Originally Posted by
aviatorhi
Wait... now I'm confused. The union told me the AIMS and medical stuff was not even being addressed by the company. The company says it caved on those issues to the union.
I sure hope there's a catch in what the company proposed. Otherwise this just gets more and more suspicious.
Notice the term “relevant” regarding AIMS data. I don’t think the two sides agree on what that word means.
As far as health insurance, my understanding is that the company won’t define benefits or put a cap on cost increases.