|
Post by TCU 2U2 on Oct 3, 2013 12:23:33 GMT -5
you must be on a Navy contract ... not sure how they work.
i am on a FAA CWO contract.
|
|
|
Post by mjpascal on Oct 3, 2013 12:28:28 GMT -5
you must be on a Navy contract ... not sure how they work. i am on a FAA CWO contract. Ok, thanks anyways!
|
|
|
Post by fu on Oct 3, 2013 13:08:39 GMT -5
^^
You might want to leave a message in the section called Military Contract Talk if you're on a Navy contract. Can't guarantee you'll get an answer though since it's mostly FAA contract talk here. Good luck.
|
|
aero0
New Member
Posts: 29
|
Post by aero0 on Sept 8, 2014 21:00:36 GMT -5
PATCO should have been on the ball and saved our Severance pay, can't believe Tuso let this valuable benefit slide by the wayside..
|
|
|
Post by weatheri on Sept 9, 2014 7:48:22 GMT -5
PATCO should have been on the ball and saved our Severance pay, can't believe Tuso let this valuable benefit slide by the wayside.. The severance pay was really meaningless to begin with for FAA contracts. It stated that IF THE FAA provided the funds, then and only then would the severance pay be given. It was a nice touch for a "just in case it ever happened" but the likelihood of funds being provided in today's economy is slim at best.
|
|
cirrus
Junior Member
Posts: 86
|
Post by cirrus on Sept 9, 2014 9:20:15 GMT -5
Yea, severance pay was just fluff for the CBA. You should also check your new CBA's that Tuso "negotiated" for you... Tuso let a Wage Scales/Benefits article slip in the CBA that states: "Providing that the FAA agrees to reimburse the company the wage scales/benefits in this Agreement and/or does not determine that the rates or benefits herein are at variance in accordance with 4.1b, Part4, Title 29 Volume 1 of the Code of Federal Regulations or any other Federal Regulation, all employees shall receive the wage scales and raises on the time line described in Appendix A as well as the benefits defined in this Agreement."
This gets the company out of paying the future wages we bargained for. Jerry Tuso is the worst Union Negotiator I have ever seen... This Article should have NEVER been allowed into the CBA!
|
|
|
Post by wxlover on Sept 9, 2014 12:19:46 GMT -5
Yea, severance pay was just fluff for the CBA. You should also check your new CBA's that Tuso "negotiated" for you... Tuso let a Wage Scales/Benefits article slip in the CBA that states: "Providing that the FAA agrees to reimburse the company the wage scales/benefits in this Agreement and/or does not determine that the rates or benefits herein are at variance in accordance with 4.1b, Part4, Title 29 Volume 1 of the Code of Federal Regulations or any other Federal Regulation, all employees shall receive the wage scales and raises on the time line described in Appendix A as well as the benefits defined in this Agreement." This gets the company out of paying the future wages we bargained for. Jerry Tuso is the worst Union Negotiator I have ever seen... This Article should have NEVER been allowed into the CBA! This is a classic example of an illegal clause. I'm pretty sure based on the below link the contractor has to pay the wage rates they agreed on. Arms Length Negotiations
|
|
|
Post by tornado on Sept 9, 2014 12:31:37 GMT -5
"Providing that the FAA agrees to reimburse the company the wage scales/benefits in this Agreement and/or does not determine that the rates or benefits herein are at variance in accordance with 4.1b, Part4, Title 29 Volume 1 of the Code of Federal Regulations or any other Federal Regulation... Ours reads: "All employees shall receive the attached wage scales and raises on the time line described in the appendices of this Agreement, pending agreement by the FAA to accept the wage scale and reimburse the Company at that rate." That's a shorter version of the same thing. The clause "...pending agreement by the FAA to accept the wage scale and reimburse the Company at that rate" was not in our 2011 CBA.
|
|
|
Post by weatheri on Sept 9, 2014 13:13:42 GMT -5
I believe the clause is in there because the FAA can say no to the negotiated contract. If that happens, then the contractor would not be reimbursed for the pay raise. I personally don't see a problem with that in the contract. Jerry did well for our site. Some things went away that we wished would have stayed but there was compensation for the items removed. It's called negotiating. I'm happy it's done and now we move forward.
|
|
cirrus
Junior Member
Posts: 86
|
Post by cirrus on Sept 9, 2014 13:35:18 GMT -5
Yes, compensation upon FAA approval... those big pay raises on the pay scale are there for one reason only: TO PACIFY YOU FOR TAKING AWAY YOUR BENEFITS. It's the classic "Bait & Switch"... It's false negotiations. Plain and simple.
|
|
|
Post by fu on Sept 9, 2014 13:53:14 GMT -5
Yes, compensation upon FAA approval... those big pay raises on the pay scale are there for one reason only: TO PACIFY YOU FOR TAKING AWAY YOUR BENEFITS. It's the classic "Bait & Switch"... It's false negotiations. Plain and simple. Cirrus not sure if you're aware of this or not but all annual pay increases have to be approved by the FAA. You could have a CBA that shows increases for the next 3 years but the contractor has to go to the FAA each year to get each yearly increase approved. That clause protects the contractor from getting stuck holding the bag on any increases that the FAA doesn't approve. To date the FAA has never turned down an increase and that clause has never had to be used. Also the severance pay was a waste of ink and paper. The FAA would have never paid that out.
|
|
|
Post by wxlover on Sept 9, 2014 14:02:33 GMT -5
Yes, compensation upon FAA approval... those big pay raises on the pay scale are there for one reason only: TO PACIFY YOU FOR TAKING AWAY YOUR BENEFITS. It's the classic "Bait & Switch"... It's false negotiations. Plain and simple. Cirrus not sure if you're aware of this or not but all annual pay increases have to be approved by the FAA. You could have a CBA that shows increases for the next 3 years but the contractor has to go to the FAA each year to get each yearly increase approved. That clause protects the contractor from getting stuck holding the bag on any increases that the FAA doesn't approve. To date the FAA has never turned down an increase and that clause has never had to be used. Also the severance pay was a waste of ink and paper. The FAA would have never paid that out. My understanding is that the contracting officer takes the negotiated CBA and "incorporates" it into the contract, and treats it like a contract specific Wage Determination. We are lucky that the FAA doesn't do their job very well, because when you dig into the AMS rules (I tried to read this stuff back when all those lawsuits were being posted), it states that CBAs which weren't negotiated at "arms length" should be sent to the DOL for a ruling. When you google what an arms length negotiation is you end up down a rabbit hole with the NLRB which tells you that contingent language indicates it isn't an arms length negotiation. My worry is that if the FAA ever got smart and wanted to really cut costs on this contract, they could tell the contractors that the CBAs are tossed out because of that contingent language and they will only be paid for the applicable WD rates for the site. If that ever happens, it should be the contractor that takes the hit on money, they should still have to pay us what we negotiated for, in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by fu on Sept 9, 2014 14:08:27 GMT -5
I don't know if they would throw out any CBA's but it wouldn't surprise me if they started sending wage adjustment requests back unapproved.
|
|
|
Post by toofarnorth on Sept 10, 2014 17:43:34 GMT -5
FAA approval, annually, of wage/benefit increases is a legal requirement. So is the acceptance of CBA's as the new wage determination. While the language Cirrus stated is scary, it means nothing - the FAA must accept the CBA wage & benefit increases.
|
|