Showing posts with label collective bargaining. Show all posts
Showing posts with label collective bargaining. Show all posts

Saturday, May 5, 2012

Union pushes back for Saints players

The National Football League Players Association (NFLPA) has filed a grievance against the suspensions imposed by Commissioner Goodell. The union makes a procedural argument and a technical immunity argument. The union claims the discipline imposed by Goodell is outside his authority and that under the Collective Bargaining Agreement discipline of players can only be imposed by the System Arbitrator, not Goodell. The second argument relates to a provision of the new CBA that released players for conduct engaged in prior to its effective date (August 4, 2011). Of note, this is a challenge by the NFLPA, not the players, who have not yet appealed.

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

AZ to WS public sector bargaining

Will Arizona become the next public sector collective bargaining hot spot.

Monday, January 2, 2012

It can get weirder

Seems some South Carolina Boeing employees have filed a "retaliation" charge against the Machinists' union because they used the NLRB process to bully Boeing into locating the 737 Max production line in Washington State. Through collective bargaining Boeing and the union reached a 4 year agreement which included assurances that the 737 Max line would be built in Washington, and also included a resolution of the 787 Dreamliner case which ensured that contested work relocation would remain in South Carolina. The employees were assisted by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. I wouldn't bet the farm on a complaint issuing on this charge.

Saturday, December 10, 2011

Boeing settled

The much debated "controversial" Boeing unfair labor practice case concerning the relocation of work to South Carolina has been formally settled. While some suggest the result is due to "pressure", it is unlikely pressure from the right, as The Hill post suggests, contributed to the resolution. Acting General Counsel Solomon is closer to correct. The collective bargaining process worked. The company and the union bargained and as a result of the bargaining, the union requested the relocation charge be withdrawn. Thats the way collective bargaining should work. Unions are free to bargain away ULP's, particularly where there is no identifiable individual discriminatee.

Saturday, November 26, 2011

Hoops play in December?

It appears the owners and players have reached a tentative agreement which may have the NBA playing by Christmas.

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

No MLB Strike

Owners and players representatives inked a 5 year collective bargaining agreement virtually assuring labor peace in the sport through 2016. The agreement still has to be ratified but faces no serious threat in that process.

Friday, September 9, 2011

From the jobs speech

"I reject the idea we have to strip away collective bargaining rights to compete in a global economy."
                                                                                          President Obama  9/8/11


Red meat for organized labor, but a little short on specifics.

Thursday, September 1, 2011

New unit determination standards for nursing homes

In Specialty Healthcare (download here) the NLRB changed the standard for determining what is an appropriate bargaining unit in nursing homes. In so doing the Board claims to apply the traditional analysis as to what is an appropriate bargaining unit. This change will profoundly affect the ability for nursing homes to deal with union organizing activity. More after the jump

Monday, August 8, 2011

Can you hear me now?

45,000 Verizon employees on the east coast are on strike. Verizon intends to continue operations with management personnel and others.

Friday, August 5, 2011

Ratification

The NFLPA ratified the collective bargaining agreement with the team owners.

Saturday, June 18, 2011

Off Target

Labor has targeted Target for organizing efforts. None of its 1700+ stores is organized. But a petition was filed at a New York store, and the election results are in. By a vote of 137 - 85 the employees rejected the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) as their representative for purposes of collective bargaining.

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Making sense of polls

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll finds 62% of Americans strongly oppose stripping public employees of the right to collective bargaining while at the same time even larger percentages think public employees should contribute more to their retirement benefits (68%) and pay more for their healthcare (63%). By a whopping 77% those surveyed believed public sector union members should have the same rights as private sector union members. To me, none of this is surprising or even incongruous. More after the jump

Sunday, February 27, 2011

Mums the good word

Looks like the NFL/NFLPA mediation is getting serious. Here is the statement from the mediator. Also now he says we ain't commenting anymore. Sounds like progress otherwise everybody would be posturing talking.

Monday, February 21, 2011

Wisconsin demonstrates

Chris Bowers at Daily Kos has a detailed piece with video about the remarkable demonstrations ongoing in Wisconsin as Governor Walker continues to target public sector unions. Of course its favorable to labor . . .

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Showdown in union country

Massive protests have erupted in Wisconsin in response to Republican efforts to repeal collective bargaining for public employees. Wisconsin was first in the nation to grant collective bargaining rights (1959) to public sector employees. Not something you will see in this part of the world.

NFL accuses union of failing to bargain in good faith

In a move that seems more designed to curry favor with fans and the media, the National Football League (NFL) has filed refusal to bargain charges against the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA). The charges are largely directed at the players threat and authorization to decertify (disband) the union, which likely would bring into play antitrust claims against the owners if they choose to lock out the players. There is an antitrust exemption for collective bargaining, but if the union goes away, so does the reason supporting the exemption. The players have decertified the union before, and that resulted in free agency and the salary cap which were created to settle earlier antitrust litigation. This is another volley in the public relations battle for fan support. While one observer claims the owners will win the PR battle, I'm not a believer. In fact I think his argument that things will get too complicated for fans to sort out works in favor of the players. If the owners lock the players out, you can expect the anti-labor noise machine to crank up full volume in support of the owners, but the simple issue for fans will be the owners created the problem.

Thursday, January 6, 2011

Nursing home bargaining units

The NLRB is considering a different standard for determining the appropriate bargaining unit in longterm care facilities. The Board recently solicited briefs on the issue. The prediction is the Obama Board will allow much more flexibility in carving out job classification units in long term care facilities. Rather than presuming only a unit including non-supervisory nursing employees, housekeepers, laundry and dietary employees is appropriate, separate units may be ordered for one or more departments. This would  significantly advantage piecemeal organizing of facilities and Balkanized collective bargaining.

Friday, September 10, 2010

Oopsie

Sometimes employers can make critical mistakes that create serious problems on their own. It appears this supermarket employer has done so. In collective bargaining, an employer creates a huge, unnecessary problem for itself when it claims it cannot afford to meet a union's economic demands. When the employer does rely upon economic justifications to reject union economic demands, the union is entitled to examine the employers books and other financial data in order to bargain effectively. When the company refuses to provide the financials, the NLRB will issue a complaint, and in the linked article, it appears the NLRB has sought immediate federal court injunctive relief. Had the employer rejected the union's demands, and maintained that the demands were not in the best interests of the company (as opposed to claiming it could not afford the economic demands), it would not have exposed its financial data to union scrutiny.

Monday, September 6, 2010

The Company strikes back

It may be only a press release, but it was picked up as news and it conveys a powerful rebuttal to the union's posturing in the Mott's strike (as well as to Secretary of Labor Solis who suggested the parties need to come back to the bargaining table).