railway act question

buddy0272 Mon Nov 16, 2009 2:19 pm

Ok, let me explain this, a couple of contracts ago with my company they put in wording in the contract that says thru the last day of the contract ( in this case sept 30th) they are to give step increases on the anniversary date of the employee. All the previous contracts they had continued giving these increases even after the contract was up and in negotiations. However this year they halted all increases after sept 30th. But they say that we are running under the rules of the old contract. If they rules of the old contract are extended, isnt the dates for pay also extended. I thought under the railway act during negotiations the contract is suppose to be run as status quo.

Eric Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:52 am

buddy0272 wrote:Ok, let me explain this, a couple of contracts ago with my company they put in wording in the contract that says thru the last day of the contract ( in this case sept 30th) they are to give step increases on the anniversary date of the employee. All the previous contracts they had continued giving these increases even after the contract was up and in negotiations. However this year they halted all increases after sept 30th. But they say that we are running under the rules of the old contract. If they rules of the old contract are extended, isnt the dates for pay also extended. I thought under the railway act during negotiations the contract is suppose to be run as status quo.

If the current contract has language that supercedes the older contracts, and the current contract is the one that is going to continue in full force and effect while the parties are negotiating a new contract, the current contracts express language controls, absent any ambiguities.

Eric

JoeC (McGruff) Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:42 am

Has the union served section 6 notice on the carrier? Is this a class1 Railroad or an airline?
JoeC (McGruff)

buddy0272 Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:16 pm

we are a company that does work for the airlines ( actually we use to be owned by the airlines). we have air traffic controllers and such. I am one of the union negotiators and we have gone thru 2 negotiations so far with intent to change the contract. however a drop in pay is not among the issues.

JoeC (McGruff) Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:06 pm

Oh you're one of the negotiators- OK yes contact an attorney familiar with labor law, and see if he will file a status-quo injunction in district court. If an attorney will not file you will have to hash it out at the table.
JoeC (McGruff)

JoeC (McGruff) Tue Nov 24, 2009 3:56 pm

You need any thing else? I am interested in what a labor law attorney told you if you spoke to one so please follow up.
JoeC (McGruff)

buddy0272 Tue Nov 24, 2009 6:15 pm

we are going to the table again the 8-10th of december gonna see what is said then and will post it here.

JoeC (McGruff) Tue Nov 24, 2009 6:21 pm

Do you guys have your own attorneys? If not you need a recommendation? What state are you in? Has section 6 notice been served on the carrier?
JoeC (McGruff)

buddy0272 Tue Nov 24, 2009 6:27 pm

we have the union bussiness agents from the teamsters, (the main negitiator is Dan Kane Jr, president of local 202 from NYC ) its a national contract so its not particular to any specific state, We have filed a greveance . And i am not sure if Dan kane has filed the section 6 notice.

JoeC (McGruff) Tue Nov 24, 2009 6:39 pm

If you're in national negotiations now Section 6 has been served. There is very little state court action under the RLA with the exception of wrongful termination suites. If a grievance has been submitted the B.A may have consulted counsel, and is using the grievance machinery for whatever reason. Courts tend to throw out injunctive pleadings declaring the dispute minor. This throws the case back to the union who at that point has to hash it out at the table or resolve the issue up to the adjustment board. I would contact Kane and ask him why he does not feel an injunction is in order.
Sec 6 RLA:

Sixth. Conference of representatives; time; place; private agreements

In case of a dispute between a carrier or carriers and its or their employees, arising out of grievances or out of the interpretation or application of agreements concerning rates of pay, rules, or working conditions, it shall be the duty of the designated representative or representatives of such carrier or carriers and of such employees, within ten days
after the receipt of notice of a desire on the part of either party to confer in respect to such dispute, to specify a time and place at which such conference shall be held: Provided, (1) That the place so specified shall be situated upon the line of the carrier involved or as otherwise mutually agreed upon; and (2) that the time so specified shall allow the designated conferees reasonable opportunity to reach such place of conference, but shall not exceed twenty days from the receipt of such notice: And provided further, That nothing in this chapter shall be construed to supersede the provisions of any agreement (as to conferences) then in effect between the parties.

JoeC (McGruff)

Sponsored content

railway act question

railway act question

Current contract clause rules

Re: railway act question

Re: railway act question

Re: railway act question

Re: railway act question

Re: railway act question

Re: railway act question

Re: railway act question

Re: railway act question

Re: railway act question