IAM Employees at Boeing Ratify 7.5 Year Agreement
Boeing employees in St. Louis, represented by the International Association of Machinists (IAM), ratified a 90 month extension agreement in mid-February by a 1,269 to 449 vote. The prior agreement was due to expire in January 2015. The extension agreement will continue in effect until 2022.
The agreement includes general wage increases and lump sums as well as increases in employee contributions to health care plans and freezing of the current pension plan in 2016.
A summary of the agreement released by the Union begins with a short preamble in which the IAM acknowledges that, without competitive costs to compete for and win new business, “significant staffing reductions are imminent.” The statement continues, “As a result, the parties desire to continue a working relationship that encourages long term sustainment and growth for jobs.”
According to the summary, employees will receive wage increases of 2% in 2016 and 2018 and 1% in 2020 and 2022. Additionally, they will receive signing bonuses of $8,000 as well as three lump sum payments ($3,000 in 2019 and $2,000 in 2017 and 2021). Boeing will also continue its practice of providing cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) to employees.
Employees will also see health care contribution rates (currently at 14%) increase by 1% every year for the term of the agreement. Additional contributions will be required from employees and spouses or some gender domestic partners who do not complete certain health and well-being improvement activities.
The agreement outlines a new voluntary separation benefit program and a voluntary layoff benefit program for employees. The separation program will allow workers who terminate employment to continue to receive benefits for a preset time period. The layoff program will provide one week of base pay for each year of completed company service to employees with 25 or more years of service who volunteer for layoff due to a reduction in force.
Employer Did Not Violate FMLA When it Terminated Woman who Declined to Use FMLA Leave
A jury in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found a California poultry farm, Foster Poultry Farms Inc., did not violate FMLA when it terminated a woman who expressly declined to use FMLA leave. The fired employee did not return from a “vacation” in order to take care of her ill parent.
According to a Bloomberg BNA report, the employee, Maria Escriba, requested and received FMLA leave on 15 occasions. In the current case, Escriba allegedly requested two weeks of paid vacation and explained she was going to Guatemala to visit her father who was in poor condition. Escriba was instructed to submit a doctor’s note upon her return to work if she needed more leave.
When Escriba did not return to work for three days after her scheduled return day, she was terminated. Escriba sued the farm in 2009 for interfering with her FMLA and California Family Rights Act entitlements. In 2011, a jury found in favor of the farm but denied the farms’ request to recover about $14,000 in cost from Escriba. Both parties appealed.
Escriba argues that when she notified the supervisors about her need for time off to care for her father, the FMLA’s protection automatically was triggered.
The court, however, found “The employer could find itself open to liability for forcing FMLA leave on the unwilling employee…We thus conclude that an employee can affirmatively decline to use FMLA leave, even if the underlying reason for seeking the leave would have invoked FMLA protection.”
The entire case is available online here.
Hospital Plan to Require “House-Wide Rebid” for Nurses Blocked by Union
Sutter Easy Bay Hospitals’ Alta Bates Summit Medical Center planned to lay off union-represented nurses and require them to rebid for positions. The District Court for the Northern District of California agreed with the union, California Nurses Association (CAN)/National Nurses United (NNU) that the nurses were likely to suffer irreparable harm from the plan. The court permitted a temporary restraining order of the plan.
According to Bloomberg’s BNA, the judge in the case, Judge Richard Seeborg said the union is likely to prevail in arbitration on its claim that the hospital’s plan would violate the collective bargaining agreement.
A total of 1,700 nurses at Alta Bates are represented by CAN/NNU. The parties reached a new agreement in September. Shortly after the agreement was ratified, the union filed a grievance challenging the planned layoffs. When Sutter denied the grievance the union filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Sutter contends the charge is the very same as the Section 301 complaint.
Judge Seeborg did not address the NLRB complaint, but simply ordered the temporary restraining order on Sutter’s plan to lay off the nurses.
In a NNU press release, the union claims Sutter’s layoff plan is an attempt to “immediately and unilaterally implement the concessions it was unable to win in bargaining.
Sick Leave Law Expanded in New York
The New York City Council approved a bill to expand the coverage of paid sick leave on February 26.
The council passed by the bill by a 46-5 vote to support Mayor Bill de Blasio’s plan to expand the sick leave law passed last year. The original law applied only to businesses with 15 or more employees while the new law will apple to business with five or more employees. Affected businesses must provide up to five paid days off per year for sick leave.
In a statement, de Blasio said the new law would extend paid sick leave to 500,000 more workers than the prior law. According to an article in the New York Times, “by passing the expanded bill, the Council was essentially undoing restrictions that were demanded by the previous speaker, Christine C. Quinn, who ran against Mr. de Blasio for mayor.”
While the bill will take effect in April as the original law intended, small businesses will be provided a six month grace period.