March 15, 2010: A memo from the YRCW VP for Labor Relations claims that the corporation has obtained a new union concession regarding the contract clause requiring the recall of laid-off Teamsters when excess overtime is worked.
Bob Jones, in a memo distributed to stewards at some Ohio terminals, directs YRC and Holland management to essentially rewrite Article 5, Section 6 of the NMFA. The contract requires that when total overtime worked for a week exceeds 10 hours in a week per active Teamster by a total of 50 hours, then a Teamster must be recalled, and one more Teamster for each additional 50 hours. The contract is clear and gives an example.
The NMFA thus requires that if active Teamsters are worked an aggregate average of over 50 hours, the company must start recalling laid off Teamsters to spread employment to our laid off brothers and sisters.
The YRCW corporate memo claims that a "recent agreement between the IBT and the company" will "give the company greater latitude in O/T utilization without triggering recalls of laid-off Teamsters."
The company claims they can now stretch it out to 90 hours over the aggregate limit, instead of 50, before triggering recalls. The effect is to allow more excess overtime before anyone is called back to work.
The change would hurt smaller terminals the most. For example, if there are 18 Teamsters active on the city-dock board, under this policy YRCW is claiming, they could work everyone up to 55 hours and still not trigger any recall.
Did the IBT really agree to this, as YRCW's labor man claims? We hope not. If so, why? And, since it is a change in the plain language of Article 5 of the NMFA, when will the affected Teamsters be allowed to vote on it by secret ballot, as required by the IBT Constitution for mid-term contract changes.
Teamster and local officers in a number of areas report they know nothing of this claim by YRCW of changing the contract. It's time for the International Union to clarify the situation, and to enforce the contract.