Search News
For the Media
For media inquiries, call CWA Communications at 202-434-1168 or email comms@cwa-union.org. To read about CWA Members, Leadership or Industries, visit our About page.
CWA to AT&T: No Deal Without Job Security
AT&T made a very public push for an extension of its contract with CWA, but where it counts — at the bargaining table — the company refused to address workers’ real concerns about jobs and job security.
AT&T publicly painted its offer as giving workers “greater stability in wages and benefits until the economy and the telecommunications industry show signs of improvement.” But the company’s news release left out the real story, said Ralph Maly, CWA vice president for Communications and Technologies.
“CWA made clear that our members want to keep their jobs, now and in the future, and that we want AT&T to succeed,” Maly said. “We have pointed out to AT&T that much of the work now contracted out or shifted to management should be performed by AT&T employees, but the company refused to discuss these issues,” he added.
Instead, AT&T proposed a complicated scheme that would use workers’ pension funds to pay their own termination benefits, Maly said.
“AT&T’s proposal for termination benefits is nothing but a raid on our members’ pension fund. This scheme would enable the company to cut jobs and push its downsizing costs onto workers, forcing our members to finance their own job loss. CWA overwhelmingly rejects this blatant grab of workers’ pension and retirement money,” Maly stressed.
As part of the extension, AT&T also insisted that CWA give up the neutrality provision negotiated in the 1998 contract and agree not to make public statements or actions that are critical of the pending AT&T Broadband and Comcast Communications merger.
CWA made several counter proposals and offered to begin immediate bargaining for a fair and comprehensive agreement, prior to the March 11 scheduled opening of talks. AT&T officials, however, balked at discussing workers’ jobs and job security concerns, and in a recent letter to CWA, indicated that they were “stunned and perplexed” by the union’s position.
But when it comes to the job protections and security for top executives at AT&T, senior management and board members at both AT&T and Comcast Communications understand those concerns all too clearly.
The two companies filed new corporate governance rules with the Securities and Exchange Commission that, among other items, would ensure that none of the 12 members of the board of directors could be replaced before 2005. This job protection covers AT&T’s top executive C. Michael Armstrong, who is slated to become chairman of AT&T Comcast, and current Comcast President Brian L. Roberts, who will serve as chief executive officer,
After 2005, the top executives could not be removed unless at least nine of the 12 directors vote to do so.
Industry analysts consider these rules highly unusual, especially in the wake of the Enron debacle, the Global Crossing collapse and other high-profile corporate bankruptcies and indicators of possible corporate wrongdoing. “The AT&T Comcast board will be entrenched, a move very much out of step with the growing and clearly necessary public scrutiny of corporate boards of directors,” Maly said.
The proposed $72 billion merger must be approved by the Justice Department and shareholders of both companies.
AT&T publicly painted its offer as giving workers “greater stability in wages and benefits until the economy and the telecommunications industry show signs of improvement.” But the company’s news release left out the real story, said Ralph Maly, CWA vice president for Communications and Technologies.
“CWA made clear that our members want to keep their jobs, now and in the future, and that we want AT&T to succeed,” Maly said. “We have pointed out to AT&T that much of the work now contracted out or shifted to management should be performed by AT&T employees, but the company refused to discuss these issues,” he added.
Instead, AT&T proposed a complicated scheme that would use workers’ pension funds to pay their own termination benefits, Maly said.
“AT&T’s proposal for termination benefits is nothing but a raid on our members’ pension fund. This scheme would enable the company to cut jobs and push its downsizing costs onto workers, forcing our members to finance their own job loss. CWA overwhelmingly rejects this blatant grab of workers’ pension and retirement money,” Maly stressed.
As part of the extension, AT&T also insisted that CWA give up the neutrality provision negotiated in the 1998 contract and agree not to make public statements or actions that are critical of the pending AT&T Broadband and Comcast Communications merger.
CWA made several counter proposals and offered to begin immediate bargaining for a fair and comprehensive agreement, prior to the March 11 scheduled opening of talks. AT&T officials, however, balked at discussing workers’ jobs and job security concerns, and in a recent letter to CWA, indicated that they were “stunned and perplexed” by the union’s position.
But when it comes to the job protections and security for top executives at AT&T, senior management and board members at both AT&T and Comcast Communications understand those concerns all too clearly.
The two companies filed new corporate governance rules with the Securities and Exchange Commission that, among other items, would ensure that none of the 12 members of the board of directors could be replaced before 2005. This job protection covers AT&T’s top executive C. Michael Armstrong, who is slated to become chairman of AT&T Comcast, and current Comcast President Brian L. Roberts, who will serve as chief executive officer,
After 2005, the top executives could not be removed unless at least nine of the 12 directors vote to do so.
Industry analysts consider these rules highly unusual, especially in the wake of the Enron debacle, the Global Crossing collapse and other high-profile corporate bankruptcies and indicators of possible corporate wrongdoing. “The AT&T Comcast board will be entrenched, a move very much out of step with the growing and clearly necessary public scrutiny of corporate boards of directors,” Maly said.
The proposed $72 billion merger must be approved by the Justice Department and shareholders of both companies.