Looks like a fair source of information.
You're quite welcome.
There is good information there and you will be able to see just how fine the hair is when they split it.
There are something to take note in a case there as buffalo bill was speaking of. "Blatant" would be a good word to use.
Cab Lizzard
TB Veteran
- Credits
- 572
The sides could agree to binding arbitration .
Does a company with a brand that is worth billions want to risk being front page news.........They do not want their dirty laundry aired on the nightly news.
Jim Carville
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 0
That makes zero sense to me. So, let's say you negotiate on the purchase of a house. The two sides cannot agree what the price will be. Me personally, I refuse to pay a million dollars for the house. I'm only willing to pay 500k for the house. Why would I ever agree to let some outsider make me pay more than I want for the house if I don't have to? Sure, they can agree to binding arbitration just like they can agree to give us all free health insurance. They don't have to though. If it was my company i'm not turning that decision over to some beaurocrat ever.
I also don't think this will ever be front page news. Public doesn't care about what we make. Hell, we make more than most of them anyway.
Cab Lizzard
TB Veteran
- Credits
- 572
It may not make sense to you but that's some of the way's to achieve a mutual agreement.
Its not about how much you make!
The company only cares about the bottom line.
You are nothing more than a necessary cost to get to that number. They would replace you with a machine if they could and they may at some point.........
It's about a global company doing the right thing.
Jim Carville
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 0
If they did the right thing, we wouldn't be having this conversation. They're suddenly going to get morals and turn over the fate of their company to someone else so that they can say they did the right thing? I'm not optimistic.
Cab Lizzard
TB Veteran
- Credits
- 572
They evidently did not because some of your fellow employees have taken a different approach.
The company knows what the right thing to do is, but sometimes it is not good for the bottom line and look the other way.
I just cannot see how having a labor agreement is turning over the "fate"of their company.
Well I am optimistic that a company can have a labor agreement right along side the labor agreement that management has .
Over the years I see the young kids all they care about is that dollar amount on their check each week. As they get older its about health care and braces for the kid's. Then when your body is all worn out its about the health insurance and how am I going to survive ? I worked all these years to live the dream and all of a sudden my body can't do this anymore and I have not saved anything.
53% of households spend every dime they have just to get by. They also report less than $1000.00 in savings.
Look around brother these are your friends,co workers
Jim Carville
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 0
I don't expect the company to do right by me, and I also don't think a union will make them do right by me either. I expect me to do right by me. That means cutting through the crap and not getting into philosophical debates about what's right. I have savings because I worked to have it. Not a lot, but protection for me and my family. If others don't then that's not Fedex fault. It's theirs. I hold my company accountable with my feet. If they don't provide, i'll move on. If you're willing to work, someone will hire you. I've always done better when I moved on. I'm not saying a union is out of the question for me. If my terminal gets to a vote, i'll probably go with the flow if that's what my co workers want to do. I just don't see it as a magical cure, and it probably would be another bill to pay. There was a lot of talk a while ago but it died off some. Still there though.
Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
With a private sector union, the company doesn't have to agree to anything...a contract, an impasse, and especially arbitration...they're only bound to negotiate in "good faith"...which is a very vague term.
Do you really think any company is worried about a labor dispute being aired on the news these days? The only ones who would even pay attention would be those who are involved in the dispute...and they already know what's going on!
The whole news argument is so '80's, times have changed. The unions tried the whole news argument with Overnite in the '90's, even bringing in HBO (which was big at the time), and NOBODY cared!!
They even tried picketing the companies that used Overnite...another union tactic...and NOBODY cared!
No, it absolutely isn't necessarily bad faith. If I offer you 25 cents an hour less than you are currently making but offer OT after 8 instead of 40....that certainly could be considered negotiating in good faith.
If you think this isn't a give and take, you are naive.
Mediation isn't always utilized during INITIAL contract negotiations. If the company or union declares impasse and the NLRB agrees, it's done. Last offer made by the company stands. Union members don't get to vote on that.
To be clear. That isn't always the case. Union boards may have the right to exercise the contract without a ratification vote. If the IBT gets tired of going back and forth with FedEx and believes the best they have to offer may not be ratified by the membership, their constitution may give them power to exercise the contract without member ratification.
Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
Another scenario...the company could offer free healthcare in a contract if that's what you're asking for...but they could also offer less wages to offset the cost of that free healthcare. At the end of the day, they're still offering exactly what you have now, nothing less, therefore it's considered "good faith".
Of course these guys will never see a contract IMHO, so this whole conversation is moot!
Of course these guys will never see a contract IMHO, so this whole conversation is moot!
Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
And that's exactly what happened to UPS employees in LOU...even after 94% of the employees voted no.
Jim Carville
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 0
I forgot about that. I heard that tho.
Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
I posted a link to the article in the first post of the thread "Know What You're Voting For" and another 3 links in post #7 of the same thread if you're interested in reading.
joes bar and grill
TB Legend
- Credits
- 0
Tell that to the guys on the bottom of the list
Redrecer3136 said:
Both of you seem to forget the fact that there is a nationwide driver shortage. The Company is not in that strong of a position, to realistically offer nonsense like a reduction in pay in exchange for an increase in some other area. Just not that type of environment. We already are at a deficit compared to the competition, in many areas.
Many of the tactics being thrown about, by others (not by either of you), are also nonsense and would be counter productive, both in productivity and driver retention. Offers of less than we have now are laughable in today's environment. If that is even plausible, then we have bigger problems than even the teamsters can help with. As always, just my opinion...
I am attempting to keep facts and opinions separate. When someone says the company can't negotiate backwards, I'm pointing out that they certainly can. Whether or not they choose to is up to them.
I will be very surprised if there are not concessions made in multiple areas to compensate for gains in other areas. No way are the Teamsters pitching a no-hitter, won't even be a shut out.
- Status