Fly-by-night
Only when you care to send the very best
- Credits
- 744
Read it for yourself. The big word being previous scheduled.
https://teamster.org/organizing-victories/what-expect-management
XPO | Xpo Union Thread.
- Thread starter upnorth
- Start date
- Status
https://teamster.org/organizing-victories/what-expect-management
Fly-by-night
Only when you care to send the very best
- Credits
- 744
With that in mind any raise given this year was not previous scheduled so that means any barn under union contract talk does not have to be given a raise
The company set past practices by giving out pay raises on a regular basis ( see decision) . I think they would be spitting in the courts face to withhold any thing that’s coming next month.
Fly-by-night
Only when you care to send the very best
- Credits
- 744
The ruling says nothing about the 2017 raise if I read it right. The only leg they have to stand on is raise was scheduled before the vote was certified
Serene Gene
TB Regular
- Credits
- 2
You crack me up. You've spent your entire time here painting the company as cheapskates, talking about "if" we get a raise every year, and suggesting that at some point we're even going to lose money. Now you're arguing that the company has set a precedent for giving annual raises??
And you say *I* hurt my credibility. Hilarious.
Im glad I humor you we all can use it nowadays!
Last edited:
It’s the union way. Lie, make things up, change the narrative. What ever it takes to make them look good while making the company look bad. Facts don’t matter.
Oh please. Same old song and dance.
100% agree. I’ve seen the same old song and dance from you guys. You can’t have it both ways. Either the company is cheap as doesn’t pay or they’ve set a precedent for paying us. Which is it?
The answer to your questions is we can and we will . The courts have decided if you have a problem with I kindly suggest you ask the company why they broke the law .
There is no answer I could give you that you would fit your narrative .
I have said my peace on this. I will be sure to repost a link and the case number for when the government (Nlrb) reopens.
Last edited:
Raises have always been "reviewed" yearly and are not set in stone.
The form letter that was posted in Miami is the same one that has shown up at several locations, including the Portland benefits office. This comes up regularly during "good faith" negotiations. A company cannot "withhold regularly scheduled pay increases" which means they cannot keep NMF from getting a regular step increase in their pay. However, once negotiations start, everything has to be negotiated, including unscheduled pay increases or increases to the pay scale. I'm not saying that there was no wrong doing on either part as I don't work there but that's the letter of the law.
NLRB regulations are written as pro-union....by that I mean that a union does not bear the same burden of proof that a company does. A union can do many things that a company cannot without any reprisal. They can promise anything that they want leading up to an election and there is nothing that the NLRB can or will do about it due to how the regulation is written. Once it's posted that there is a specific fine imposed by the NLRB on the company for a specific violation or that there is a specific dollar amount being issued to the employees at NMF, then I'll believe it.
The form letter that was posted in Miami is the same one that has shown up at several locations, including the Portland benefits office. This comes up regularly during "good faith" negotiations. A company cannot "withhold regularly scheduled pay increases" which means they cannot keep NMF from getting a regular step increase in their pay. However, once negotiations start, everything has to be negotiated, including unscheduled pay increases or increases to the pay scale. I'm not saying that there was no wrong doing on either part as I don't work there but that's the letter of the law.
NLRB regulations are written as pro-union....by that I mean that a union does not bear the same burden of proof that a company does. A union can do many things that a company cannot without any reprisal. They can promise anything that they want leading up to an election and there is nothing that the NLRB can or will do about it due to how the regulation is written. Once it's posted that there is a specific fine imposed by the NLRB on the company for a specific violation or that there is a specific dollar amount being issued to the employees at NMF, then I'll believe it.
This is not the case . This is part of a settlement handed down by the court . Please read the case findings . The posting is only to be posted in Miami. The settlement includes specific directives to reimbursement. Please do not come on here pretending or assuming you know the specifics when you clearly haven’t read the court document. Respectfully Sir you are not informed.
Suck666, I did read it and as I've said before, I don't assume anything. There is nothing specific in this posting relative to back pay. It say "backpay retroactive to April 2016 if withheld" which is what everybody has argued about. Pro-union believe that is all pay increases while anti-union believe that to be the scheduled yearly step increases which occur on your anniversary. This posting and link is not specific as to which this covers.
Per NLRB regulations, once a bargaining order is issued, everything becomes status quo. Meaning nothing is added or taken away without it being negotiated/bargained. Those are not company or union words, those are from the NLRB regulations.
I'm not employed at NMF so if you are and have first hand knowledge of anything that has been posted or said directly to those team members, then enlighten us. Otherwise, we're both speculating......
joes bar and grill
TB Legend
- Credits
- 0
There's the same old dance, it only took 2 posts.
(a) Make whole employees in its Miami/Hialeah service center, who are represented by the Charging Party Union, for any monetary loss suffered as a result of
5 Respondent’s failure to grant to these employees, wages granted to similarly situated unrepresented employees, retroactive to April 2016, plus interest in the manner set forth in the remedy section of this decision.
I don’t think gets any clearer
5 Respondent’s failure to grant to these employees, wages granted to similarly situated unrepresented employees, retroactive to April 2016, plus interest in the manner set forth in the remedy section of this decision.
I don’t think gets any clearer
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in certain unfair labor practices, I shall order it to cease and desist therefrom and to take certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies of the Act. Each of the affected employees shall be reimbursed for the increases they would have received in April 2016 to the present time by payment of the difference between their actual wages and benefits and the wages and benefits they would have received had they been compensated in the same manner as Respondent’s unrepresented employees. Back pay shall be computed in accordance with Ogle Protection Service, Inc., 183 NLRB 682 (1970), plus interest at the rate prescribed in New Horizons, 283 NLRB 1173 (1987) compounded daily as prescribed in Kentucky River Medical Center, 356 NLRB 6 (2010). Respondent shall also file a report with the Social Security Administration allocating backpay to the appropriate calendar quarters and compensate employees for the adverse tax consequences, if any, of receiving one or more lump-sum backpay awards covering periods longer than 1 year, Advoserv of New Jersey, Inc., 363 NLRB No. 143 (2016).
- Status