mike33,
wings396,
I don't think this was an oji. The person was hit by a car walking from employee parking lot. He asked me last nite as to whether he was limited to a certain amout of light duty. I dont know. I'll ask him tonight if he was oji. BF
Bagfather,
wings396,
Two years ago a co worker of mine was determined, by the treating surgeon, to have reached maximum medical improvement. The employee's return to work was "based on the findings of the Functional Capacity Exam" required by the company. The employee's only restriction was not being able to lift 70 lbs. overhead unimpeded. The employee was able to lift 67 lbs. unimpeded. The pre surgery restrictions were no lifting over 15 lbs. The employee was denied the ability to return on a limited duty basis post surgery even though there was a remaining balance of limited duty days for the injury based on contractual language. End result... the loss of compensation, benefits, vacation / sick day accrual for over two months! Many OJIs require "additional strengthening" even after a patient has been declared to have reached "Maximum Medical Improvement". IMO...this message of intimidation by the company is meant to serve as punishment for and a deterrent to claiming a workers compensation OJI. It must be challenged and cease. Am I safe to assume your friend was , in fact, offered post surgery OJI limited duty?
So... once again the company decides to alter the contractual language agreed to. First they agree to 60 days of limited duty per injury... then decide it only applies to pre surgery. They offer limited duty OJI, pre surgery, with very limited restrictions but refuse to offer the contractual balance of limited duty post surgery with far less restrictions. The difference is pre surgery is not a workers compensation claim. Post surgey is a limited duty return to work after a workers compensation claim. Quite a difference in posture by the company regarding the application of Article 16. The end result was over two months of lost compensation, benefits, vacation and sick accrual. Their intended message is let that be a lesson to the said employee and anyone else who goes out on an OJI workers compensation claim. This practice by the company has been grieved and is awaiting arbitration. Going forward, upon further investigation, I believe we will find inconsistent application of this policy and the requirement to pass an FCE as a requiement to return to full duty work, throughout the system. Rumor has it... the company is considering only offering limited duty to red headed, fair skinned fleet service employees in the future.
I'd like to change the course of conversation and get some feedback from you guy's concerning the negotiations. After talking to some co-workers about the question of the union talaking strike to the company. How many would support that situation. Most I've talked to said for no more tahn the union has done, they would cross the picket line because if the company fired us for walking, they have no faith in the union to get our jobs back. What's the consensus and is the negotiating aware of the lack of support from the membership?
The threat of a legal strike, one that is sanctioned by the NMB, is the only real leverage any union or negotiating committee has at the bargaining table. Without that leverage your contract improvement proposals are reduced to requests and nothing more. Do your co workers believe the benefits they now reap are the result of the company's generosity? They are entitled to these contractual gains and benefits because of the solidarity within labor. Workers who weren't afraid to lay it on the line for improved wages, benefits and working conditions. Necigrad is correct. Fortunately, in this day and age you cannot be fired for being part of a legal strike. IMO... your co workers need to better educate themselves on the history and principals of organized labor.
