Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
The Competition
FedEx Discussions
Why Senior Employees Should Be Pro-Union
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ricochet1a" data-source="post: 1102962" data-attributes="member: 22880"><p>Negotiations between ORGANIZED labor and unorganized labor are completely different animals...</p><p></p><p>Say the employees of Express organize and get the NLRB to compel Express to recognize the union. At that point very specific rules kick in, EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF AN AGREED TO CONTRACT.</p><p></p><p>Being under the RLA does restrict Express' ability to dramatically cut compensation (the RLA does have prohibitions on that, to discourage 'disruptions' to national commerce), but doesn't state that compensation must follow any real guidelines as to progression. It is all under 'good faith'. Companies not under RLA, actually have more leeway to cut their non-organized employees compensation if they see fit. The RLA does have a dual edge - it makes it harder for employees in companies so covered to actually organize, but they also have some protection against changes in compensation which are not in good faith. Employees working for employers under NLRA rules have a much easier time to actually organize, but should they remain non-organized, are at risk of having compensation cut without their employer being fearful of federal intervention. Fred's business model works much better under RLA rules, thus why he paid to get under them.</p><p></p><p>However, should the Express employees organize, enter into a negotiation with Fred, then come up empty handed - they go back to work at their ORIGINAL wages, work conditions, etc. In other words, they don't risk losing what they have, as a potential consequence of organizing and entering into the highly structured collective bargaining process. In a typical non labor contract negotiation, everything is fair game, if one side is in a power position, they can present terms which are in essence 'take it or leave it'. Both parties are assumed to enter into the process as equally competent players and equally able to walk away. The same assumption doesn't apply to employer-employee negotiations when the employees are represented by a union.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ricochet1a, post: 1102962, member: 22880"] Negotiations between ORGANIZED labor and unorganized labor are completely different animals... Say the employees of Express organize and get the NLRB to compel Express to recognize the union. At that point very specific rules kick in, EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF AN AGREED TO CONTRACT. Being under the RLA does restrict Express' ability to dramatically cut compensation (the RLA does have prohibitions on that, to discourage 'disruptions' to national commerce), but doesn't state that compensation must follow any real guidelines as to progression. It is all under 'good faith'. Companies not under RLA, actually have more leeway to cut their non-organized employees compensation if they see fit. The RLA does have a dual edge - it makes it harder for employees in companies so covered to actually organize, but they also have some protection against changes in compensation which are not in good faith. Employees working for employers under NLRA rules have a much easier time to actually organize, but should they remain non-organized, are at risk of having compensation cut without their employer being fearful of federal intervention. Fred's business model works much better under RLA rules, thus why he paid to get under them. However, should the Express employees organize, enter into a negotiation with Fred, then come up empty handed - they go back to work at their ORIGINAL wages, work conditions, etc. In other words, they don't risk losing what they have, as a potential consequence of organizing and entering into the highly structured collective bargaining process. In a typical non labor contract negotiation, everything is fair game, if one side is in a power position, they can present terms which are in essence 'take it or leave it'. Both parties are assumed to enter into the process as equally competent players and equally able to walk away. The same assumption doesn't apply to employer-employee negotiations when the employees are represented by a union. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
The Competition
FedEx Discussions
Why Senior Employees Should Be Pro-Union
Top