Union Drive Background
November 24, 2004
In November, 2004, two and a half years into an organizing campaign, employees of the Minneapolis Borders voted to approve a contract that they and UFCW 789 had been negotiating with Borders for nearly a year and a half. With the favorable vote, they joined the employees of the Ann Arbor store as the only two Borders stores currently under contract. Ann Arbor employees approved their first contract earlier in the year, after a two month strike.
Previously:
On November 8th, 2003, employees of Borders original store in Ann Arbor, MI, went out on strike.
On December 6, 2002, they had voted resoundingly, 51 to 4, to join United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 876; on October 18, 2002, employees of the Minneapolis Borders also had voted to join another union, UFCW Local 789.
Although Borders likes to tell the press and unwary employees that it has been targeted by the AFL-CIO, the truth is that the Borders union campaign is an employee-driven, grassroots movement, facilitated in groundbreaking ways by the internet, in which employees have reached out to several different unions on their own initiative.
Thirteen Borders locations have had union votes, six have approved union representation, five have secured contracts, two stores are presently under contract. More than a dozen other stores have had serious union drives that never reached the voting stage, and dozens of others have had enough union activity to register on Borders union 'radar screen'.
Three stores that approved contracts (in 1997 and 1998) let them expire and those stores are no longer unionized. Enthusiasm for the union was countered by an aggressive anti-union campaign, a lack of wage gains in the contracts, 'open shop' agreements, and a great deal of employee turnover. However, in the wake of the restructuring, those older contracts look pretty good: if the Lincoln Park, Chicago, contract was in place today, that store would still have four lead clerks making a $1.00 premium, separate SPO, inventory, and periodical positions, all making premiums, there would still be set schedules, full-time hours could not be reduced to 35/week and book clerks couldn't be made to work in music or the cafe or vice-versa (that's what they wanted, other people may feel differently).
How it began:
In March 1996, after a long organizing campaign, employees of Borders store #21 in Philadelphia voted against union representation with the Industrial Workers of the World. #21 was the first store to organize, and that drive sparked a number of other drives around the country. Subsequent to the loss, the employee-organizers continued their work, seeking representation by the United Food and Commercial Workers union.
On June 15th, 1996, a bookseller at the Philadelphia store was fired for insubordination. The bookseller, Miriam Fried, was generally recognized as an excellent employee, was given good evaluations by management, and had never been disciplined or given any written or verbal warnings. This, combined with the fact that she was known to management as a union organizer, led to allegations that Ms. Fried was fired for her union activities.
Acting on this belief, branches of the Industrial Workers of the World (the IWW or the 'Wobblies') picketed Borders stores from coast to coast, urging a boycott until Ms. Fried was reinstated or until Borders acknowledged she was wrongly fired. Subsequent to her termination, Ms. Fried filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board. The NLRB ruled against her complaint, citing lack of evidence (the dispute that led to her firing was not witnessed by other employees). Although Borders did not retract Ms. Fried�s firing, the pickets by the IWW resulted in a new policy for employee separation at Borders, and provided an umbrella of protection for other Borders workers seeking to form a union. National attention was also drawn to the union drive.
Meanwhile, Borders, fearing further union activity, hired a notorious anti-labor law firm, Jackson, Lewis, Schnitzler & Krupman, to advise and conduct its anti-union campaign. Jackson, Lewis is the second most active 'union-busting' law firm in the country, according to the AFL-CIO.
Michael Moore, the producer of the film Roger and Me, host of TV-Nation, and author of the book Downsize This! , announced his support for a union during several book readings he gave at Borders. He donated profits from the sale of his book to the union effort, and made a film--The Big One --of the events that transpired on his book tour, including his meetings with Borders employees. It is currently available on videotape.
The UFCW conducted several union drives and contract negotiations at Borders stores across the country.
In the summer of 1996, a drive started at the Ann Arbor, Michigan, Borders--the original Borders store. The employees filed a petition with the NLRB for an election, but it was not held, after a reversal in employee support.
On Oct. 2, 1996, employees of the Lincoln Park, Chicago store approved the UFCW as their bargaining agent. Negotiations for a contract started on November 19, 1996. In October 1997, employees voted to approve the UFCW negotiated contract. Three years later, the employees allowed the contract to expire. The store is presently without a union.
During the last week of October 1996, the workers at the Borders warehouse in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania petitioned for a union election. The employees voted against union representation in December 1996. Employees filed for election a second time, in November of 1997, and again rejected the UFCW as their bargaining agent in January 1998.
On December 10, 1996 employees of the Des Moines, Iowa, Borders voted to authorize the UFCW as their bargaining agent. They approved their contract in December 1997. That brought of the number of Borders stores under union contract to two. Iowa is a right-to-work state: union membership is optional; that fact, combined with a weak contract, led to the dissolution of the union. The store is currently without a union.
In January 1997, after a divisive anti-union campaign by conducted by Borders, employees of the Stamford, Conn. store voted against a union. After the union loss, many employees left or transferred away from the store. NLRB charges were also filed against Borders by employees who alleged unfair actions by Borders� management.
On February 28th, 1997, employees of the Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania, Borders voted to authorize the UFCW as their bargaining agent. The UFCW was unable to negotiate a contract that satisfied employees. In March 1998, employees started a petition drive to decertify the union. In June 1998, UFCW Local 1776 filed a disclaimer of interest, ceasing its effort to represent employees of the store.
On June 3, 1997, employees of the Borders in Seattle, Washington, voted against union representation. During the anti-union campaign, store managers resorted to tearful pleas during small group meetings. After the union loss, many employees left, dismayed by the tactics and actions of management.
On June 13, 1997 employees of the Borders in the World Trade Center voted to authorize the UFCW as their bargaining agent. In April 1998, employees voted to approve a contract. Subsequently, employees voted to amend the contract, providing an 'open shop' clause, which undermined the power of the union. A second contract was not negotiated.
In October of 1997, UFCW local 951 in Michigan began a national campaign to pressure Borders executives into signing a fair campaign practices pledge. It picketed Borders Group executive officers� homes and worked with staff of several Borders stores to initiate union drives. Working with Borders pro-union employees, it collected petition signatures of prominent writers. Borders claimed that 'at least one' of the signatures was forged, but never offered any evidence to back its claim. Actually, the petition is authentic, and Local 951 possesses the original signatures. Ultimately, 951 abandoned its attempt to mount a national pressure campaign, due to employee disinterest in the stores it had targeted and financial constraint.
On November 17th, 1997, employees of the Evanston, Illinois Borders, in conjunction with the UFCW, filed a petition with the NLRB, seeking an election to determine union representation. Employees in Evanston subsequently rejected union representation.
In the spring of 2001, employees of two New Jersey Borders stores filed for union elections, seeking representation by the Teamsters. Ultimately, the employees of both stores voted against the union. Supervisors had been excluded from the vote by a government ruling, and that made the difference.
In the spring of 2002, a union drive started at store 397 in Gurnee, IL. That drive sparked union movements at other stores, including Minneapolis and Ann Arbor.
Union Busting
In their public communications, executives of Borders Books and Music say that while they oppose unions at Borders, they respect the right of employees to investigate the option, and they believe the best path to discouraging unionization is through open and honest communication.
The factual record is quite different. In reality, Borders anti-union strategy features bullying, emotional manipulation and retaliation against pro-union employees, and the refusal to bargain in good faith with stores that go union.
This pattern has been repeated in many of the 12 stores that have
held union elections. The most notorious incident received a lot of
press coverage: it occurred in Philadelphia, where a pro-union employee
was summarily fired. Filmmaker Michael Moore publically intervened on
her behalf, while the IWW labor union picketed stores nationwide;
however, there have been other, less well-known incidents during
election campaigns and contract negotiations.
An Illegal Firing in Ann Arbor
Before employees in Ann Arbor voted 51 to 4 for unionization, store managers hatched a plan to intimidate and divide employees from one another. Foolishly, they discussed this plan in a public place - a bar across the street from the store - and non-employee union supporters heard every word, and later testified to the National Labor Relations Board, which subsequently ordered that Borders restore back-pay to a fired union supporter.
At the "clandestine" pub meeting, the General Manager started out by saying that it was likely that the union would be voted in, and that once voted in, it was their job to get rid of it. After a silence, three of the four managers present began discussing how to union bust. "We've got to act like assholes," one manager opined. They discussed several employees, denigrating their characters and work, marvelling at their sense of entitlement to their jobs. In reality, these employees had very positive work records.
The Cafe/Multimedia manager said that they should start by alienating the cafe from the rest of the group. They later began doing this by first telling everyone in the cafe that they couldn't accept tips because the rest of the staff didn't think it fair.
Once the employees caught wind of this rumor they circulated a nearly unaminous petition for the cafe workers to be allowed to receive tips. Backed into a corner with his own lies, the General Manager allowed the cafe workers at store #01 to receive tips for the first time.
They further advanced their union-busting goals by firing a long-term employee for what was clearly a misinterpretation of policy on his part. Borders later paid him back salary as restitution for their blatant union-busting on recommendation from the NLRB.
The NLRB decision also formed the legal basis for the successful strike in Ann Arbor.
Harassment in Stamford
In the Stamford store, after the union drive became known to Borders, a number of executives, along with trainers from other stores, descended upon the store. The trainers and the executives - including Director of Human Resources, Murray Coleman, a British ex-cop who sold his services to Borders after learning of the union campaign on the internet - proceeded to monitor and harass the store employees during the course of several weeks, following them around the store as they performed their duties.
According to charges filed by employees with the National Labor Relations Board, Coleman singled out one employee in particular for abuse: Samarpana, the "leader" of the union drive in the store. According to Samarpana's testmony, on multiple occasions Coleman yelled at her while she was performing her job:
On January 17, 1997, during the afternoon, I was in the basement speaking to the receiving clerk while I filled boxes with books to bring upstairs. It was known throughout the store that I was in favor of the union. As I spoke with the receiving clerk, Mr. Coleman came down the stairs. He left, and a minute later came back to the stairs and yelled at me: 'Samarpana, what are you doing down here? We: don't pay you to talk - get up on the floor and stay there; you've got no business here.' I was badly frightened and shocked by such harsh treatment. Four days later, I was helping a customer find a book in poetry. (This Is part of our job - to help customers in any section of the store.) Mr. Coleman walked by and came back and threateningly told me: 'Get back to your section. There are customers in children's.' Mr. Coleman tried to restrain my movements within the store and to restrain me from speaking with other employees and literally from doing my job, which is to help all customers. I am a very serious employee and have never had any problems with management before.
Unknown to Samarpana, store managers had sat down with Borders executives and planned her elimination from the staff. An employee of the Stamford store contacted the Borders Union Web site and told us this:
'Do any of you know what did happen in #38 Stamford... One of Borders Managers there had an idea to move Samarpana out of the childrens section. This idea was shared during a dinner with the GM, another AM, Murray Coleman and the head of Store Ops. The idea was greeted with positive overtones and it was actually played out. This was done purposefully to get rid of Samarpana the Union leader at #38 and it worked.
When Samarpana informed an AM she liked that she was leaving, that AM informed the GM, who, typical to her loud, and over-zealous personality, screamed with delight, 'We did it!'
Come on guys, get with it and do something. If there ever was a store that was Union Busting, #38 was at the head of the line. '
According to another employee, Borders' focus seems to be on degrading us and humiliating us to the point where we feel like we have no rights all, including the right to unionize. Borders made our store an emotional battleground; their tactic was to make it all into a personal attack�
It's no surprise that given this treatment, employees voted 27 to 10 against the union, seemingly just to get peace restored to their workplace. Unfortunately, after the anti-union vote, Borders retaliated against the pro-union employees who remained in the store:
During the campaign BGI used a lot of unfair tactics and told a lot of lies and we lost... The union filed objections and I supported them to the point of testifying to the NLRB. Borders responded wih harsher working conditions such as 4 and 5 hour shifts behind the register, arbitrary changes in schedules & selective disciplining of pro-union employees... Conditions got so bad that 4 employees quit in three days, many without having new jobs lined up.
The most glaring example of this came when a vocally anti-union employee yelled loudly at me in the store 'Jon why dont you just quit?' and launched into a tirade against unionizers. When I complained to our GM she initiailly said 'It's not a performance issue I'm not getting involved.' Only after I repeatedly asked and brought forward a witness to my harassment did she agree to 'talk' to this employee.
Crocodile Tears in Seattle
In what can only be described as a "good cop/bad cop" routine, Borders has historically not only relied on bullying in its anti-union campaigns, but also on tugging at the heartstrings of employees.
In Seattle, employees narrowly voted against union representation. Support had been strong at the start, but gradually eroded during the anti-union campaign which featured visits by Borders CEO, Bob DiRomualdo; Director of Employee Relations, Jim Lathrop; President of Borders Stores and Borders Online, Tami Heim; and others.
Heim reportedly cried in every meeting, and a few of the store's Assistant Managers joined in. In the first mandatory all-store anti-union meeting, it was announced that the popular General Manager was leaving. The employee organizing committee, in its communications, had made clear that the union campaign was based on economic issues, not on problems with the management. Borders response was to make it all personal:
As the events of the past two weeks have unfolded, we feel it is time to give our response. Several people have told us that the recently issued manifesto and the petition should not be taken personally, that 'this has nothing to do with the managers of the store -- we are sending a message to corporate.' In response to that statement, we do take this very personally!!!!! We sought Borders out because it is a very unique company, a company that has a staff as diversified as its product line. While we each got into this business for different reasons, we as a group enjoy the fact that this is a personal business, a business of people...
By signing cards petitioning for union representation you have in effect said, 'Sorry, Sharon, Tom, Dean, Katie, you're not doing your job, we want someone else.' You may not have realized that is what you did, but you did. If that is what you feel, then fine, we did the best job that we could...
We have something very special here; we
are not going to lose it. We are going to do everything we can to
educate you, so that when properly informed, you will choose to vote NO
on June 3rd.
While Heim and the assistant managers tugged on heartstrings, Jim
Lathrop attacked; according to an employee:
Neither the crc or oc are outspoken against the union, in fact they are both on the fence. Actually our crc might be leaning towards yes now because Jim Lathrop yelled at her a few days ago when she jokingly asked if she should get a lawyer.
Six weeks after the staff voted against the union, an employee reported that stress levels in the store were at an all time high:
...We were quite saddened at Mark's (old
GM) leaving. Most folks believe he really wanted to be transferred, but
as he had only been in Seattle 6 months, I remain skeptical.
The 'open door' policy is a myth in Seattle. [the new GM]... ALWAYS keeps her door closed. There are constantly management meetings going on. We never see managers on the floor.
This wouldn't be so bad if we weren't so incredibly short staffed. And I mean INCREDIBLY. We were short 4 booksellers and one cafe and music seller prior to our election. Naturally the powers that be said they couldn't hire anyone during the whole union process...
The booksellers are stretched so thin that over half want to quit. Hell, I bet that number is around 75%. But you know what? I bet that is what [the new GM] wants. She would like any bookseller who was here for the election drive gone. regardless on how you voted. No one likes working there anymore...
...Four people have come up to me and said they wish they voted for the union. Those four would have changed the outcome.
Bad Faith Contract Negotiations
In stores that voted the union in, Borders negotiating style has been characterized by stalling, refusal to bargain on economic issues, and intimidation of union negotiators and of employees who sit in on negotiations.
In negotiations at the Bryn Mawr store, Borders representatives walked out of a negotiation session. An employee present reported:
That's right they walked but only after Jim Lathrop called one of our UFCW negotiators an 'asshole' and a 'jerk' and [Jackson, Lewis attorney] Mark Shiffman remarked that our negotiating committee '...doesn't know what's going on.' Seems that being told three or four times that we would not respond to their counter-offer until we could see their entire proposal was not enough. They insisted that we respond and claimed that the Local did not know how to negotiate a contract...This incident will be used by Borders in other stores as an attempt to smear the Union. The truth of the matter is that we were willing to take the remainder of their proposal today and then caucus until we had a complete counter-offer to give them. They walked.
The source of contention in several negotiations has been Borders refusal to provide information in a timely fashion, and refusal to engage in bargaining over economic issues until the very last possible moment. The negotiating syle of Borders executive Jim Lathrop, and of the attorneys from the law firm Jackson, Lewis, has been repeatedly characterized as belligerant and disrespectful. An employee present at negotiations for the World Trade Center store reported:
We had a 4 hour negotiating session today that got pretty heated at times.
In our last negotiation session, Oct. 27th, we asked Lou Silverman (Jackson, Lewis Attorney who lives up to his reputation quite well) to send us a complete counter-proposal in advance of today's session so we would have time to review it before talks today. They failed to do so, and presented their counter-proposal to us at the table today. We were angry at this, as we had sent them volumes of information--indeed, virtually everything they asked for in terms of economics, health care options, etc.
When our attorney expressed his surprise at their lack of an adequate response, Silverman said that they had merely agreed to 'try' to get us their counter-proposal in advance, and they did try and couldn't do it in time. We felt that this was merely a stalling technique on their part.
The counter-proposal they brought forth today, however, lacked any information on economic proposals. We expressed to them quite clearly that this was not sufficient. Silverman then said that in his experience, he felt it was 'more efficient' to discuss language first, economics last. We disagreed with this, and told them that we want to negotiate this as a complete package, as any economic gains (or lack thereof) will have a tremendous effect on what our committee would consider in non-economic language. And as our attorney explained, judging from the experiences of the other stores' contract talks thus far, their idea of 'efficiency' in negotiations is not something we care too much about. This caused a little spat, which ended unresolved.
Later, Jim Lathrop showed his true colors with a little display of belligerence and disrespect that he's becoming well known for. We were discussing a certain issue, and our lead negotiator asked an employee at the table to elaborate on the issue from the shop-floor perspective. When the employee began to do this, Lathrop cut him off and said 'No, I'm talking to him, not you' (referring back to negotiator). Our attorney was very put off by this, as was everyone on our side of the table. Our attorney asked Silverman to tell his client to please show some respect and professionalism at the table, and that this type of behavior was completely uncalled for. SIlverman said 'I didn't hear anything disrespectful.' and things got very heated.
After that, things were tense at the table for most of the rest of the session. We did come a small bit closer toward an agreement on a few larger issues, but nothing too close yet. Meanwhile, we feel that discussing the contract language without a discussion of economics is like trying to drive a car without the wheels. And their counter-proposal today seemed far behind some of the agreements reached in Chicago.
In Chicago, Borders not only refused to engage in economic bargaining, but also threatened an employee present on the negotiating team:
Last wednesday, 6/11, we meet with the
company again. After some opening pleasantries, Borders got down to the
brass tax: no wage increases; no cuts in health care costs; no Sunday
premium; no extra holiday; no cross-training premium; no 40 hours a
week... I've given up trying to argue with these guys. Its obvious that
they've convinced themselves that their way is the right way and any
information contrary isn't applicable. Nonetheless, I noted to the
Borders team that the two independents down the street from us start
their employees at higher wage and offer them better health care
coverage than those at our store. Sure, we do better than B&N, but
not better than the independents that Borders is running out of
business. It was then suggested to me by [Jackson, Lewis attorney] Mark
Shiffman that I go get a job at an independent. Jim Lathrop added that
as I was obviously so disloyal to Borders that I didn't deserve a raise.
The tip of the iceberg
The preceding examples, of course, are only a small selection of what has transpired over the past six years: there have been union votes at twelve stores and serious union campaigns at a dozen others, and there are more stories yet to be told.
We, the current and former employees who constitute the online community at BordersUnion.com, respectfully request that Borders executives and their attorneys generate no new stories of egregious anti-union behavior, now that the Borders employee organizing campaign is in full-swing again. If you do, everyone will know.
Ann Arbor Contract
December 18 Proposed Contract from UFCW 789
ARTICLES OF AGREEMENT
This Collective Bargaining Agreement is entered into this ___, day of _______, __03 between United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 789 (�Union�) and Borders, Inc (�Company�).
ARTICLE 1
UNION SECURITY
Section 1.1:
The Company recognizes the Union as the exclusive Collective Bargaining Representative of all full-time and regular part-time employees, including sellers, hourly supervisors and special process team employees employed by the Employer at it�s Minneapolis, Minnesota location at 3001 Hennepin Avenue South; and excluding contingent employees, salaried supervisor and guards as defined in the Act.
Section 1.2:
A.It shall be a condition of employment that all employees of the Company covered by
the Agreement who are members of the Union in good standing on the effective date of this Agreement shall remain members in good standing and those who are not members on the effective date of this Agreement, become and remain members in good standing in the Union. It shall also be a condition of employment that all employees covered by this Agreement and hired on or after its effective date shall, on the thirty-first (31st) day following the beginning of such employment become and remain members in good standing in the Union.
Section 1.3:
A. The Employers agrees to deduct Union dues and initiation fees from the wages of employees in the bargaining unit who voluntarily provide the Employer with a written authorization which shall not be irrevocable for a period of more than one (1) year, or beyond the termination date of this Agreement, whichever occurs sooner. Such deduction will be made by the Employer from the wages of the employees during each week and will be transmitted to the Union. Together with the transmittal of deductions referred to above, the Employer shall furnish the Union with a list of the employees for who deductions were made.
The Union agrees to refund promptly any dues found to have been improperly deducted and transmitted to the Union and to furnish the employer with a record of such refund.
B. The Employer will collect and forward membership application forms for new hires on behalf of the Union.
ARTICLE 2
MANAGEMENT RIGHTS
Except as expressly limited by other provisions of this Agreement, all of the authority, rights and responsibilities possessed by the Company are retained by it, including, but not limited to, the examinations, selection, recruitment, hiring, appraisal, training, retention, promotion, assignment or transfer (within store) of employees; the discipline or discharge of employees in accordance with law and the provisions of this Agreement; and, in general, to promote efficiency and productivity in the operation of the store.
ARTICLE 3
WORKER�S RIGHTS
The Company, in an effort to promote a fulfilling working environment, agrees to promote the following conditions in the workplace:
A.) The right to a representative of the Union being in attendance at all disciplinary actions taken by the Employer, if requested by the member.
B). Create a workers committee to help develop in store ideas. This committee shall act as a conduit to build greater workers involvement for in store promotions, book placement, community relations and establishing attendance policies.
C). Provide a harmonious workplace free of harassment, abusive behavior and discrimination.
D). Develop a structure where workers have constant opportunities for promotion and advancement through continuing education.
E). Establish a joint venture with Borders/UFCW Local 789 where employees would be paid a day�s wage to work in the community. An employee would be eligible for two (2) community service days per year. They would wear an Article of clothing supplied by the Union that identified the worker as being from Borders/UFCW Local 789.
ARTICLE 4
WAGES, HOURS AND WORKING CONDITIONS
Section 4.1:
The minimum hourly rates of pay for the classifications covered by this Agreement are contained in Appendix A.
Section 4.2:
Employees who had worked for Borders in the past, and are rehired, will receive credit for all hours worked for purposes of hourly progressions. Employees who are hired at rates of pay higher than the starting rate shall be credited with the corresponding service for purposes of wage increases.
Section 4.3:
Thirty-five (35) hours worked in five (5) consecutive days, shall constitute a normal weeks work for regular full-time employees. A full-time schedule, other than the normal thirty-five (35) hour weekly schedule may be arranged by mutual agreement. Regular full-time employees may request a schedule of up to forty (40) hours per week which shall not unreasonably be denied. Employees may not work in excess of forty (40) hours per week without the express permission of a manager.
Section 4.4:
A. Work performed by an employee in excess of forty (40) hours per week and or eight (8) hours per day shall be paid at the rate of one and one-half (1 �) times the employee�s rate of pay.
B. Scheduled overtime worksheets shall be posted in the store on an as needed basis, and employees desiring to work overtime shall sign the worksheet. Seniority shall prevail in the assignment of overtime hours for employees.
C. The Employer shall continue to assign daily overtime on a voluntary basis. However, employees may be expected to perform any reasonable amount of overtime work assigned to them. In such case, the Employer will attempt to assign overtime work to the employees who are immediately available when the need for overtime occurs, and who normally and customarily perform the work involved except in cases of emergency the Employer may assign the overtime to any employee capable of performing the work.
Section 4.5:
Work schedules will be posted at least one (1) week prior to the start of a work week. Schedules shall provide employees with ten (10) hours between shifts, unless the employee waives that right. No employee shall be required to work a split shift unless it is mutually agreed.
Full-time employees are entitled to two (2) consecutive days off per week. Non-consecutive days off may be arranged by mutual consent.
No full-time employee shall normally be required to work more than two (2) night shifts that end after 9:00 PM per week.
Employees shall be permitted to trade shifts with other employees provided the shift traded does not create an overtime situation and the other employee is fully qualified to perform the job.
Full-time or regular part-time employees with two (2) or more years seniority will indicate their continued preference for day shift or night shift within job classifications. Day shift is any shift that is scheduled to start after 7:00 AM and scheduled to end before 6:00 PM or earlier. Night shift is shift schedule to end after 6:00 PM.
Section 4.6:
All employees may elect to receive a thirty (30) minute paid lunch period if they work five (5) hours or more in a day. By mutual consent, Employer and employee may extend the lunch period of an additional thirty (30) unpaid minutes.
All employees working three (3) continuous hours or more per day are entitled to a fifteen (15) minute break. All employees working six (6) continuous hours or more per day are entitle to two fifteen (15) minute breaks.
Section 4.7
A. A part-time employee shall be guaranteed no less than four (4) hours of work each time he/she is scheduled to work or receive pay in lieu thereof except in cases where the employee requests fewer hours and the Employer agrees.
B. No part-time employee shall be scheduled for less than fifteen (15) hours per week except in cases where the employee requests fewer hours and the Employer agrees.
C. Part-time employees, in accordance with their seniority, shall have the right to more hours than junior part-time employees.
ARTICLE 5
DEFINITIONS: FULL-TIME, PART-TIME
Section 5.1:
A regular full-time employee is an employee who normally works thirty-five (35) hours or more per work week.
Section 5.2:
A regular part-time employee is an employee who normally works less than thirty -five (35) hours per work week.
Section 5.3:
Contingent employees may be used as needed by the Employer. They should only have hours after regular full-time and regular part-time employees have all the straight time hours they request. There may not be more than five percent (5%) contingent employees.
Section 5.4:
The Union is interested in developing a guarantee for the number of full-time positions. We recommend seventy-five percent (75%) of all hours be full-time; but are willing to listen to other suggestions.
ARTICLE 6
SENIORITY, LAYOFFS/RECALL/JOB BIDDING
Section 6.1:
Seniority shall be based upon continuous service from the last employment date with the Employer. All new employees shall be on a probation for a trial period of thirty (30) days after which they will be placed on the seniority roster and their seniority shall date from the date of hire.
Section 6.2:
All open positions or new positions shall be posted for one (1) week. Existing employees by seniority shall be able to bid and be awarded those positions ahead of employees from outside of the store. Employees interested in transferring to another store shall not be discriminated against because of their Union affiliation.
Section 6.3:
Layoff�s shall occur in the following order:
1.Contingent Employees
2.Probationary employees
3.Part-time employees
4.Non-probationary full-time employees by seniority, starting with the least senior.
Section 6.4:
Employees will receive a thirty (30) calendar days� notice prior to being placed on lay-off.
When a reduction in force causes openings in current positions, the filling of these positions will take place as follows:
1. All vacant position(s) will be visibly posted for ten (10) working days to all remaining employees.
2. Within those ten (10) days employees must apply in writing for these openings.
3. Positions will be filled by an interview process by the Company.
Section 6.5:
Employees will retain recall rights for a twelve (12) month period. Employees who are laid off and subsequently recalled to work within one (1) year shall retain their seniority.
Employees shall be recalled in the reverse order of the layoff.
An employee�s seniority shall be broken only by:
voluntary quit;
justifiable discharge;
layoff in excess of one (1) year;
absence caused by illness or non-occupational accident of more than two (2) years:
failure to return from layoff after being properly notified to do so.
ARTICLE 7
HOLIDAYS
Section 7.1:
Employees will be paid for ten (10) holidays, including: Columbus Day, May Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year�s Day, Independence Day, Memorial Day, Martin Luther King Day, President�s Day and Labor Day.
No employee shall be required to work on Thanksgiving or Christmas Day.
Section 7.2:
For employees who don�t work on the holiday, they shall receive:
Full-time eight (8) hours regular pay.
Part-time four (4) hours regular pay.
Section 7.3:
Employees who work on holidays specified above shall receive straight time for all hours worked on the holiday in addition to their holiday pay. If an employee works on more than four (4) of the holidays listed in Section 7.1, they shall receive time and one-half (1 �) for all hours worked plus holiday pay.
Section 7.4:
Employees who work on any of the above holidays, may bank their holiday pay by requesting it be added to their P.T.O.
ARTICLE 8
PAID TIME OFF (PTO)
Section 8.1:
PTO is designed to provide compensation at any employee�s regular rate of pay for days away from the job for reasons of vacation, sick leave, personal illness or family illness.
Section 8.2:
PTO will be earned at the rate below, based on the length of service with the Employer. Calculations will be computed based on all hours paid to the employee. PTO will be calculated from the date of hire, but not collectable until after the employee�s probationary period.
Years of Service Hours Paid To Earn One (1) Hour PTO
Date of hire 12 Hours
After three (3) complete years 10 Hours
After eight (8) complete years 8 Hours
Section 8.3:
PTO will be paid out in hours increments equivalent to the number of hours scheduled for the shift missed or for the average hours worked for vacation pay in a week.
Section 8.4:
An employee may carry over PTO at the completion of the first year of service. However, all PTO earned in an anniversary year must be used before a subsequent anniversary year is completed, or the employee will be paid out all remaining hours.
Section 8.5:
Employees may request (schedule) PTO in January of each year and will be awarded by February 15. Seniority will be used in awarding Paid Time Off. After February 15, selection shall be first come first served. There shall be no total blackout dates, the Employer will work with a committee to determine reasonable staffing levels during peak sales times.
ARTICLE 9
LEAVES OF ABSENCE
Section 9.1:
Applications for personal leaves of absence shall be in writing and directed to the attention of the store manager. A leave of absence for a period of up to ninety (90) days shall be granted by the Employer for employees with one (1) or more years of continuous service (employees working less than twenty (20) hours after two (2) years of service), providing such leave is for a reasonable purpose and shall not substantially interfere with the operation of the business.
Section 9.2:
The Employer agrees to grant time off without pay and without discrimination to any employee designated by the Union to attend a labor convention or serve in any capacity or other Union business which necessitates such employee being away from work for the predetermined length of time.
Section 9.3:
Any employee who has completed his/her probationary period will be paid for the actual time lost in accordance with his/her working schedule over a five (5) day leave period in the event of the death of a brother, sister, father, mother, father-in-law, mother-in-law, grandparents and grandchildren; one (1) day leave for brother-in-law and sister-in-law; a ten (10) day leave for the death of a spouse, significant other, child, or stepchild regardless of the adoptive relationship.
Section 9.4:
Any employee who has completed his/her probationary period who is subpoenaed petit jury duty service shall receive the difference in pay for time lost and the amount received as jury pay, but in no case shall the total pay exceed forty (40) hours' pay at the employee's regular straight-time hourly rate. When an employee is released for a day or part of a day, he/she shall report to his or her store for work. Hours spent on jury duty shall be considered as time worked for the purposes of this Agreement.
Section 9.5:
The Employer shall grant to employees who are inducted into the military service a leave of absence. Any employee who is required to take time from work for training or encampment in any recognized military unit shall be granted a leave for such period of time without pay and with loss of seniority. Such employees will not be required to use their vacation time for such purposes.
Section 9.6:
In the event of illness, injury, or pregnancy which requires a prolonged leave of absence, any employee shall be granted a leave of absence for illness or injury for a period not to exceed six (6) months. Extensions of ninety (90) days at a time, up to a total of one (1) calendar year, shall be granted upon written request, supported by a written medical statement from the attending physician (or chiropractor), setting forth the expected duration of the medical leave.
Upon notice to the Employer of availability for work and if requested by the Employer, the attending physician's release to return to work following absence because of a bona fide sickness or accident, the employee shall be restored to his/her previous job held and shall begin work no later than the next posted work schedule, provided the employee returning from a leave of absence for illness or injury notifies the Employer by 12:00 noon on Thursday of his/her availability to return to work the following week.
ARTICLE 10
GRIEVANCE AND ARBITRATION
Section 10.1:
A.All matters related to discipline or discharge must follow the principles of just cause.
B. When a grievance arises in a store, the employee (with or without the Union representative) may attempt first to settle the matter with his/her immediate supervisor. In the event that this is unsuccessful, the representative of the Union shall be called so that the matter may be settled without loss of time to either party.
C. If the grievance cannot be resolved on a local level, a representative of the Employer and a representative of the Union shall, within seven (7) calendar days, attempt to reach a settlement of the controversy, dispute or disagreement.
D. In the case of wage discrepancies, the Employer agrees to submit to the Union upon request from the Union any and all wage data concerning same.
E. Any claimed grievance of any kind to be acted upon or accepted as valid for any reason, must be filed in writing with the Employer and the Union within thirty (30) calendar days of each alleged act of violation, except that back pay on grievances involving the failure of the Employer to grant wage increases in accordance with the Agreement, shall be collectable over a period of time covering two (2) years or back to the effective date of the Agreement, whichever is more.
F. Any controversy over the interpretation of or the adherence to the terms and provisions of this agreement , including all claims for wages which cannot be settled by negotiations, shall be submitted to arbitration by either party notifying the other involved in writing of its desire to do so.
Notification of desire to submit the grievance to arbitration must be made within thirty (30) calendar days following exhaustion of B, C, D and E above.
Section 10.2:
Any discharge or dispute that cannot be resolved under the provisions of SECTION 10.1 may be referred by mutual agreement to the Bureau of Mediation Services of Minnesota in an attempt to reach an agreement on a resolution. The party wishing to submit the dispute or discharge to nonbinding mediation shall do so in writing within fifteen (15) calendar days following the exhaustion of the remedies in SECTION 10. 1. The parties, by mutual agreement, may elect to bypass Mediation and refer the matter directly to Arbitration.
Section 10.3:
If the grievance is not resolved, either party may refer the matter to arbitration. Any demand for arbitration shall be in writing and must be received by the other party within thirty (30) calendar days of the party�s final meeting. The Employer and the Union shall attempt to agree on a neutral arbitrator who shall hear and determine the dispute. If no agreement is reached, the arbitrator shall be selected from a list of seven (7) neutral arbitrators to be submitted to the parties by the Director of The Federal Bureau of Mediation Services.
Section 10.4:
The authority of the arbitrator shall be limited to making an award relating to the interpretation of or adherence to the written provisions of this Agreement, and the arbitrator shall have no authority to add to, subtract from or modify in any manner the terms and provisions of this Agreement. The award of the arbitrator shall be confined to the issues raised in the written grievance and the arbitrator shall have no power to decide any other issues. The award of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties.
Section 10.5:
The award of the arbitrator shall be made within thirty (30) calendar days following the close of the hearing. The fees and expenses of the neutral arbitrator shall be divided equally between the Employer and the Union.
Section 10.6:
The time limitations set forth herein relating to the time for filing a grievance and the demand for arbitration shall be mandatory. Failure to follow said time limitations shall result in the grievance being permanently barred, waived and forfeited, and shall not be submitted to arbitration. The time limitations provided herein may be extended by mutual agreement of the parties.
ARTICLE 11
HEALTH CARE PLAN
Section 11.1:
A. The Employer agrees to make contributions into the United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 789 and St. Paul Food Employers Health Care Plan on behalf of any regularly classified full-time employee who has worked thirty-five (35) or more hours per week or averaged thirty-five (35) or more hours per week for the reporting period (�Full-time Contributions�).
B. The Employer further agrees to make contributions into the Plan on behalf of any regular part-time employee (excluding seasonal and contingent) working less than thirty-five (35) hours per week (�Part-time Contributions�). It is further agreed that if the aforementioned part-time employee works thirty-five (35) or more hours in any one week and averages thirty-five (35) hours or more per week for the reporting period he/she will have a full-time contribution made for any week he/she worked thirty-five (35) hours or more during that reporting period.
Section 11.2:
A. The schedule of contributions are as follows:
Effective September 1, 2002:
Full-time Contributions: $70.88 per week.
Part-time Contributions: $25.73 per week.
Effective September 7, 2003:
Full-time Contributions: $74.88 per week.
Part-time Contributions: $27.73 per week.
Further, effective March 3, 2002, in the event the Trust Fund�s net reserves reach the level of seven (7) months, the Employer shall be obliged to make additional contributions to the Fund, as determined by the Fund Trustees, up to a maximum of $5.00 per week for Full-time Contributions and a maximum of $2.50 per week for Part-time Contributions. Any additional contributions which may be determined by the Fund Trustees to be required by this section shall be paid on the same basis as set forth in SECTION 11.1.
B. In addition to the contributions provided for in Section 11.2 A., the Employer shall, effective March 7, 2004, make "Benefit Fund" contributions as follows:
Full-time Contributions: $8.00 per week.
Part-time Contributions: $3.00 per week.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, it is agreed that, in the event that an actuarial analysis of the Health and Welfare Fund to be completed prior to the third year of the contract term (i.e., prior to March 7, 2004) should project that Health and Welfare Fund reserves will fall below the seven (7) month level at any time during the remainder of the contract term, then the amounts specified above as "Benefit Fund" contributions during the third year shall be designated for contribution exclusively to the Health and Welfare Fund to the full extent required to attempt to maintain a seven (7) month level of reserves in that Fund.
Section 11.3:
The program of benefits of this full-time plan and of this part-time plan are as agreed to between the Employer and the Union Trustees and will be maintained for the life of this labor agreement at no contribution cost to employees. Benefits may be modified by mutual agreement of the Board of Trustees.
Section 11.4:
The Employer is bound by the existing Trust Agreement covering the aforesaid Trust Fund and any amendments thereto. It is agreed that the Trust Agreement shall be amended to provide: (1) subsidized retiree health insurance benefits consistent with the terms of the Letter of Understanding Regarding Retiree Health Insurance dated March 17, 2002; (2) that part-time employees hired on or after March 18, 2002 shall become eligible for coverage only as of a date 180 days following the date of hire; (3) electronic transmission of Employer Contribution payments; and (4) a "best efforts" attempt by the Trustees to develop a mechanism for participating employees to self-fund accounts to be used for paying the costs of retiree coverage.
ARTICLE 12
BENEFIT PROTECTION
Borders will maintain current policies with regard to book credit, dress code, House Accounts, Employee Stock Purchase Plan, Employee Stock Option Plan, 401K Plan, and all other benefit plans currently in effect that are not addressed above or in the areas of this Contract. Any material improvement in these benefits offered to employees not under Contract shall also be extended to employees currently under Contract. In addition, Borders will participate in a Bus Pass Purchase Program. Employees who take the bus, will submit a receipt of their monthly pass and Borders will reimburse fifty percent (50%) of that cost.
ARTICLE 13
LEGAL ISSUES
Section 131:
No employee shall be discriminated against because of race, creed, sex, age, color, national origin, disability, political ideology, religion, marital status, status with regard to public assistance or affectional preference.
Section 13.2:
No employee shall be asked or permitted to make any written or verbal agreement that will conflict with this Agreement. No employee shall have his/her wage reduced who may be paid over the minimum wage called for in this agreement, nor shall any employee be reclassified to defeat the purpose of this Agreement.
Section 13.3:
1) Nothing contained in this agreement is intended to violate any Federal law, rule or regulations made pursuant thereto. If any part of this agreement is construed to be in such violation, then that part shall be made null and void and the parties agree that they will within thirty (30) days begin negotiations to replace said void part with a valid provision. It is agreed however, that either party to this agreement shall have the right to appeal any decision that a provision of this contract violates a Federal law, rule or regulation.
2) It is also understood that if a provision is deemed in violation by the final appellate court, the parties will negotiate with the intention of replacing the void part with a valid provision, but, however, should negotiations fail, the matter will be subject to arbitration according to SECTION 10.3 of this Contract.
ARTICLE 14
TERM OF AGREEMENT
Section 14.1:
The parties agree that this Contract may be amended by mutual agreement of both parties, and if amended, the amendment shall be attached to the Contract by addendum and signed by both parties.
Section 14.2:
This Agreement shall be effective from the date hereof, except as otherwise specifically provided and shall continue in full force and effect through June 1, 2005 and shall continue from year to year thereafter unless either party serves notice in writing upon the other party ninety (90) days prior to the expiration date of its desire to terminate, modify or amend the provisions of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first above written.
By________________________________ By_________________________________
Title_______________________________ Title________________________________
In an effort to be reasonable in our wage proposal, UFCW Local 789 has used information from the Minneapolis Community Development Agency. We have taken their base rate for 2001 and adopted it as our starting rate.
Minneapolis City Council Member and Chairperson for MCDA said: �We consider the city�s living wage policy crucial in helping our residents afford housing and other basic necessities of life.� We agree, and while this proposal is lower than we think it should be, it is a beginning point.
We think APPENDIX A should look like this:
APPENDIX �A�
WAGE RATES
Current 2003 2004
Hire $ 9.33
6 Months
12 Months
18 Months
24 Months
30 Months
36 Months
Over scale
We have left all of the columns empty until we see the current wage rates. We believe that wage adjustments for months of service increments should be consistent ( i.e.: every six (6) months should have a value, somewhere in the neighborhood of twenty-five cents ($.25) per hour.) We also will bring increases for each of the next two (2)years.
In addition we want to talk about:
*Sunday premium pay
*Additional responsibility pay including Special Processing Team and Supervisors. We also would like to see job descriptions of the various jobs in the store.
Minneapolis Video
[mpls.o18.media]
|
Minneapolis Negotiations
This is a record of the contract negotiations conducted in Minneapolis in 2002. Things worked a little differently there from other Borders contract negotiations in that the transcripts of the sessions were posted immediately to the web afterward.
Initial Contact - UFCW 789 to Store #27
November 1, 2002
Maria Zachmann
Border Books
3001 Hennepin Ave S
Minneapolis MN 55408
RE: Contract Negotiations
Dear Ms Zachman:
It is customary to send initial letters to the store manager, and it is even more usual to have them deferred to the corporate offices. Please pass this on to whomever will be conducting the negotiations on behalf of the company.
The N.L.R.B. certification came to us on October 31, 2002 and we would like to select dates to begin the negotiating process as quickly as possible. First contracts are always challenging, but we believe the agreement we will introduce, will be one that works well for all parties. In talking with workers, it is clear their interests lie in developing a practical, concise document that helps re-establish their role in making Border's a strong, viable retail operation.
I am encouraged by engaging in a process where workers are this interested in the daily operation of the store. Border's is fortunate to have workers dedicated to that end.
Please note, this document is being copied to workers in the store. I feel it is only fair to you to know these communications and subsequent negotiations will be available to workers in several different formats. There will be no secrets or behind closed door discussions with the employer that are not shared with workers and others.
I appreciate your prompt action on this matter and will tell you we are interested in securing a good fair settlement with the least amount of disruption possible.
Sincerely,
Bill Pearson
President
UFCW Local 789
Bernie Hesse
Organizer
UFCW Local 789
UFCW 789 to Josefowicz 11/12/2002
November 12, 2002
Gregory P Josefowicz
borders Group
100 Phoenix Dr
Ann Arbor MI 48108-2202
Re: Contract Negotiations Borders #27
Dear Mr. Josefowicz:
I apologize in advance of receipt of this letter, but I need your help. On the 18th of October, the workers at Border's store #27 in Minneapolis, Minnesota voted for us be their certified bargaining representative. The vote was 15 for and 6 against, and I thought it was an even handed campaign free of any real ugliness.
On the 1st of November I sent a letter to the store manager with a request for dates for negotiations to begin. I have the good fortune of more than a few years in the business, and I realize those decisions will be made well beyond her. That's where you come in.
I am certain these talks will be conducted by people other than yourself, though we would love to have you join us. I would appreciate if you could place me in contact with whomever will be heading up these negotiations. I have included a standard request form we use for all contract negotiations. I would appreciate that data be returned to us as quickly as possible. Once we get it there is some preliminary work we need to do, but we should be ready to go shortly after the first of December.
I know in the past, you have used the Jackson Lewis law firm. Unfortunately, their reputation precedes them. I would hope you would have your own in-house human resource people available, but it is obviously your call on who can best negotiate this contract. I would appreciate whomever you are using to contact me at 651-451-6240.
I am certain you are very busy, I will try and avoid writing you unless it is an absolute necessity. Thank you for your help in this matter.
Sincerely,
Bill Pearson
President
UFCW Local 789
PS: As a courtesy, please be aware, all communications exchanged will be available to others
Pearson to Carney 12/02
December 2, 2002
Mr. Thomas Carney
Vice President and General Counsel
Dgd.
100 Phoenix Dr
Ann Arbor MI 48108-2202
Dear Mr. Carney:
Thank you for your letter regarding the upcoming negotiations for the Borders Store #27. There was some confusion in that I will be the lead negotiator and the communications should come thru me.
My style is to be fairly direct, so let me just clarify why I wrote to Mr. Josefowicz. I have read through volumes of information relative to the negotiations that took place in 1997 and 1998. There is a fairly clear and consistent pattern to the bargaining. Without passing judgement, I will let the outcomes speak for themselves.
I would be less than honest to say they were positive for the workers in those stores. That is troubling, and not a mistake I want to repeat. I also realize the precarious position you are in. Those two factors almost insure a fairly challenging and spirited set of talks. I know the Jackson Lewis folks are �good� at what they do, and frankly I hate to �lose�.
Let me be very clear, our intention is to make these negotiations as transparent as possible. The visibility of these discussions will be like no one has ever seen. That can be very good or very bad, depending on how we all act at the table. We will come prepared to move to a fair settlement, of course that may well be a matter of perspective.
To the earlier point, I will work within your contact structure, as long as we are moving forward. If not, I will not hesitate to communicate with Greg or anyone else who is interested in what is happening.
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at 651-451-6240.
Sincerely,
Bill Pearson
President
UFCW Local 789
cc: A number of interested observers
WGP/gf
Opeiu #12
Transcript Negotiations 12/18/02
Borders Negotiations
December 18, 2002
Session 1
*These are the notes from the 12/18/02 session; it is not intended to be a verbatim transcription*
For the Union:
Simone Menier (Borders)
Jason Evans (Borders)
Holly Krig (Borders)
Bill Pearson, President UFCW 789
Bernie Hesse, Organizer UFCW 789
Jennifer Christensen, Representative UFCW 789
For the Company:
Maria Zachman
Mark Shiffmann, Attorney at Law
James Lathrop, Director HR
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Services:
Mitch Franklin
--9:40 a.m.--
Bill
It would be helpful, because we only have one day, It would be helpful to know who is the mediator so we can set dates.
Mark
This is the nicest FMCS office I�ve been in. As far as, as I said to you, we certainly have no problem involving mediation, I don�t know that we to add early in the process of the negotiation, to involve the delay of the mediators schedule. It is hard enough to try and get dates without involving the mediators schedules. We are open to that process.
Bill
I have been doing this for years- We were in Long Prairie yesterday, we didn�t have a mediator there. If we are meeting here, I won�t give up dates because there isn�t a mediator. The advantage of taking dates is we can book a room.
Mitch
When you book rooms, those rooms are subject to cancel if the mediator needs it. Also you have to go at 5 pm if you are meeting without a mediator. Part of our new security.
Bill
As I said, I was in Long Prairie yesterday, it was a 14 hour day, but we got it done. Our, the only, value of being here is that these are going to be a very unusual set of negotiations. We are approaching it a little differently. I have spent a fair amount of time reading the pages of negotiations from 5 years ago. I�ve had the emails made available. The history is from an education standpoint; how I do business is across the table looking face to face. I am not interested in getting a contract I have to force on people. It is not about what I think they should have, it is about what they think they should have.
My style, there was a point in my history where I was a produce clerk, one of the guys from the International came in and I opened my mouth and the guy from the Int�l took me out into the hall and reamed me. I never forgot that. I let all of my committees speak. I expect my committees to be courteous � come to the table civil�we expect to get a contract.
We are posting everything we do (in negotiations) on bordersunion.com. This will be the most transparent negotiations ever. We are being realistic in our proposals. Our proposed contract is 16 pages long � our grocery one is 70. For many years we have tried to keep negotiations a secret. For the last two contracts we built a web site, email committees, in store communications committees. After negotiations we would send out/post on the internet members would print and post in the store.
Membership involvement is critical to the success of any union. We have moved to an open communication style with the membership. I know it can be uncomfortable I want to make sure it is on the table so there is no surprises to anyone.
Mark
You indicate that the negotiations are going to be unusual. We�ve had negotiations in auditoriums � You indicated that the only difference is that they are going to be open. We have had four negotiations. 3 were ratified. One ended up not being. I don�t think at any point in those processes was there even a harsh word exchanged.
Even under the contract, in the 3 places we did achieve a contract it was the union that chose not to negotiate. In one place they walked away in the middle. Then I was contacted and they said don�t come to town� I don�t see that this is going to be different. While Borders hasn�t experienced the open communication in negotiations, I have. The one thing I would request is that the communication be accurate. We have reviewed the web site. There was one letter that was posted and one that was received. The difference was the spelling of the name was different. If you are going to do this as is your right, you do it as accurately as you can. I don�t see that this is going to be any different that normal .
This is your committee?
Bill
Maybe one more from the office
Mark
This is the meeting place (FMCS). How likely is it that we get a last minute cancellation?
Mitch
Not likely, we try to take in consideration people flying in.
Mark
If there is an agreement I would assume that on your end it has to be ratified.
Bill
Yes.
Mark
We will come to the table with authority to offer agreements at the table.
Language first and then economics
Bill
We have a full contract.
Mark
Do you agree that this makes more sense �language first.
Bill
What ever makes you more comfortable. I got your letter
Mark
Regular language.
Economic language.
Then economics.
This makes the economics more easy.
We would have you forward your contract to us and we would give you a counter proposal based on your original. What I don�t like doing is you working on one set of papers and me off another.
Jennifer:
Re: electronic communication � form format?
Mark:
I will put you in touch with the person who takes care of that
Bill
Mark had alluded to the letter. And she sent it out to Greg Josefowicz with the name sent incorrectly. I insulted him in the letter by spelling the name wrong, didn�t want to do it on the web too.
We will have this information on the web. What we are saying isn�t a secret. We will put you on the web. The minutes of the meeting will be posed as to what is being said across the table. There is video streaming�
Mark
Your not going to video stream?
Bill
Only If you agree to it.
Mark
I have too many bad sides.
Bill
We are going to be producing video�
I have read the information on negotiations, I am not implying that it was anyone�s fault. I have never not gotten a contract.
Mark
I think it has happened to me once
Bill
And I�ll tell you another thing- I always got another contract. I can tell you when we hooked up with the people from Borders � We have a website youareworthmore.org - Our goal is to represent people in that store
Mitch
No notes taken in caucus- In joint session I don�t care what you do, but when I am talking to just the union or just the company, notes are subject to the confidentiality of the mediator. Those sessions are confidential in nature. I have served my purpose, I am going to remove myself from the negotiations process.
If you need me I will be available.
Bill
Did we schedule just the morning? Or do we have all day?
Mark
By the early afternoon
Bill
I only say that because if you are going to assign a mediator. We would like to know before we leave so we can get dates.
---Break�
10:44 a.m.
Bill
Again I know that this is a little unique. I won�t go into it. Again I will forward it to you electronically. For purposes of today though I will pass these out to you (Bill passes out bound proposed contract). And while there is a signature page, I don�t expect you to sign it. And just so you know we will pass it out to all the workers.
Mark
I think for future negotiations I will bring back to you 8.5 x 11
Is there anything in here that you think we won�t (understand)? If there are any items you want to highlight
Bill
I have stolen language from many contracts.. We have 70 contracts (to draw from).
(Bill touches on highlights and articles of contract proposal)
Article 1 � standard union security language
Article 2 � Managements rights came off of the web site..don�t know where it originally come from
Article 3- Worker�s rights - These proposals come very much from the workers
Mark
Let me ask: by �Union Representative� do you mean the professional union representative?
Bill
Initially Yes. (will be training) (continue to touch on highlights of Article 3)
Article 4 � Standard boiler plate language
35 hour workweek with option of 40 .
I am sure we will have much discussion. Understand this is all subject to negotiations but we wanted it to fit into what you are doing.
Mark
On contingency employees is it 5% of the work force or 5% of the hours.
Holly
As we discussed it, it seemed clear that it was 5% of the work force
Bill
In the contingent work force we are trying to be sure that the FT and PT employees get the hours.
Holly
We wanted to be sure that they (contingent) don�t outnumber the regular employees (FT PT).
Article 6 � layoff/recall/job bidding
Mark
You put in the layoff language contingent before probationary. In the borders culture is that the contingent is typically the borders employee who has stepped back.
Bill
I think that if you hired a probationary employee was hired because there was a hole. We wanted to be sure that the �real� employees got to work.
Mark
Again, contingent employees are contingent because they want to be. They choose. They don�t want a regular schedule.
Bill
Article 7 � Holidays
Mark
4 of the holidays you have listed are always fall on Mondays.
Bill
What we were trying to say is, if there is fairness it is good; if they work more there is an incentive.
Article 8 - PTO
We proposed this, you are probably familiar with this.
Article 9
Leaves of absence
This is tandard Language
Article 10 � Grievance and arbitration
(bill goes though steps as listed)
Mark
you have Bureau of Mediation Services written. This is FMCS
Article 11 � Health Care Plan
Bill
We are proposing the UFCW Retail Health Care Plan. I don�t have what your current costs are�
Mark
I will send them to you. Send me your SPD
Am I to read that this is $280 per month?
Bill
It is up to $307 (new rate).
(Bill briefly summarizes retail health care plan)
Bill
Part time going to $27.73/week.
(Bill summarizes plan)
Article 12 � Benefit Protection
Bill
I started to propose our 401 plan, but then I saw your plan. We wrote this in trying to maintain what you have rather than plug (the employees) into ours.
I want to point out, and this comes from the employees, parking is at a premium at your store, the employees have proposed a bus pass reimbursement of 50%.
Article 13 � Legal Issues
This is standard language
Article 14 � we propose a two year agreement
Wages:
We have adopted the Minneapolis Living wage base rate for 2001 as our starting rate. When we see where people are at we will plug in the other scale rates
This proposal is pretty basic. I always want to get contracts that are easy to understand. We could have brought the Minneapolis retail language.
Mark
Jim any questions?
Jim
No.
Bill:
One of the things that I have seen (on the web) stated continuously by Borders workers is that they would like to have more in put into the running of the stores This is going to sound like a criticism... But the bigger any entity gets the structure controls and this is coming from the UFCW which is a top down organization .. The Borders workers are trying to do what we as a local are trying to do as an organization.
Mark:
Do you want to talk about some dates?
Bill - Yes
January 9,10 � 16, 17 To begin at 9:30 a.m.
Borders Negotiations - January 9, 2003
Session 2
(These are the notes represent the discussions from the 01/09/03 session; it is intended to represent the conversation and discussion to the best of our ability, it is not a verbatim transcription).
For the Union:
Jason Evans: worker
Holly Krig: worker
Bill Pearson, President
Bernie Hesse, Organizer
Jennifer Christensen, Representative
For the Company:
Maria Zachman
Mark Shiffmann, Attorney at Law
James Lathrop, Director HR
MS: Bill and I had a very brief discussion about process about how we should address this. As I mentioned to you last time, any language that is underlined is new, any not underlined is yours, and not agreed to is struck through.
Each article is on its own page, (we may have killed a few trees)
I have a full response, all economics is struck through, not that we aren�t agreeing, but �
This is explained at the beginning of the contract.
What Bill and I had talked about is we will go through the whole proposal, have a discussion, break so you can discuss this with your group.
I would then suggest we go through and pick several articles to work on.
A couple of other preliminary things, you had asked for our health care costs, we don�t have them yet, we are working on them, it is year end and we should have them for you.
Do you have the SPD (summary plan description � health care plan)
BP: I will bring it tomorrow.
MS: (Briefly summarizes changes in language [see attached management proposals] Questions, responses and discussions are as noted.)
BP: in 4.2 what do you do now if someone is hired at a higher rate.
JL: At 6 months .25 at one year .25 and then into the �pool�.
If they are hired at a higher rate they would skip the progression and go into the pool, annual schedule (review).
BP: in 4.4 is that your current arrangement? No overtime after 8?
MS/JL: Yes, it is more than 40 in a workweek.
BP: On the two consecutive you usually get two consecutive off?
MZ: It depends on what the employees want
JL: Unless the business needs require, employees generally work one weekend day.
BP: Currently how do you determine FT
MZ: Currently it is more than half
BP: Are there any PTers that are PT that don�t want to be? No
MS: See that is the difference in the grocery industry, people start as PT and progress to FT. At borders people go back and forth and we may not be able to accommodate it immediately
BP: Do people in your store have half hours or hour lunches.
MZ: Both. There preference or store needs.
BP: Is there ever a time when they don�t?
MZ: They are scheduled for a lunch.
BP: You struck the language for working 2 nights.
MS: Again we try to accommodate everyone�s preferences some want all closings some want days. It varies based on the needs of the store and the staff.
HK: I think that the salient point is that you keep mentioning the needs of the employees, but many may want 5 consecutive days and that they are not mutually exclusive.)
MS: We have a flexible schedule where we try to accommodate peoples� needs,
HK: I don�t think that is necessarily true, I think it is that the store is under staffed and I don�t think that the employees should be punished for that.
MS: You have the employees based on the sales in the store. That is a determination of management. It is what works in the store.
HK: I don�t think you can say it works in the store because you have not worked in it.
MS: The set number of payroll hours, not people, is a management decision. How it is divided is an appropriate topic of discussion. That you don�t think you have enough people in the store can be a topic for discussion.
HK: You are easily able to appeal to that, but we are prepared to argue the case.
Because there are some who want to work consecutive days does not mean that other employees cannot continue to work flexible schedules.
MS: Our position is that we are not willing to guarantee consecutive days.
BP: I am surprised you �popped� B already.
I think that when employees have some say in their company and when workers are included in the functioning of the store (you have a better working environment). What you see here, with what Holly is saying, is an example of how people in the store feel - that even though you are (a large corporation) why can�t the employees, at least within the store, function as a small company.
MS: I think that already exists and scheduling is an example. Scheduling changes based on employees needs, and we do a pretty good job of that. Some people want to do volunteer work, some have school and that scheduling is done informally.
My experience is typically scheduling in supermarkets is very much seniority based, once they are there they are pretty much locked into those hours unless someone leaves, I have been around for a long time something changes in my life I can�t get a new schedule. In our organization, when those changes happen we try to meet our employees needs. It is extraordinary to meet employ
HK: There is a dichotomy created between (the concept of) flexibility and (rigid) guarantees with the union - I think both can exist, flexibility along with guarantees.
JL: We are not at all receptive to guarantees in schedules. With the exception of the numbers of hours (etc) - with this size of store and the number of employees we would not be able to run the store.
BP: As it becomes more top down it becomes more rigid as a corporate structure
MS: That is true I wouldn�t dispute that
BP: We can say we want six more workers, and you are right that is not a mandatory subject of bargaining, but scheduling is. We wanted to say that we want to say to the employer that workers want input. We want us to take the moral high ground. From Holly and Jason�s stand point they like working at borders. What you are hearing from Holly is what is happening all over.
JL: If we have to reduce hours we share that across employees, before we lay people off. If we put guaranteed hours� we reduce hours by request and then average the hours over a four week period to maintain benefits. our desire is to handle hours in that fashion before we lay people off.
BP: How many FT and PT
MZ: 10 Full time
7 Part time
4 temporary (seasonal) they can be temporary for 120 days and then a decision has to be made.
BP: is there a time in the book business that is slow
JL: the spring can be slow, but it really depends on the releases, if you have a harry potter released during the slow season you will have people come into the store.
MS: We certainly have a busy season.
BP: I am a part time employee, would that employee get hours ahead of a contingent or temporary?
MS/JL: We would certainly have a part-time employee worked during the holiday than a temporary. There is no incentive for us to give the hours to the temporary before PT or contingent.
If we are going to hire temporary seasonals on a FT basis before we do that we are going to pt and contingent employees before hiring seasonal employees
Mostly used for Holiday seasonal and summer vacation coverage.
JE: I started as a seasonal.
MS: Unlike most other environments, our PTers work the hours they work based on their preference, that is not always the case, but it is mostly the case.
BP: (6.1) Probabtion is 60 working days, if they worked one day a week they would be union members in 60 months?
MS: Being members and being on probation is two separate issues.
BP: So the contract covers them but they are still probationary.
MS: They are probationary only for the purposes of benefits (we will get to that) and whether or not we decided to keep the employee.
(note typo in 9.6 corrected to state no loss of seniority)
BP: you�ve struck 10.2 (mediation)
MS: We don�t feel mediation is necessary. If we have a serious grievance here that will get attention beyond Maria. If we can work it out, we will. We don�t feel we need the extra step.
Everything else economic, we are probably fine with a two year term.
BP: Let me make notes on the wage page.
JL: There are multiple people in classifications:
Booksellers: 11 booksellers (4 full time)
In this store we do not have cashiers.
4 Another classification is Hourly Supervisors
2 SPT
The other classification that exists that isn�t here now is cashier.
0 cashier
JL: other classifications are music sellers and caf�
BP: from a hierarchy stand point is there a pecking order? Is there a ranking?
JL: generally if would go from bookseller to hourly supervisor
Cashier (entry)
Bookseller/music/books (premium)
SPT
Hourly
Premiums are in information sent to Union
BP: I don�t want to read anything into your comments, is there a chance it could become a bigger store?
JL: Because of the constraints of the store, and space, if we do come up with a larger space we would look at adding caf� or books. There are very few stores without music and caf�.
Break �
Resume
BP: let me start on the first page � we are going to take them in a pecking order,
I am more non-traditional than you I think often times other pieces are related to other pieces. One of my largest disappointments is that we have sat in negotiations and negotiated over language which no one cared about and then spent a day on economics-
MS: with thee exception of Health Care economics, it is either this or this. Language can be massaged. I had 85 meetings with a teachers union, 84 � were about language.
BP: These are going to be interesting, as we talk about economics that over-lap language.
Under article 1 TA (tentative agreement 1.1 - 11:39a.m.
Section 1.2 I need to understand-
Standard language, once you have completed your probationary you are a member.
You can join (the Union), but the Union cannot help you with a termination.
MS: If you would rather not have them be members until they complete their probationary period, we would change that.
BP: What would the advantage be to you to have a contract not cover a PT who worked only one or two days a week.
Why are you proposing a longer probationary period.
MS: So we can see how the employee (works out) their attendance etc.
If we are going to commit to a standard that we won�t separate people for cause � this only applies to new people � we need time to evaluate the employee.
BP: So a full time employee who works 5 days would have to work 3 months on probation?
HK: I was looking in the Borders hand book for a definition of a probationary period-
MS: There is none. The borders employers are always at will employees. When we make disciplinary decisions they are always well founded.
BP: I work from standards � have not seen this concept that you have members that you cannot represent.
Section1.3 you have struck initiation fees �
Logic behind that?
MS: We just choose not to � we will deduct dues
Administratively it is easier to take dues out once a month.
BP: We have changed our dues structure � do if for some reason some reason they did not work, we don�t charge them. Under the monthly system (the old system), if they didn�t work and didn�t pay does, the next month they would have to pay dues times 2. We don�t make an adjustment on a weekly system. We have built a software system, instead of exchanging paperwork, you can transmit once a month � we download it - you plug in an amount � say 5 dollars a week.
MS: Why don�t you give us an example of your software and we can give it to our payroll system.
BP: Easier for the employer, deduct and remit.
JL: Can I just ask the question why you don�t want to deduct initiation fees?
MS: We just don�t feel it is appropriate for us to deduct initiation fees.
HK: Why isn�t it in appropriate?
MS: We just don�t want to do it. We will do dues check-off, not initiation fees check-off.
MS: missed one word on managements rights, add �subcontract�
BP: that is a big one.
Articles 3 and 4 we will talk about tomorrow.
Article 5 �
Some questions before we break
When is a contingent employee no longer a contingent employee �
When they have a regular schedule � or if they haven�t worked in a quarter
JL: An employee may request to become a contingent employee
We don�t hire contingent employees off the street.
If they become available and there is a schedule available they can come back as PT and FT.
Typically it doesn�t happen very often. Generally when people become contingent they are moving out of the store
BP: Only because the collective bargaining agreement will create some changes in structure of how you operate. I have some experience in health care where on call(contingent) picking up over a hundred hours �
JL: For us that would be a part-timer.
MS: Let me suggest something. I see your concern -that is not how we do this.
We would have no problem agreeing to a maximum number of hours with the exception of the holiday period or maybe summer vacations.
JL: If they are working on a regular weekly basis, they would be PT.
If a contingent goes a quarter without working at least 8 hours we terminate them.
There is a whole lot we have to do if someone becomes contingent, so we are not encouraging it.
BP: in 5.4 you have struck our proposal on the number of FT positions I see nothing to replace it.
MS: because we do not want to have a set number of anything. We want to retain the flexibility to staff the store with the right combination of people. Part-timers provide flexibility. The company has always been based primarily on full-time staff.
BP: WE have talked about the probationary period unless you have something else to cover.
Lunch break.
Resume 1:16 p.m.
BP: Article 9 Leaves of absence
60 work days
MS: 60 days seems to be an aweful lot of union leave time for a store this size. Are you looking at several for a few days?
BP: I can see taking one or two people out for a long period of time.
BP: I see only FMLA, there is no where you address a medical leave of absence
We will take care of that tomorrow
You also struck the language regarding returning to work after the leave (scheduling etc.)
Must be a line missing from management�s rights to discipline for just cause.
That is where I normally have it.
BP: I just haven�t seen it put into managements rights before
We agree that discipline is for just cause, we just don�t know where we are going to put it
One of the issues I have is that you have struck the issue of wage discrepancy claims � that hasn�t been our experience, we have had members
That wouldn�t even need the grievance procedure. If there was an error, informally we would say, we blew it, we�d fix it. If we made a mistake, we fix it. We go back and fix it.
With using the term �affectional� preference we would agree to 13.1
We need a definition of affection.
BH: we actually use this term in our grocery contracts.
BP: We are agreeable to a two-year contract.
On your article 4 (4.3) 35 hours worked in 4 or 5 days shall constitute a normal week�s work a FT schedule other than�
So what is a normal weeks work?
MS: Some of our employees want to work four days
BP: So it is 4 �9 hour days?
JL: It is variable based on the needs of the employee.
BP: The reason it became a discussion point is that when it gets down to the point where we need to be, is it 35 or 38?
JL: Our definition all along is 35.
When you hire a fulltime employee is that what you tell them?
MZ: a minimum of 35 hours.
BP: The reason we bring this up, is that the difference between 35 and 40 is a substantial amount of money. When you reach an agreement on the number of hours, that is the number of hours they own. And that is not what I am hearing
JL: That doesn�t mean that if we had payroll issues in the store we wouldn�t reduce them to 35 � we would not expect to reduce (Jason) from 38 to 35 to maintain benefits.
Our historical practice has been to reduce everyone to prevent layoffs.
We do not envision reducing hours, but that is our vision of how we address the reduction of hours
BP: We�ve talked about the grocery contract; a 40-hour contract is 40 hours. Once I start taking money from them as a representative and they have been at 40 for 20 years, and now they are reduced to 35- it reduces the relevance of seniority.
JL: I will tell you over the last 10 years FT/PT ratio has changed due to the labor market up until this last year. When the market was tougher to hire, often you could only find PTers. Yes, based on what you just stated we do come from different direction. In general we would reduce part-timers to some level and then full-time to some level.
BP: We are running a parallel track to what we are doing here � we now have a staff of 5 organizers. We think there are issues that come to the table that we see as issues to organize around. When we put stuff on the Internet, it does reflect what is happening here. The discussion we just had is the discussion we are going to organize around. We are trying to be as straightforward as we can. This isn�t a trick question to see how bad a corporation can be, because I don�t think you are a bad corporation. We just have workers who want to make some changes.
HK: Let me just respond to the issues of reductions Borders has continued to value all of its employees, just because an employee is full time it does not mean they are more valued than part-time. It has been a philosophical perspective that has served Borders and the employees well.
Clearly there is a subtext that is apparent-
It�s nice of you to say it values its part-time employees as much as its FT employees but
FT employees (jobs) should be valued more because we need to create better jobs as opposed to mediocre jobs as opposed to hours, benefits.
You make the argument that PT employees make the situation more fluid, and yes it does make it more difficult to schedule - but
We are here to say that the onus is on the employer to make the workplace a more livable environment. But, so be it, it must be done.
BP: The debate almost has to be held in a public venue. Our economy is never going to get rebuilt on the backs of $8 /hour jobs. We tried to come to the table without these things out here, we tried to bring things that work and that are in reach. Will you say hell no to stuff, yea, but we�ve heard that a lot our goal is to come out of here to make workers feel more secure and feel that being union had value.
Borders Negotiations - January 10, 2003
Session 3
(These are the notes represent the discussions from the 01/010/03 session; it is intended to represent the conversation and discussion to the best of our ability, it is not a verbatim transcription).
For the Union:
Jason Evans: worker
Holly Krig: worker
Bill Pearson, President
Bernie Hesse, Organizer
Jennifer Christensen, Representative
For the Company:
Maria Zachman
Mark Shiffmann, Attorney at Law
James Lathrop, Director HR
BP: Just a note before we start - Under articles of agreement change �company� to �employer�
MS: I did check my notes I did missed a whole line in the managements rights clause: �transfer within store, demote and promote, discipline or discharge employees for just cause�.
BP: After negotiations, I like to get the committee�s perception of what went on. It is always revealing to hear the feed back from people who haven�t been involved in the process before. There has been initial disappointment in your response to articles 3,4,5. We will respond - some with counter proposals, some not.
There is some surprise that you rejected 3.B (workers rights). One of the things we have seen at borders is that you hire smart people who like customers, books (etc.) while there will be issues we bump heads over, it doesn�t mean that we can�t work together. We will continue to cling to some kind of structure, it doesn�t have to be the exact verbiage, including (the concepts in) B. Mark (Shiffmann) can continue saying it isn�t a mandatory subject of bargaining.
Article 3
3.A.) T.A. 01/10/03
3.B.) We will come back with language
3.C.) T.A. 01/10/03
3.D.) I need to know the structure,
MS: We post jobs throughout the company. As a company it is a very common practice for employees to move up beyond the individual store. There are lots of people at lots of stores with unusual backgrounds.
JE: Does borders take outside applications at the same time as postings?
JL: Yes, we may not recruit from out side but we do take applications.
BP: There is a concern that as a Union store it will exclude some employees from promotions.
You saw that we had included language for continuing education?
JL: We have in store training. There is also a Borders foundation scholarships are offered, now offered to a maximum of 25 per year. We have a third party decide, because it is a competitive scholarship. We are in the process of putting together the information for next year�s round.
BP: This wasn�t an obligation to put some kind of continuing education in play. We are interested in ensuring people aren�t excluded for promotional opportunities.
MS: You�ve given the classic example; the person driving the organizing drive was promoted to management.
BP:
3.E.) We will propose one day a year (for community service) and you will see that in our proposal when we come back.
Article 4.
4.1 (economic)
We spent some time talking about the 35-hour workweek. (4.3) It is foreign to me but it is common to Borders. You have created the opportunity to add to that week. But for a full timer that has, for a long period of time, worked more than the 35, to lose 2 hours when you are only making $9 per hour is significant. One reason that people join unions is so that seniority means something. We will come back with a proposal that as people work up through and get hours, they can retain them- by seniority.
4.2 is structural we will get to that when we get to economics
4.4.B we have contracts that have 4 tens (ten hour days), 3 twelves (twelve hour days) with no overtime. We will bring language. On a basic workday we will have the 8 hour days. In the settings where someone wants more hours in a day - whatever works for the employee works for us.
4.4.C I think we can work through this we were okay until you changed may to will.
4.5 we need to get more input from employees.
MS: I don�t think it is something we would normally schedule.
MZ: We work with the employee on that.
BP: The two consecutive days off actually made sense. Some people could have Tues/Wed off and have to work Sat/Sun.
When are your stores the busiest?
JL: In most store its weekends, then evenings, then days.
HK: Again the point of contention is that while it is true that while one person would like one weekend day and one weekday off others would prefer 5 consecutive days of work. People have different needs. I think there is room for both.
MS: You are going to have trouble with guarantees in scheduling. We do our best to meet the requests of our employees. This is one of those areas where if it ain�t broke don�t fix it.
BP: We will, as a fairly creative group, put together some language on this issue.
You struck (lined out) the line �shall normally be required to work more than two (2) night shifts��
MS: We do not want any guarantees. Store needs probably won�t change, but employee needs may. We don�t think this will benefit the employees.
BP: We will come back with a modification of that (proposal.)
Huge numbers of unemployment change the employer�s perspective on hiring. The contention at Sears today is that the goal is to get rid of the old-timers and hire a cheaper workforce. The economic work force is driving down wages and creating a worker surplus.
JL: Demographically in two or three years we will be in the situation where we will be hiring � after the baby boomers retire.
BP: I think that the boomers will be looking for jobs in places like borders.
JL: I have one comment to that, again, I think it is something we don�t appear to do. Again, it is the Sears employees who have that complaint. This is a two-year contract, why do we need to address that if we are not doing it?
BP: Again, I am not suggesting that you do, I just negotiate for (those issues)
4.5. 2nd paragraph T.A. 01/10/03 10:47 a.m.
4.5 3rd paragraph - We need to work through some other language
4.6 T.A. 10:48 01/10/03
4.7 T.A. 10:49 01/10/03 first paragraph
5:1 T.A. 10:59 01/10/03
BP: 5:2 I need to understand if they are reduced in hours do they maintain their full time status?
JL: If you average over 35 in 12 weeks
MS: Once they�ve worked PT for 12 weeks, it affects benefits.
BP: so the employee still maintains recall rights?
MS: Yes, only there benefits are efected
BP: The way you described contingent employees yesterday was more palatable.
If you started with �employees who do not work on a weekly basis..�
MS: Do you want to suggest language? This may be a place to use �normally� - they may work weekly during the holidays
BP: Here is what I am saying. It is Christmas, I am out of school for four weeks. I am a part-timer working limited hours and they say I want hours and you say no I am goin to give them to a temp. seasonal, what we are saying is that
MS: With respect to the temp seasonal, the only time we would hire a temp seasonal instead of giving them to a pt. Is if we didn�t know about their availability. Why?
BP: I don�t know. That is why I don�t think the language is so damming (5.3).
JL: Our concern is if we schedule people more than 35 hours, we run into the issue of unscheduled overtime.
BP: The need to fix unscheduled overtime has resulted in scheduling people less than 40 hours. When a worker suddenly loses hours it has an effect. Now if every day they were schedule 38 and every day they get 20 minutes, they�d make it up.
MS: It (over-time) is under control now.
BP: But it is at the cost of two hours of work.
JL: Well, even unscheduled hours are an uncontrolled/unbudgeted time. What we have done is make sure it doesn�t go into overtime. Obviously there are cases where it does.
MS: Take a crack at some language.
BP:
6.1 I will come back with a counter
6.2 I have a note that says no. Oh, no wonder I wrote this so big. We are really interested in seniority meaning something. I am not interested in negotiating over management determining who is qualified. This is going to be a big issue.
MS: Our position is that we want someone who is more qualified. If they were equally qualified, we would take the most senior.
BP: How do you determine the most qualified bookseller?
JL: Well you could have performance and disciplinary issues-
MS: It is much more an issue when you are looking at different functions, when you have cafes and music. It is not an issue here.
BP: We have that situation in the grocery stores with department heads, where being promoted to that positions is at the discretion of management. I have this debate all the time. For a person to be in a critical position you have a right.
MS: Supervisors are the only positions you can bid up to. If you want full time you ask for it, if the hours are there you get it.
BP: Then the discussion becomes, what if two people want fulltime � two people � you�ve got to wait until there are hours, but who gets it?
MZ: I would look at their performance record.
BP: That is the answer then for why we are proposing language.
BP:
6.3 We agree with your change but we are not sure what the classifications are going to be. You said within classifications.
MS: I think we talked about it yesterday-
I will put down T.A. 1/10/03 pending classifications
B.P.
T.A. 6.3 1/10/03 01/10/03 11:27
T.A. 6.4 (pending agreement on 6.2) 01/10/03 11:28
T.A. 6.5 okay but we still don�t have the classifications. T.A. 01/10/31 11:31
Article 9 I am just leaving open now.
Article 10 I am okay with E going into C
But I am going to add back in the sentence you struck in E.
MS: I think you need a few other words. It should really say �not withstanding� are you going to provide language?
BP: You are going to clean it (Article 10) up, why don�t you take a whack at it.
Maybe we can get rid of a �letter" here
T.A. 10.3 � 10.6) 01/10/03 11:34
BP: Health insurance � we were trying to figure out how much people were paying.
JL: I believe it is broken out on their checks.
I believe it is spread over the twenty-six payperiods
MS: We have given you the employees� share.
BP: I haven�t seen that
MS: The total cost is what we don�t know yet. I thought we had given you the employee cost. If not, I apologize.
BP: In our Health Care Plan, insurance is also on the part-timers. By the time we factor in the employers costs, often the cost is cheaper even with the inclusion of the part-timers than what the employers pay themselves.
MS: The part-timers only have coverage on themselves?
BP: Yes.
That is about it. What do you think we should do from here?
MS: You haven�t really given us a proposal yet.
BP: Well I can�t until I have a chance to look at all of this.
MS: Then we are done.
BP: As I said, I expected to be done early today. We will meet at 9:30 next Thursday (January 16, 2003).
Borders Negotiations - January 17, 2003
Session 5
(These are the notes represent the discussions from the 01/17/03 session; it is intended to represent the conversation and discussion to the best of our ability, it is not a verbatim transcription).
For the Union:
Jason Evans: worker
Simone Menier: worker
Bill Pearson, President
Bernie Hesse, Organizer
Jennifer Christensen, Representative
For the Company:
Maria Zachman, Store Manager
Mark Shiffmann, Attorney at Law
James Lathrop, Director HR
Loni Kellett, Interim Dist. Mgr
MS: let me tell you what I have done. I have identified the open issues. A few of these we owe you a response a few of them you owe us a response.
BP: I like working with attorneys who are detailed oriented.
MS: there are a few of the things I have identified.
BP: I didn�t have a clue where we would go on this today.
MS: 1.2 union security.
BP: if you don�t mention it it is agreed to?
MS: (the following are open issues)
1.2 I have cross-referenced this with 6.2
1.3 we agree to dues check off and not deducting initiation fees
Article 2
3B, 3E, 4.3,4.4 (open)
4.4.C � if we use will, but we are sensitive to your concern, we would a sentence, �the employer will be cogniscent of other employee obligations in the event of unscheduled overtime�. We currently have the right to make people stay over time, since Maria has been manager we never have.
4.5 three paragraphs open
4.7 B & C
6.1 probationary period
5.4 and 5.6 (Union proposal)
6.2
9.1 & 9.6 awaiting response
9.2 we counter with 5 days.
New 9.7 the employer agrees to comply with all federal, state and local laws governing medical leaves.
Article 14 no strike clause.
And why don�t you Bill continue to go through and note any others
BP: need to renumber article 10 � 10.3 becomes 10.2
MS: in the final copy it will be renumbered.
BP: Let�s break, we will talk with the committee
+++++
BP: section 1.2 - 60days probation, one, I want holly to see it and also it has an impact on other negotiations around the country. Form a practical standpoint I am less concerned about longer probationary periods than some unions.
Temporary employees, you are not suggesting another probationary period if they become regular employees?
SM: Tell us what you want.
JL: the date of hire becomes an issue
BP: Do you ever move someone from temp/seasonal to regular?
MS: It probably makes sense that the seniority date starts on the date of the status change.
JL: However many days they worked as a temp would count as a probationary period.
MS: I don�t know if you can require them under the law to join the union at that point.
JC: I will call the NLRB for the answer.
BP: no, we don�t agree with subcontracting, if you said to us tomorrow that you were going to subcontract out the cashiering-
MS: but why would you?
BP: we are still in disagreement with 1.3, Article 2, 3B, 3E, 4.3, 4.4, 4.4.C, 4.5
BP: TA 5.4 (with the addition of 5.5)
6.1 works in conjunction with 1.2 and we will respond.
6.2 still in disagreement on.
Article 9 � 9.1 let me bundle this � this is not where it belongs
MS: 9.1, 9.6, 9.7 are all the same
BP: I would like to see personal leave of absence to be 60 days.
And anyone accepting management non-union position�
MS: We do not want anyone to take a leave of absence � to take a management job.
The idea of someone taking a leave �while still working for us - and giving them the opportunity to return to the unit without loss of seniority �
BP: Where would you say that?
MS: - In the seniority article. They are two completely different articles.
Are you suggesting a 60-day leave? They would be more likely to be granted a leave with our language with the thirty days and an extension.
BP: We will talk about that.
And if a person worked for you for 9 months and broke their leg you wouldn�t give them a leave?
MS: If they were off for four months they could then reapply for their job. If they were off for 10 days it would be an informal schedule adjustment.
BP: And given that response I guess 9.6 will stay open.
MS: How would you expect me to respond? What would you expect me to do?
We are saying we would give them a leave after they reach the one-year threshold (FMLA). There are criteria, what would you use?
BP: After they complete their probation they would be eligible for a medical leave.
9.7 we can agree to and article 14 we can agree to.
MS: I think that�s everything. Why don�t you talk about the leave of absence and why don�t you talk about the seniority language. Come and get us when you are ready.
Break
BP: Under 6.5 � taking your lead I created another bullet
MS: Employees failure to return to his/her unit position after 60 days after accepting a non-unit position.
BP: Let�s think about it. We recognize that sometimes people are unsure, you don�t want to discourage it.
MS: We will keep this as a �ponder issue�
While you ponder this I will give you something for 6.1 if you feel it is appropriate to use 60 to try a management or new position, shouldn�t we at least have the same opportunity to decide on a new employee? Just trying to use the same logic.
BP: On article 9 � Providing such leave is for reasonable purpose and shall not interfere with the operation of the business
MS: If someone wants to take a leave during the holidays, we would say no, if in February and we still have a seasonal temp, it would be much more likely.
BP: The sense from this side of the table is that it should be �shall.�
FMLA is 1250 to qualify. So, what about an employee who has been with you for ten years and only work 1000 hours a year are you saying they don�t meet the requirement for a leave?
JL: It is one year and 1250 hours
MS: Yes we are saying we are not obligated to give them a leave. They probably would be given one.
JL: They could take it as a personal leave.
MS: They may be eligible for one.
BP: So that ��is what you are saying.
Dates?
February 7 and 20
BP: So on the 20th we will have some language to bring back.
MS: We will have some economic language.
Bye-
Negotiations Update
UFCW 789 and Borders Inc. (BINC)
Former first lady, Nancy Reagan would be beaming. Her most famous words were the theme repeated at UFCW Local 789 contract talks with Borders Inc. Her anti-drug message, "JUST SAY NO," was stated ad naseum.
In an effort to be fair (love that term), things weren't quite that bad. Agreement was reached on all kinds of minor contract language. Hate to minimize, but the important stuff was left in dispute.
Specifically, we have been unable to resolve seniority, job protections, subcontracting, scheduling, overtime and medical leaves of absence. The employer even rejected an offer to increase store level employee participation seems like we may be on a different page on these items.
After the five sessions, we are at the proverbial end of our language rope. We have agreed the next session will include economic issues, though not wages. This should prove very interesting given the Union's proposal for all the workers at the store to be included in Local 789 and Grocery Employers Health and Welfare Trust Fund.
As strange as this may sound, negotiations are proceeding exactly as we planned. Border's is following the same game plan used six years ago. We had anticipated it, planned for it and have developed a strategy to counter it. It is significant to note: "WE AREN'T INTERESTED IN GETTING A BAD SETTLEMENT, JUST SO WE COULD SAY WE HAVE A CONTRACT." We expect talks to go on for months, with all kind's of strange happenings and unique events occurring as we weave our way to a fair (there's that word again) settlement.
Our next scheduled talks are February 7, 2002 and February 20, 2002, perfect for our time lines.
In solidarity,
William G. Pearson
Jennifer Christensen
Bernie Hesse
Jason Evans
Holly Krig
Simone Menier
Borders Negotiations February 7, 2003
Session 6
(These are the notes represent the discussions from the 02/07/03 session; it is intended to represent the conversation and discussion to the best of our ability, it is not a verbatim transcription).
For the Union:
Holly Krig: worker
Jason Evans: worker
Simone Menier: worker
Bill Pearson, President
Bernie Hesse, Organizer
Jennifer Christensen, Representative
For the Company:
Maria Zachman, Store Manager
Mark Shiffmann, Attorney at Law
James Lathrop, Director HR
MS: We have an annual wage and benefit change that occurs each year and the changes are effective the 1st of April. What I have here is a letter with the open enrollment packet, also a memo we are suggesting be used to distribute the pkt. To the employees. There is one change in coverage. We currently have 100% coverage, we are changing that to 90/10. 100% is highly unusual, as is 90%, the union has 80% coverage. We are also asking the employees to increase
Current single $50 new: $57
E +1 $140 $160
Family $165 $185
There are changes in stock option grant. Currently issued quarterly, will be changed to annually �
JL: Used to be one grant per employee at a given quarter � now all on the same date
MS: Now need to be employees for two years. Employees who have received grants � with less than 2 years experience, they will have to wait until they have two years to get further options - limited to 50 options per year. We do a merit based wage adjustment. Pool established in the store. Based on management evaluations, the average wage increase would be equal to the pool. The pool is 3 � % increase.
Open enrollment is now February, that will be extended for these employees so they have four weeks. We also understand that all of these issues are subject to negotiations.
What we think the based way to go about this is to inform the employees of these changes. What I have is a copy of the memo and the packet.
What we are willing to do with respect to this store, instead of giving the excellent performer more and the lesser performer less, we are willing to give everyone the average, with exception of the very poor performer who is on the verge of being discharged, and I haven�t even discussed this with Maria, we would give them the increase.
BP: The 100% isn�t on everything?
JL: $150 on emergency room. Doctor�s visits not effected. $1000 per individual, $3000 for family. Hospital visits have co-pay and deductible. What we did was to try and keep overall percentage contribution at the same breakdown as it was before.
BP: For the cost that you had passed on to you� And this is in all the stores now?
MS: The benefits package is in the stores now.
BP: Are we going to get the actual costs of these plans?
JL: I have a call in we should be able to verify it today.
MS: In respect to your plan, you have one rate for single +1 and family?
BP: Yes, there is a different rate for PT coverage, but the rate is the rate is the rate. Do you have the breakdowns for this store?
JL: Everybody in this store is single coverage.
BP: You must have dental tacked on?
JL: However none of those changed.
MS: We provide a certain level of life insurance and disability coverage; the employees have the option of picking up extra.
If you could by the next time, new list of current employees and their wage rates, it is my understanding that the �seasonals� stayed on.
MS: Okay.
Break�
Resume 10:56
BP: I had Sam and Vicki on the phone from 876, Sam�s immediate reaction�was it the same letter?
MS: virtually identical
BP: I told them what you said over the table � I think from our perspective, put it in the stores, I have no sense that we will be done by April 1st. This isn�t about me, I am more concerned about what people in the store feel about the package. What they think is more important than what I think �
The one issue that we had a discussion about, was that Sam said the wage package was tied to the benefit package - ?
MS: again they are tied together - assuming we haven�t reached an agreement; we will implement them both. The thing I didn�t say to Sam was that we were going to give the 31/2 %. We have only interacted with them once. Vicki�s reaction has been atypical.
BP: are you saying to know you is to love you?
Are you saying if you don�t implement the wages you won�t implement the healthcare?
MS: we think what we said � is we are going ahead, subject to negotiations.
We are either going to implement it all or nothing.
BP: if the wage isn�t there is the benefit not there?
MS: the only way we could not implement it is to implement it and back it all out.
If we didn�t implement the health insurance, she�d have to pay the $10 and we would have to reimburse the $10.
BP: if you have a high utilizations person it could cost more.
That is why I asked you how many people you had on family because it could be much more expensive.
MS: I think it is the corporate norm to have everyone on single. We will get that in the hands of the employees by next week.
BP: then I can give you an official answer next week.
MS: Our next agenda item�
We were going to go through some language stuff�
I�ve (Katie has) updated language..
JE: can I ask about wage pool-
Does it include managers?
JL: They are still in a three and a half percent pool � but it is a different pool.
MS: I did check with Maria, there is not anyone in a disciplinary situation. If that is your preference we would distribute it evenly.
BP: did you preclude someone?
MS: The only peop