Thread regarding Verizon Communications Inc. layoffs

You sold out the new hires, years ago!

You (union) created the two tier system we currently have amongst our work force. The new cps awarded to new hires is not enough, not nearly enough. The contracts are still being geared towards the ones with the 500k pensions... it's infuriating. Im not expecting a pension but iam expecting to be compensated more inline with what they have, be it a larger 401k match or whatever.

Im only one vote, but this is a hard NO for me.


by
| 1258 views | | 20 replies (last March 7) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kjv6q4w7

20 replies (most recent on top)

@tn it can't happen soon enough
GO ELON GO

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tq+1kjv6q4w7

The union was lucky to get this contract and also getting the VZW transport work. The biggest threat to the new hires are not the older workers but rather Starlink Elon Musk and soon to come LEO Amazons satellite data product. Sure it wont be as fast but doesnt require a physical line that can be damaged , yes the cell sites and business require fiber. But how many techs do you think VZ needs to service sell sites and enterprise customers. It is probably less than 10 years from cutting into market share

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tn+1kjv6q4w7

@gf us “geezers” wont be setting up any more picket lines, so any lines you cross will be your own. We’ll be retired. I understand you’re pi---d, but you would be better off taking what you have, and invest wisely and plan for your future.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gx+1kjv6q4w7

I thought I signed up for brotherhood. One deafening voice to represent all. You geezers sold us out. We will cross every picket line you set up with a huge middle finger to you. And just wait until you retire and need us to fight for you! We fight for us- not you. Never you!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gf+1kjv6q4w7

In 2012 we were asked by the Union “do you really want to go on strike for people who haven’t been hired yet” . My children had opportunities to be hired by this company multiple times, I highly recommend they find other work. Best advice a parent could ever give.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ga+1kjv6q4w7

@a1 new hires haven’t had anything taken, they knew what they signed up for

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ea+1kjv6q4w7

You had me nervous with the 500k pension talk. I just checked thankfully it is much more

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @d1+1kjv6q4w7

Retirees are the ones who traded away the pension to protect their own forever healthcare- so......... boo hoo.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cp+1kjv6q4w7

@aa Thanks for being a great role model. 🙄😆

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cd+1kjv6q4w7

The union worked without a contract for the overtime. Lots of cars/trucks were bought with it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c7+1kjv6q4w7

OP - the problem with 2 tiers, top tier are in their 60s because they can't afford taxes in FiOS region and can't retire. So they will eventually expire.

Tier two is very unfortunate based on prior union agreements. Hopefully they are young enough to go to civil service and have a real life.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @at+1kjv6q4w7

@OP I voted no on that contract. Stupidest move by the union ever. If anyone recalls the union had the company in a very bad position in 2011. We were on strike when two back to back tropical storms hit the eastern seaboard. The company asked the union to come back to work due the emergency situation and work without a contract. In return the company would continue to “bargain in good faith” while we worked without a contract. They lied! We should have stayed out until they agreed to better terms. How does the union help the company out in a pinch and then wind up with a $hitty 2 tier contract? Stupid whimps in our union hierarchy that’s how. It’s amazing that the company hasn’t leveraged that 2nd tier yet. It wasn’t created just to save money but to help create dissension between union members. It would behoove the company to offer a retirement incentive across the board and get the legacy employees off the payroll and then let the union have an ineffective strike with the 2nd tier members. I’m shocked the contract was settled because the company missed a golden opportunity.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ag+1kjv6q4w7

I’m sorry but you guys are fu--ing spoiled. 100k a year or more at top pay. Most jobs don’t have pensions or jack sh-t that people get. Save your damn money and plan for retirement accordingly.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ab+1kjv6q4w7

Retiree health care is of no concern to me. They didn’t fight for the future of their brothers and sisters so let them cook!!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @aa+1kjv6q4w7

@OP I understand your frustration, and as a pensioner I personally voted against the 2 tier system as I knew it would become an issue down the line. At the time, Verizon was 0.0 people. That being said, you did know the deal when you took the job. Verizon should sweeten the deal for non pensioners however.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a7+1kjv6q4w7

2 tier? More like 4 tier.

  • up to 2005…no lay-off clause and still has company retiree healthcare
  • 2005 to 2008….company retiree healthcare but no lay-off clause is gone
  • 2008 to 2012….retiree healthcare is an amount negotiated to go and find ur own.
  • 2012 to current…. No pension.
by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a5+1kjv6q4w7

No mention of travel pay, or meal allowance increases for travel assignments. I can’t believe they left this out again.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a4+1kjv6q4w7

@a2 Under U.S. federal labor law (the National Labor Relations Act or NLRA), unions do not have a legal duty to bargain on behalf of retirees, and employers are not required to bargain with unions over benefits for already-retired employees.
The key Supreme Court decision on this is Allied Chemical & Alkali Workers of America, Local Union No. 1 v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. (1971). In that case, the Court ruled that:
• Retirees are not “employees” within the meaning of the NLRA.
• They are not part of the bargaining unit represented by the union.
• Benefits for retirees are not a mandatory subject of bargaining (i.e., “wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment” that apply to current active employees).
As a result, changes to retiree benefits (like health insurance or pensions for those already retired) are generally a permissive subject of bargaining—not mandatory. This means:
• An employer can unilaterally change retiree benefits without bargaining with the union, as long as it doesn’t affect active employees’ future retirement benefits.
• A union cannot force an employer to bargain over retiree benefits, and the union has no statutory duty to represent retirees in negotiations (since retirees aren’t bargaining unit members).

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a3+1kjv6q4w7

look that cps is a insult pease dont get upset at that . Be more upset that jobs are being contracted out and the rising cost of healthcare and they sc--w'd over retirees again.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a2+1kjv6q4w7

You could always go find a different job. You’re the one who accepted the one you currently have.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a1+1kjv6q4w7

Post a reply

: