Message from Ernie & Andy

Started by Ernie, October 27, 2013, 03:11:47 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Ernie


         Soon the drivers, matrons and mechanics of Pioneer are going to be offered a contract from our employer. This contract was negotiated between our employer, and 1181. 1181 did not approve this contract, only the drivers, matrons and mechanics can approve or disapprove the contract. Then we will then be given the opportunity to vote on this contract. If the contract is approved, it will take effect immediately, and extend to June 2015. We believe due to the state of our economy, and the circumstances brought forth by Mayor Bloomberg, that there will probably be give backs in this contract. What the give backs will consist of has yet to be determined. Our employer has stated that these give backs are necessary in order for him to be competitive in bidding for future work. Now the way we see it, if you place money on a table, and tell someone that they can help themselves, we don't think there would be any money left.

         THIS IS THE TIME that we can make a significant difference, THIS IS THE TIME that WE will inform our employer what the drivers, matrons and mechanics think is FAIR.
         If WE, UNITED AS ONE, feel that we are NOT getting a FAIR DEAL, then THIS IS THE TIME to vote NO. As soon as we are notified of the details of the contract, we will call a meeting at the Arthur Kill yard. We then will discuss the contract and either approve or disapprove it. REMEMBER; please keep in mind a vote to disapprove the contract will ultimately lead to a STRIKE.

Thank you all
Ernie and Andy

Buzz

#1
Thanks, Ernie and Andy, and I hope people pay attention to the last sentence of your post.

I'm sure nobody wants Pioneer to be priced out of existence. Not us, not the company. If fairness is truly what both parties are striving for, then it seems to me that 2 things should be evident:

1) We should not be expected to absorb any future losses in earnings due to a decreased bid before those losses actually occur.
2) When a lower bid does take effect (i.e., after June 2015) then the loss in earnings should be born both by the company and workers.

This was not the case with the contract that was imposed on us in April, and any similar contract would be equally unfair. There is no doubt that the industry is changing, and not for the better, and we have to change with it for our good and the good of the company. Therefore, I think it is time for some creative, out-of-the-box thinking when it comes to making contracts.

To agree to a dollar amount in reduction of compensation when we don't know what the reduction in bid will be is not fair. And for that reduction to begin before a lower-bid contract takes effect is even more unfair.

So, how can it be made fair? This is where the process of negotiating a contract has to take a completely new and revamped approach. To me, the only way a fair agreement can be reached, is for our compensation to be proportionate to and contingent upon the company's actual reduction in earnings ... and only when that takes effect.

For instance, and this is simplified for the sake of making the example, if the future bid is 20% less, then we should be expected, (and willing), to absorb only about HALF that loss ... a 10% reduction in compensation, whether pay, accrual, etc., or some combination there of. (It may not be exactly a 50/50 sharing of loss. See note below.)

Not knowing at this point what the future bid/loss will be, stating dollar amounts of reductions to us now is not fair to either side. A contract should be proposed that will state percentages of reductions proportionate to and contingent upon the new contract the company makes with the board of ed in 2015, and only at that time should our current terms be changed. Because it's never been done doesn't mean it can't be done!

Yes, this would be a radical and unprecedented change in the mindset of designing contracts, but it would be extremely fair, if fairness ... for the good of BOTH parties ... is truly what both sides desire. It would allow Neil to be as competitive as he needs to be to keep his work, and allow us to keep working.

In any event, we should not be presented with any contract before we are "made whole" for the past monies due us as stipulated by court order.



Note: Our compensation is only a portion of Neil's overhead, and the only portion of that overhead that can be reduced. The other portions of that overhead ... fuel, maintenance, insurance, etc., etc., etc., will stay the same or increase. Therefore, splitting the loss in earnings may, for example, have to be 60/40 (60% from us, 40% from him), depending on determining what percentage of his overhead we actually represent.
I am patient with stupidity, but not with those who are proud of it.

Grrr


yabba

Buzz for 1181 president in june 2014  ... well said buzz....my question is if we vote it down we automatically go on strike...im not understanding that part...and if that is true i guess reliant isnt working tomorrow morning cause they voted down there garbage....i still have faith our contract will be fair but time will tell..

Buzz

Quote from: yabba on October 27, 2013, 02:54:24 PM
Buzz for 1181 president in june 2014  ... well said buzz....my question is if we vote it down we automatically go on strike...im not understanding that part...

Thanks for the endorsement! LOL.

A lot of people don't get the strike part. Look, if a contractor says, "This is my final and best offer," Michael has no choice but to present it for a vote. For him NOT to do so would be failure to bargain in good faith ... something not looked upon favorably by the courts, as the coalition learned the hard way. The ONLY way a contractor could be induced to reopen negotiations would be to end a strike. So yes, a "no" vote is a strike vote. Going back to the table without one would be virtually impossible.
I am patient with stupidity, but not with those who are proud of it.

Buzz

Quote from: Grrr on October 27, 2013, 02:45:45 PM
Excellent post, Buzz.

Every now and then I suffer episodes of temporary sanity.   :wink1:
I am patient with stupidity, but not with those who are proud of it.

yabba


driver

What you are saying is true. The problem is there are many non union companies out there. making less then we are..I wonder who let them do that..??  Anyway, I totally agree that he should honor our existing contract until 2015, but apparently he is not. Is the new mayor going to help us?? We have to be strong and I feel that what Ernie directs us to do we should stand behind him.

Goose623

Was this contract negotiated with 1181 or are the owners shoving it down are throats again??? Also when is this supposed contract being released??? If one company is
Losing money and another making a killing why should the drivers at the company making profit give anything back??? We need to break up the coalition.. Pioneer drivers should give nothing back!!! NOTHING!!!

Eucerin

I totally agree with Groose623...NOTHING back

terminator

Buzz...excellent points! I understand if the union does not present the offered contract for a vote it would be considered not negotiating in good faith BUT isnt the company "NOT" negotiating in good faith by offering us less money while still getting paid the higher rate by DOE?

Buzz

Quote from: terminator on October 30, 2013, 04:19:23 PM
Buzz...excellent points! I understand if the union does not present the offered contract for a vote it would be considered not negotiating in good faith BUT isnt the company "NOT" negotiating in good faith by offering us less money while still getting paid the higher rate by DOE?

No, the company isn't obligated to negotiate basis what their current contract is. That's the whole point of my suggestion ... which would be shot out of the water based exactly on what it is predicated ... fairness.
I am patient with stupidity, but not with those who are proud of it.

PROUD MEMBER

Apparently in the near future Ernie is going to call a meeting and present to all 400 or so members a contract offer from Neil. Ernie is not going to force anyone to vote either way but I'm sure he will voice his opinion. I suggest we all give weight to that opinion but at the same time we should all speak up at that meeting the same way we speak up on these gadgets. Remember in February after only 2 or 3 weeks into the strike how each and everyone of our thoughts and emotions were. The time to speak your thoughts is when we're all together before we vote. Remember this time the vote is not Local wide. So no matter what way the 400 of us vote is the way it will be. SPEAK YOUR MIND AT THE RIGHT TIME. Either way this vote will definitely have an impact on all of us and our families. LETS MAKE A TRULY UNITED DECISION!!!

worker341

#13
OK this is how it should be with no ifs or buts about it. Forget the verbal votes and bullshit stories you will hear people say before you vote. Do what we did so many times before when we had to vote in the garage for shop steward when more then one was running for the job of shop steward, paper ballots, mark yes or no on a piece of paper drop it in a box and count the votes in front of all workers and of course get one of them high paying assholes down to our garage to having everyone sign in before they vote and drop the paper in the box. And that way no one and I do mean no one will know how anyone voted and no one has to fear what the boss or union reps. will do if the vote does not go the way they want it to go. So bring the box out and lets have a fair vote and no one has to worry about shit from anyone.

terminator

Buzz...if 'we' (the 400 drivers currently at pioneer) voted NO to the contract -could the company hire other out of work 1181 drivers?