Glenn Quagmire
Veteran
- Apr 30, 2012
- 4,809
- 4,343
Responding to that troll in any way, shape, or form, is bad. You would do well to just keep silent.WNMECH said:It isn't about how much the company will pay at this point.
The company already offered money in their last comprehensive proposal to us.
The company is asking for language changes in our contract that we would not vote for.
Instant deal killers and the company calls them "must haves".
A mediator can point out that these changes are not warranted, and can urge the company to seek different approaches.
We need a third party to oversee the process as long as the company wants to make changes to our contract as if we were in bankruptcy court.
It is all about their hard line on language and work rule changes. Wage rates and retro is another discussion.
Before you ask, I wont be detailing these must haves.
An internet forum is not the place to argue about these differences, and both sides arguments can be misconstrued.
Some of the back and forth has been documented in letters to and from the company.
Both sides dispute what the language changes can mean for our members.