Thread regarding AT&T layoffs

BTW--this was posted by 9421:

Board Charge Clarification
by Mike Felmann | Sep 6, 2024 | Announcement, Mobilization, News | 0 comments

The board charge filed by this local does not have to do with bargaining. It relates to ATT not honoring a grievance settlement for a member. We have received numerous inquiries as to what it was related to so I hope this gives some clarification.

I would vote no just because of no retro-pay on the increase.

No retro pay.
Increased healthcare cost.
15% pay increase while other unions are getting at least 20%.

I would vote no just because of no retro-pay on the increase.

Why? It's just as much the union's fault as the company's that there wasn't a contract in place before the contract expired. Now it's the union's fault that they aren't getting raises from now until there's another TA. If D9 didn't like the contract, it's just as much the CWA negotiating team's fault as the company's. Why don't they file a ULP against the union for not negotiating a 'better' deal and bringing one that they don't think was bargained in their best interests?

I would vote no just because of no retro-pay on the increase.

I don't get it -- did the West union membership really not like the deal or were they told to vote no in order to benefit the SE in some way? Either way, it su-ks for everyone.
Hope this you West peeps don't regret your 'no' vote.

How can it be “unfair labor practice” and a tentative agreement between Union leaders and the company?

How can both be true?

“Try being an adult and do something construction.”

You mean constructive?
Or do you literally mean go pour some crete, frame some walls, and lay some flooring?

Is that what I’m supposed to be doing on my weekends?

I’m trying to watch football, it’s a day of rest.

Try being an adult and do something construction.

@nzw+1upMSpml

Source?

Could you all keep it down on here and pick this back up tomorrow? I’m trying to watch football, it’s a day of rest.

didn't want to continue negotiations

Why the he-l would anybody 'continue to negotiate' while the TA was being voted on? That would be an influence to the vote itself. If there's a TA on the table, negotiations should cease until that outcome is verified.

How will that play with a ULP?

Not at play at all.

The members voted no. If the company didn't want to continue negotiations with an anticipation of a no vote or if the company breaks other labor practices then a ULP is in play.

1. there was a letter from Dist 9 to vote Yes
2. the locals were asking to vote No

How will that play with a ULP?

The company has been texting union employees individually in D3, asking them to urge CWA to vote on the companies “final offer”. A violation of ULP by directly contacting an employee, tampering. They are supposed to only contact the union representatives.

ULP charge filed on AT&T 9/5 day before vote was counted was it filed by Union or individual?

It was filed by one of the locals, which someone on another post said was a big one, with lots of lawmaker friends, whatever that means. Don't think it will fly as there was no activity on that for weeks. It had been solely in the CWA hands for weeks. Nothing that the company could be doing "in bad faith." And the fact that the negotiating team had accepted a TA kind of resets the meter. Can't really call it bad faith bargaining if it was good enough for the negotiating team to accept for a vote.

If you really want to know click, paste the link in the OP. It is a local union that filed though.

ULP charge filed on AT&T 9/5 day before vote was counted was it filed by Union or individual?

Stankey is now fighting on at least 4 fronts.

1. The SE - on ULP strike
2. The West - About to be on ULP strike after voting down TA
3. DTV contractual issue with ESPN and Disney channels
4. Middle and lower management on RTO and relocation

P.S. He’s pi---d off about everyone outside of his bubble!

Love the business acumen of living his purpose, the pajama life!

Firstly, it is getting interesting