View Single Post
Old 06-18-2019 | 08:23 AM
  #94  
chrisreedrules's Avatar
chrisreedrules
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,601
Likes: 0
From: CRJ FO
Default

Originally Posted by Cujo665
I’m sure that will be their claim, but as one who was actually involved in those negotiation 2013-2016 I can say that the people they sent had authority to agree. If it was out of bounds they’d break and reschedule to get approval.
I know for a fact that’s accurate. I did the NY base closure LOA after a few days of back and forth, it ended up getting done in about 45 minutes of back and forth between their lawyers and ours. Finally our lawyers said they weren’t going back in to demand more and that I’d have to do it myself. I did. (FO Rep came with me) In 15 minutes I got everything I asked for including A1 travel to work, pay protected removals from un commutable trips, unlimited hotels and a stack of other things.
I heard later that Group wasn’t pleased, and that the A1 travel to/from work caused them huge problems with every other work group. They hated every part of that LOA but their negotiators had agreed to it.
If they send somebody, they have authority to deal. They may end up unemployed afterwards, but they have the authority. It’s a huge “failure to bargain in good faith” lawsuit otherwise..... if they can’t approve, they break and get permission.
So what’s the purpose for what happened here at Envoy? After the tens of millions they’ve been investing in all 3 WOs these past few years why now do this? If it was intentional and not bumbling then what is the goal? They need no negotiating leverage because they already have leverage. All they do is stand to lose by not increasing compensation at one WO while the other 2 enjoy raises.
Reply