What's new

2014 Fleet Service Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
No they dont have to continue to bargain after a 30 day cooling off period, they can impose terms, the union can strike, the company can lock you out and replace you.
 
Did NW continue to bargain with AMFA after they struck?
 
Nope, they imposed new terms and hired replacements.
 
You have no clue of what you are talking about.
 
700UW said:
No they dont have to continue to bargain after a 30 day cooling off period, they can impose terms, the union can strike, the company can lock you out and replace you.
 
Did NW continue to bargain with AMFA after they struck?
 
Nope, they imposed new terms and hired replacements.
 
You have no clue of what you are talking about.
By law, after a strike, a company [under the RLA]  is free to impose a lockout provided it remains willing to bargain with the union. You better call Tommy up and then have him call up someone above him because I honestly don't think many of you know the law or have much education at all to comprehend it.
 
History is not on your side.
 
NW and AMFA did not negotiate, NW imposed new terms, hired replacement workers, AMFA struck and NW DID NOT Negotiate anymore.
 
And after the DL/NW merger AMFA gave up their certification.
 
Facts and truth, not Timmy's Thoughts on the RLA.
 
700UW said:
History is not on your side.
 
NW and AMFA did not negotiate, NW imposed new terms, hired replacement workers, AMFA struck and NW DID NOT Negotiate anymore.
 
And after the DL/NW merger AMFA gave up their certification.
 
Facts and truth, not Timmy's Thoughts on the RLA.
It was AMFA who chose not to negotiate. If I remember correctly, AMFA said it would refuse to go back to the table if there was any offer that resulted in job cuts.  Again, the RLA allows a company to lock out striking workers, if the company remains willing to bargain with the union. That's the law. 
 
EL AL and Alitalia both locked out their employees in the US and hired replacement workers.
 
So a lockout is permitted after the 30 day cooling off period has expired.
 
But hey you know it all, thats why you cant even win an election.
 
700UW said:
EL AL and Alitalia both locked out their employees in the US and hired replacement workers.
 
So a lockout is permitted after the 30 day cooling off period has expired.
 
But hey you know it all, thats why you cant even win an election.
you referring to the IAM strike at EL AL that lasted two years? Why are we talking about that? Nobody is disputing that a company can't lock out striking workers. 
 
Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA's) under the RLA
Contracts remain in force until changed. Either party seeking to amend existing CBA’s must provide 30-day written notice as to desired changes. (Section 6 RLA). There is no time limit by which contracts must be negotiated to avoid a work stoppage. Under Section 6 of the act either side may propose changes to an existing collective bargaining agreement, but agreements (for purposes of stability and labor peace) generally contain agreed upon moratorium clauses that provide no change may be demanded on specified subjects for a prescribed period of time.

Once Section 6 notices proposing changes to an existing agreement have been served,
the parties must maintain the status quo (no strikes or lockouts or promulgation of changes) until all procedures of the RLA have been fully exhausted.
 
For major disputes over wages, benefits and working conditions, the RLA provides for a three-member National Mediation Board, appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, with the power to mediate any dispute between carriers and their employees at the request of either party or upon the board's own motion.
 
There is no time limit on the mediation procedure. The NMB controls the schedule of talks and only the NMB may release the parties from mediation.
 
If the NMB is unable to bring about an amicable settlement of the controversy through mediation, the board is required to use its influence to induce the parties voluntarily to submit to binding arbitration. The law is specific in that arbitration is voluntary and not compulsory.
 
If both sides voluntarily agree to binding arbitration, an Arbitration Board of up to six members is to be established. Carriers and labor each select an equal number of arbitrators, who then select the additional member or members.
 
NW did this, after they thought about it:
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/26/business/26northwest.html?_r=0
 
http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/air/events/doc/javits.pdf
 
Self-help is really an issue that remains quiet in the range of acceptable self-help when both parties have gone through the entire collective bargaining dispute procedure. "However, court decisions have made clear that the scope of permissible self-help is broad," (Highlights of RLA, p.3, www.fra.gov) extending far beyond the permissible self-help that the National Relations Act would permit. "Courts have ruled, for example, that primary dispute, engage in intermittent work stoppages (e.g. "selective" or "rolling strikes") and secondarily picket other neutral RLA employers (a practice prohibited under the NLRA)" (Highlights of RLA, p.3, www.fra.gov). As far as carriers are concerned, their self-help contains the implementation of their proposal contract changes, creating a nation wide response to protect against a selective strike that may threaten national bargaining, that includes locking out striking workers and if the contract allows for with non-striking workers, other workers; and replacing striking workers.
 
http://www.stfrancis.edu/content/ba/ghkickul/stuwebs/btopics/works/railwaylaboract.htm
 
Go to page "8" which is 168 on the document:
 
http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2144&context=mlr
 
700UW said:
Not surprisingly, your nytimes article confirms my exact statements.
 
NYTimes, "Under the Railway Labor Act, which has covered airline employees since 1936, companies have the right to lock out striking workers as long as the company remains willing to bargain."
It also confirmed that it was AMFA who wasn't willing to bargain, just as I said.
 
I'm not sure why we have to continue discussing this, aren't your own links a further confirmation for you that what I said was true?  Do you read the links you post before posting them?
 
Read the rest of the papers.
 
The last one is a link to the legal case where a company can and will lockout employees and was upheld by the courts.
 
I've exhausted my conversation with you on the RLA items. 
Getting back to US AIRWAYS Fleet, why did Tommy's last proposal offer up a wage scale at DOS that is less than what AMR has? It seems brother Prez is side stepping this question.
 
Well first of all Tommy doesnt make proposals on his own, second nothing has been released by the IAM about any proposal to the membership.
 
So either your lying or AH is feeding you information of disinformation.
 
So if you want to know go ask Tommy I dont speak for him, the NC or any IAM member.
 
ChockJockey said:
...or the IAM itself.
there are certainly some fields of thought on that ...lol

all these posts about RLA and releases are a waste ,it's never gonna happen
e
on the other hand this lack of matching AMR at DOS is a dead serious issue that is dead in the water and a waste of time imo
 
Tim Nelson said:
It was AMFA who chose not to negotiate. If I remember correctly, AMFA said it would refuse to go back to the table if there was any offer that resulted in job cuts.  Again, the RLA allows a company to lock out striking workers, if the company remains willing to bargain with the union. That's the law.
Nelson, this is an example of why I’m so hard on you in these forums. Your spin blinds you to the facts-- You attempt to drive square pegs into round holes just make your version of the puzzle fit!

You, of all people should know the fundamentals of the RLA, this is basic stuff you learn as a steward, and you think you’re qualified to be President of the 141?
 
Ultimately, as the RLA runs it course for Fleet Service as it has, the following criteria would apply. YES the Company CAN lockout in the end game, and/or impose a last best offer. If a strike would occur and continue the Federal Government CAN intervene to end it. How you ask? It’s called the PEB...

Presidential Emergency Board (PEB)

If either labor, or management decline voluntary arbitration, and if in the opinion of the NMB the continuance of the controversy threatens substantially to interrupt interstate commerce in any section of the nation, the NMB is required to notify the President of the United States, who may, at his discretion, create a fact-finding Presidential Emergency Board.

The parties must maintain the status quo (no strikes or lockouts) for 30 days. If the president chooses not to appoint an emergency board, strikes or lockouts may occur after the 30-day cooling-off period.

Emergency boards are comprised of neutral members whose job is to make an investigation and submit to the president, within 30 days of its creation, a fact-finding report with non-binding recommendations for procedures or terms on which a dispute might be settled. During this period, the parties must maintain the status quo (a second 30-day cooling-off period).

Upon submission of the PEB report, the parties are required to maintain the status quo for an additional, or third 30-day cooling-off period (they may mutually agree to extend the period of status quo). The non-binding recommendations of the PEB are expected to carry the weight of public opinion and induce a voluntary agreement among the parties.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top