How responsible is the UAW regarding Ford's situation?

[Spartacus]

matt,
you never were,or ever will be of officer caliber
people sense

 

[spongebob]

If company policy supercedes union contracts, why doesn't Ford just over-ride the elements of it's existing UAW contract that it doesn't like? Let's see... "It is now Ford's company policy to provide Pensions at the sole discretion of the company." Wow... that would make their current pension disaster go away with a few strokes of the word processor. Let's keep going... "Ford no longer recognizes wages by job class and had the absolute right to set hourly rates on a per-individual basis."... Wow! Another problem just went away.

i guess when i said company policy does not cover negotiated items you skipped that part.

I guess all those Ford managers and their lawyers aren't as clever as you are. They don't need to negotiate with UAW, they just need to rewrite their company policies. Cool! I should drop then a note and see if they will pay me the big bucks!

the items in a contract are different fromn the items in company policy. i suggest you read both and then you will have a better understanding of what im telling you.

 

[spongebob]

matt,
you never were,or ever will be of officer caliber
people sense

hey he said he was changing.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

matt,
you never were,or ever will be of officer caliber
people sense

Good thing the President and the generals who run the Army didn't pick up on that and commissioned me anyway.

Friend of mine is back from Iraq again, second full tour over plus spent years in Kuwait before. The guy loved the Army, figured he would do 20 years or more, he was gung ho.

Now he droped his paperwork to get out, said too many punks being promoted. 90% promotion rate to major = insanity. The Army apparently needs people, even shitty ones.

 

[mrplunkey]

the items in a contract are different fromn the items in company policy. i suggest you read both and then you will have a better understanding of what im telling you.

I used to establish, write AND review company polices. Management spells-out the way things are done, including terms and conditions of employment. Then if you have a portion of your workers that are unionized, the collective barganing agreement has elements that are either 1) Congruent with company policy and the collective barganing agreement will reitereate the policy or is 2) Incongruent with company policy, hence the collective barganing agreement supercedes it, or 3) Raises an issue that company policy is silent on, then the collective barganing agreement establishes the policy.

I'll give you a *great* example. Our company policy stated that hourly workers are eligible for full-time status with health benefits after a 90-day probationary period. The Teamsters wanted a clause that said for workers in their barganing unit (in this case 8 employees), an employee could achieve full-time status in 30 days. We agreed to disagree, which is one of the many reasons those guys went over one year without a contract and later decertified their union.

We also disagreed over leave. Our company policy stated that unless the employee was protected by The Family Medical Leave Act of 1993, that leaves of absence were granted at the sole discretion of the company. The Teamsters wanted a clause that added other conditions for leave. Again, we agreed to disagree, and this was yet another one of the reasons the guys went over a year without a contract and later decertified their own union.

And alas... yet another example. We maintained that shifts (it was a 12-hour shift / 7-day-a-week operation) were to be assigned at the sole discretion of managment. Yet again, the Teamsters had this goofy "seniority" ranking whereby people could "vote" for shifts. Again, we agreed to disagree, and this was yet another one of the reasons the guys went over a year without a contract and later decertified thier own union.

There were some elements of company policy that we did agree on though. Our company policies about not leaving the processing chambers unattended for breaks or lunch was supported. The Teamsters were terrified of that, because at a 3% or greater concentration of our sterilization gas in the air, the entire plant basically became a fuel-air-bomb. They cut-and-pasted those company policies right out of the employee handbook and into the contract -- we even gave it to them in Microsoft Word format.

Now explain to me again how: "items in a contract are different fromn the items in company policy" ???

It's really not that hard to understand... Some of the arguments you're making here make absolutly zero sense.

 

[spongebob]

I used to establish, write AND review company polices. Management spells-out the way things are done, including terms and conditions of employment. Then if you have a portion of your workers that are unionized, the collective barganing agreement has elements that are either 1) Congruent with company policy and the collective barganing agreement will reitereate the policy or is 2) Incongruent with company policy, hence the collective barganing agreement supercedes it, or 3) Raises an issue that company policy is silent on, then the collective barganing agreement establishes the policy.

I'll give you a *great* example. Our company policy stated that hourly workers are eligible for full-time status with health benefits after a 90-day probationary period. The Teamsters wanted a clause that said for workers in their barganing unit (in this case 8 employees), an employee could achieve full-time status in 30 days. We agreed to disagree, which is one of the many reasons those guys went over one year without a contract and later decertified their union.

We also disagreed over leave. Our company policy stated that unless the employee was protected by The Family Medical Leave Act of 1993, that leaves of absence were granted at the sole discretion of the company. The Teamsters wanted a clause that added other conditions for leave. Again, we agreed to disagree, and this was yet another one of the reasons the guys went over a year without a contract and later decertified their own union.

And alas... yet another example. We maintained that shifts (it was a 12-hour shift / 7-day-a-week operation) were to be assigned at the sole discretion of managment. Yet again, the Teamsters had this goofy "seniority" ranking whereby people could "vote" for shifts. Again, we agreed to disagree, and this was yet another one of the reasons the guys went over a year without a contract and later decertified thier own union.

There were some elements of company policy that we did agree on though. Our company policies about not leaving the processing chambers unattended for breaks or lunch was supported. The Teamsters were terrified of that, because at a 3% or greater concentration of our sterilization gas in the air, the entire plant basically became a fuel-air-bomb. They cut-and-pasted those company policies right out of the employee handbook and into the contract -- we even gave it to them in Microsoft Word format.

Now explain to me again how: "items in a contract are different fromn the items in company policy" ???

It's really not that hard to understand... Some of the arguments you're making here make absolutly zero sense.

sounds like your finally understanding what im saying, that a company has absolute right to implement policies and guidlines and that only a few items will be crossed referenced between company policy and a contract. and that company policy will supercede a contract.

im thinking your not reading and comprehending my post. i said only a few items are crossed reference. and it sounds like the examples you gave here are items that either should not have been company policy or not have been items in a contract.

the union had no right to negotiate the probationary period and the leave of absence item.

let me also reword this for you if it helps.

if a company has a employee handbook in place with established policy and guidlines, and there is also a union contract in place, without a doubt company policy will supercede union contract. end of story.

lol @ you writing company policy. that seems far fetched considering....

 

[spongebob]

It's really not that hard to understand... Some of the arguments you're making here make absolutly zero sense.

why dont you just move on, you came in here with an attitude you tried to argue with me about joe and you lost, and now your reaching here. my last statement covers it well. here it is again because im tired of talking with you just for the sake of you wanting to argue and you hate being wrong as a company man.

when a comapny has an employee handbook and also has a union contract, company policy will supercede a union contract. it is most likely the two will not have many of the same items that are in conflict with one another if any.

 

[mrplunkey]

the union had no right to negotiate the probationary period and the leave of absence item.

Taken directly from the National Labor Relations Act ( http://www.nlrb.gov/nlrb/legal/manuals/rules/act.asp )

(d) [Obligation to bargain collectively] For the purposes of this section, to bargain collectively is the performance of the mutual obligation of the employer and the representative of the employees to meet at reasonable times and confer in good faith with respect to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment

Probationary periods and leaves of absence are clear and obvous "terms and conditions of employment". Hell, just go ask your shop steward if your company can set the Probationary period for employees to some large timeframe -- like two years. Also, go ask your shop steward if your union has the right to negotiate leaves of absence in your next contract. Not if they are going to -- if they have the RIGHT to raise the issue to management.

The only reason probationary periods were an issue was because the Teamsters were saying that if we went 90 days, we may be able to discrimintate against those "temporary" employees and not convert them to full-time status because by then we'd have enough time to ascertain their pro or anti-union leanings. And guess what? They'd be right.

 

[mrplunkey]

why dont you just move on, you came in here with an attitude you tried to argue with me about joe and you lost, and now your reaching here. my last statement covers it well. here it is again because im tired of talking with you just for the sake of you wanting to argue and you hate being wrong as a company man.

when a comapny has an employee handbook and also has a union contract, company policy will supercede a union contract. it is most likely the two will not have many of the same items that are in conflict with one another if any.

I do have an anti-union attitude, because it's sad to see them destroy manufacturing jobs in America. Unions served their purpose, but their demise is long overdue. It's just a shame that it takes being ravaged by global competition to kill-off these dinosaur organizations.

 

[mrplunkey]

the union had no right to negotiate the probationary period and the leave of absence item.

Chase the following link: http://www.iir.berkeley.edu/library/contracts/pdf/0062.pdf

It's the union agreement between the City and County of San Francisco (hint: that's an employer) and the Bricklayers and Allied Crafts Union, Local 3 (hint: That's a union)

In Article II.B of the agreement, it establishes the Probationary Period for employees to be six (6) months.

Then chase this link: http://www.iir.berkeley.edu/library/contracts/pdf/0378.pdf

It's the union agreement between The State of Indiana (hint: that's the employer) and the Interational Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers American Federation of Teachers (hint: that's the union)

In Article 4 Section F, there is a provision for leaves of absence in the event a union member is elected into an officer role within the union.

In Article 18 Section L, there is a provision for leaves of absence for "Parental Involvement in Children's Education"

Now... that pretty much points-out how you blatantly have no clue what you are talking about. How are you going to explain your way out of that one?