What is the Employee Free Choice Act?
The Employee Free Choice Act, supported by a in Congress, would enable working people to bargain for better benefits, wages and working conditions by restoring workers’ freedom to choose for themselves whether to join a union. It would:
- Remove current obstacles to employees who want collective bargaining.
- Guarantee that workers who can choose collective bargaining are able to achieve a contract.
- Allow employees to form unions by signing cards authorizing union representation.
Find Out More
Join the campaign-click below!
http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/passefca_
US AIRWAYS NEW ACP AND DISCIPLINE POLICY-FAQ
November 25, 2008
IBT/CWA Association
11/25 -Update from the IBT/CWA Association regarding the Attendance and Discipline policy; It is the Association’s position that the entire policy is invalid and will not be recognized by it. Our attorneys are in the process of drafting a letter from the Association to the Company stating our position in more detail. In the meantime, there is one piece of the policy that is particularly objectionable and that we feel we must address immediately - the shift trade issue. Although we are not accepting any portion of the policy as valid, a grievance is in the works right now on the shift trade issue, as stated in the FAQ below.
Why did US Airways develop a new Attendance control and Discipline policy?
When US Airways and America West merged, the customer service agents from each company had different policies they were covered under. The East had a two track system and the West had a one track system. The West agents were subjected to "stacking" where the company could combine attendance occurrences with disciplinary issue's to move them through the steps faster towards final steps of their policy. The East two track system was the policy the Company chose to adopt for all of the agents with changes to the two track system as described in the policy the Company has been covering the employees on recently.
Did the IBT/CWA Association approve or negotiate this policy?
NO. Union's normally do not negotiate discipline or attendance policies. The reason is that it would make it very difficult to challenge our members being disciplined under a policy that we negotiated. We believe it is more beneficial to reserve our right to challenge the discipline meted by the employer. Under the IBT/CWA Association, we have "Just cause" language protecting us, giving us the right to grieve any discipline issued to us under this new policy or any other Company policy.
Did the IBT/CWA Association have input in any way to the new Policy?
No, we did not have any direct input to policy. U S Airways did present it to the Association. We were able to ask clarifying questions and offer suggestions but U S Airways made it very clear they had no interest in negotiating the policy and their request in no way inferred that they would modify the policy based on our input. The only suggestion the company considered from the Association was the length of time an ATO agent is kept in Level III discipline vs. a RES agent. They changed the policy to be the same in both classifications. Now when placed on a level III discipline, it is effective for 12 months instead of 18 months. This had been an issue for years with the CWA before the merger, but it fell on deaf ears in the past at US Airways. In fact, the company had threatened to change the RES Level III to 18 months to mimic the ATO's when we asked them to make them equal. There were other changes and suggestions made by the Association, but the Company did not consider them.
Who can I contact if I have a question or issue with the new policy and its application?
You should contact your local manager with any general questions about the policy, since it was designed by US Airways. If an agent wants to file a grievance due to the application of the policy, please contact your Union steward for assistance.
Does the IBT/CWA Association agree with the new policy?
No, we do not. We did not agree with the past policies either and have continued to grieve the application of discipline in each individual case.
Does the threat of loosing our SWAPS due to a sick call on a swap, violate our Contract?
Yes, the IBT/CWA Association feels that language in the policy violates our negotiated language in the CBA and we have grievances in the works to address this issue in the near future. We feel it is also Double Jeopardy when someone is placed on a discipline level for calling out sick on a swap and loosing their right to swap for 30 or 60 days.
Disciplining an employee twice for the same act constitutes "double jeopardy".
US AIRWAYS HEALTH CARE COSTS FOR 2009
IBT-CWA Airline Passenger Service Association
September 24, 2008
Dear Brothers and Sisters:
The purpose of this letter is to address E. Allen Hemenway's recently posted letter concerning your monthly contribution premiums for healthcare in 2009. Make no mistake about it; Mr. Hemenway lied to you in his letter in an underhanded attempt to turn you against your Union. He outrageously mischaracterizes the position of your Union regarding employee contribution premiums for 2009 and intentionally left out critical details of the Company's position that could result in employees paying exorbitant premiums in years to come. In light of the sacrifices you have made over the last decade to keep this Company in business, he should be ashamed of what he has done.
The dispute over 2009 contributions is simple. Instead of approaching the IBT/CWA Association to bargain over 2009 contributions, US Airways informed the Association and other Unions on the property that it had unilaterally decided what employees' contribution rates for 2009 would be. In doing so, US Airways ignored its legal obligation to bargain over this change to employee health insurance premiums. Indeed, Mr. Hemenway's letter makes it clear US Airways has no intention of bargaining now or in the future years with the Association over employee insurance rates.
In response to this edict from the Company, the Association clearly stated its demand for bargaining. In fact, it did so in writing on September 8, 2008 to Mr. Hemenway. The Association's position is that US Airways does not have the right to unilaterally change insurance rates, now or in the future. Bargaining with the Association on this matter is mandatory, not optional. Although the Association has demanded bargaining, the Company has refused. Instead, it chose to issue Mr. Hemenway's letter in attempt to undermine the Association by dealing directly with the employees.
What Mr. Hemenway conveniently left out of his letter is that if the Association simply accepted the Company's position without bargaining, it would give your Union no say whatsoever in employee contribution rates through 2011. Although the Company's unilaterally-determined contribution rates for 2009 may be less than the 2008 rates, the Association was not given the opportunity to negotiate a potentially even lower rate for you. Furthermore, the Company's position would leave it free to raise contribution rates for 2010 and 2011 to whatever amount they wished. It could potentially double or triple rates or even raise them higher. This is unacceptable to the Association. Rest assured the Association is working to protect your interests now and in future situations involving your healthcare and its cost to you.
In Solidarity,
Velvet Hawthorne
IBT/CWA Chairperson
Dan Smith
IBT/CWA Co-Chairperson
Shift Trade memo from US Airways to all work Locations
On Friday, June 15, 2007, the CWA-IBT and the Company signed a Letter of Agreement regarding shift trades. This Letter of Agreement gives the Company the flexibility to modify which types of shift trades count towards the quarterly maximum of 26 swapoffs.
Effective Monday, June 25, 2007, the following changes will apply in all stations:
- Trade-for-trade's where the two dates involved are within the same payperiod will no longer count as one of the 26 swapoffs, provided the trade-for-trade meets the following criteria. The trade-for-trade must be submitted for approval simultaneously on the same form, and must be for the employees' entire shifts (no partials).
Example: Joe is swapping to work Sue's shift on 6/25 and Sue will work Joe's shift on 6/28. Since 6/25 and 6/28 are within the same payperiod, this will not count as a swapoff for either Sue or Joe.
- Shift trades of hours on the same day will not count as a swapoff for either employee, regardless the start times of the two shifts involved. Currently, if the start times are in different shift premium zones, both employees are charged a swapoff.
Example: Bob is scheduled to work 0500-1330 and Mary is scheduled to work 1300-2130 on 6/30. They trade shifts so that Mary is now working 0500-1330 and Bob is working 1300-2130. This will not count as a swapoff for either employee.
- In order to cancel a trade-for-trade or shift trade of hours, both of the swaps involved must be cancelled. You cannot cancel one portion of the trade transaction.
Example: Joe swapped to work Sue's shift on 6/25 and Sue swapped to work Joe's shift on 6/28. Sue has had a change of plans and wants to cancel her swap to work for Joe on 6/28. In order to cancel the 6/28 trade from Joe to Sue, the 6/25 trade from Sue to Joe would also have to be cancelled.
- The provision that allows you to trade a swapped on shift has not changed. You do have the ability to swapoff a traded shift in its entirety to another employee. That swapoff would count as one of the 26 allowed in the quarter.
Example: Joe swapped to work Sue's shift on 6/25 and Sue swapped to work Joe's shift on 6/28. Since 6/25 and 6/28 are within the same payperiod, this did not count as a swapoff for either Sue or Joe. Sue is scheduled to work Joe's shift on 6/28, but wants to trade that shift to Debbie so that she will be off. Sue can swap Joe's shift to Debbie, and that will count as one swapoff for Sue.
These changes will also apply to East Fleet Service employees on Monday, June 25, 2007, as a result of language in the IAM agreement. Changes are not required for West Fleet employees as they already have this type of flexibility.
Programming changes are needed in automated systems that process shifts trades (GPMS, East Workbrain and West Workbrain), and we are in the process of obtaining time and cost estimates for these changes. In these systems today, you do not have the ability to process a trade-for-trade on the same automated shift trade form. You must continue to process the trade-for-trade's on separate forms. We will be making temporary changes to these systems on Monday, June 25, that will allow you to have unlimited trade-for-trade's within the same payperiod and unlimited shift trades of hours immediately. You will continue to have a quarterly maximum of 26 swap offs.
We are pleased that we were able to react to this Letter of Agreement in a short period of time to address your concerns and provide you the flexibility to adjust your schedules as your personal needs dictate through the shift-trading provisions.
Questions you may have should be directed to your Station Manager.
