OFS Bargaining Report #12

OFS Bargaining Report – Day 11

Bargaining for Monday, May 22, 2006 opened with Bill Bates passing Union counter to Article 3 – Defined Terms.

The Union reinserted language for Con-Ops to have an identified Day In Lieu of Saturday and Day In Lieu of Sunday.  The Union explained to the Company that every other OFS Represented Employee has a day designated for Saturday and Sunday except Con-Op employees and that oversight, whether intentional or unintentional, must be corrected.  Therefore the Union needs such designation included in Defined Terms.

Union counter to Article 5 – Union-Management Relations was passed to the Company.  The Union informed the Company that Union Agent access to Members in the workplace requires language clarifying the fact that such times would include lunches, breaks, before and after shifts – but not limited to those times.  The Union also needs it acknowledged in the contract "that such access will not be unreasonably denied".

The Union also advised the Company we want the twenty (20) day notice prior to a layoff.  The Union just doesn't believe 15 days is ample notice when someone is faced with such a life-changing event.  And the Union has already agreed to cut back their initial demand from 30 days to 20 days, and we don't believe a 20 day notice is unreasonable.

The Union also wants the notice time for forced shift changes to be increased from one (1) week to two (2) weeks.  We explained the reasoning for the increased notification time is much the same as that for layoffs.  We just don't believe a week notice is sufficient for employees to make the necessary changes in their lives to accommodate such a dramatic change.  We also advised the Company the Union believes the Company is probably aware of such changes much sooner than a couple of weeks before they happen.

Regarding "Maintenance of Work Operations" the Union agreed not to eliminate the entire paragraph that disallows the Union from mid-contract strikes, but we still want the right to strike over grievances; we even agreed to limit such strikes to no more than two (2) days.  We explained to the Company that the current grievance process is seriously broken and the Union needs something that will force the corrections to that process, and we believe such language will be the first step in the correction process needed.

The Union provided a counter to Article 6 – Grievance Procedure.  The first change the Union proposed was to include language stating the Company cannot talk to any employee related to a grievance for any reason without a Union Representative present at such discussion.  Bill explained to the Company that we adjusted the language from the original proposal recognizing the Company's concern that the Company would not be allowed to investigate a grievance.

The Union also advised the Company that we need the language stating time limits on grievances cannot be enforced if the Union has made a demand for information or documents related to the grievance and the request for information and/or documents hasn't been filled.

Other language the Union requires in this Article is that the Company cannot make any adjustments to the workplace until after the completion of the grievance and/or arbitration.  And if adjustments have been made prior to the conclusion of the grievance/arbitration, such changes must be returned to former conditions until completion of grievance and/or arbitration.  We explained to the Company, again, that since the grievance process is currently so broken, we demand assurances that the grievance and arbitration process will be reasonable, timely and fair.

The last proposed change the Union demands to Article 6 is to strike the sentence under Step 3 of the Grievance process regarding the number of Stewards who can attend a Step 3 grievance.  The Union explained that the language in Step 3 was contradictory to language in Article 4 which states the Company can institute no limits on the number of Stewards attending a meeting.

The Union passed a counter to Article 7 – Arbitration.  The first proposed change the Union seeks is that retroactive pay adjustments awards start from up to 6 months prior to the initiation of the grievance rather than from the initiation of the arbitration.  Next the Union wants it noted that an Arbitrator can award settlements in termination cases for all losses of compensation and benefits rather than just back pay.  And if an employee owes the Company money, the Company can only deduct based on "net" wages rather than "gross" wages.

The next schedule bargaining meeting is for Tuesday, May 23, 2006.