# Does this happen in your local?



## crazymurph (Aug 19, 2009)

Last week a Rochester EC put a call in for 10 JW. The men showed up at the shop at 8am as per the call. The shop kept 4 guys and sent the rest back to the hall. I know that some shops will spin a guy but this is ridiculous.


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

crazymurph said:


> Last week a Rochester EC put a call in for 10 JW. The men showed up at the shop at 8am as per the call. The shop kept 4 guys and sent the rest back to the hall. I know that some shops will spin a guy but this is ridiculous.



That would fly over like a lead balloon.


----------



## Ocularpatdown (Apr 27, 2010)

What was the reasoning? Were those 6 guys slackers that were fired from the company before? Did the company pay show-up time?

I've seen people get sent back to the hall and I've done it myself, but only in extreme cases and in those cases the worker should know damn well that he isn't wanted by that contractor.


----------



## crazymurph (Aug 19, 2009)

I do not know all the circumstances, just bits and pieces. One of the JW's that was spun was a young guy who never worked for that EC. I think the EC was fishing for men. No show up time, they never had a chance to fill out paperwork.


----------



## Brother Noah1 (Mar 23, 2010)

crazymurph said:


> I do not know all the circumstances, just bits and pieces. One of the JW's that was spun was a young guy who never worked for that EC. I think the EC was fishing for men. No show up time, they never had a chance to fill out paperwork.


Did the JW's who were spun file charges? Did the hall back the charges? What does the contract read in reference to this issue? To many questions that need to be asked.


----------



## crazymurph (Aug 19, 2009)

I talked to the assistant BA today and he told me the contractor did not violate the agreement. What they did was unethical, but nothing that could have charges brought up. He also told me that the E board and the BA will be having some discussions on this issue.


----------



## Ocularpatdown (Apr 27, 2010)

crazymurph said:


> I talked to the assistant BA today and he told me the contractor did not violate the agreement. What they did was unethical, but nothing that could have charges brought up. He also told me that the E board and the BA will be having some discussions on this issue.


They should have received 2 hours show up time. Especially because it's clear that the EC was just jerking them around.

Each one of them had to pay for gas, spend their time there, possibly miss a call for work because they weren't at the hall ready to go out, etc.


----------



## crazymurph (Aug 19, 2009)

I agree with the show up pay. Local 86 needs to implement some new wording in the agreement.


----------



## Ocularpatdown (Apr 27, 2010)

crazymurph said:


> I agree with the show up pay. Local 86 needs to implement some new wording in the agreement.


I just can't understand how they could possibly not have that covered. 

What if the contractor just needed help moving a generator? He could call the hall and get 10 men and have them work for 15 minutes and then send them back with only 15 minutes pay?

The hall is supposed to have these issues spelled out clearly.

ETA: I'm not yelling at you, I just get aggravated sometimes :thumbup:


----------



## crazymurph (Aug 19, 2009)

The kicker is they showed at the office, not unlike a job interview. No work was performed and they had not filled out the W-2s. Our local needs new language in thier agreement. We do have show up pay in the agreement but that applies to someone already working for the contractor.


----------



## Ocularpatdown (Apr 27, 2010)

crazymurph said:


> The kicker is they showed at the office, not unlike a job interview. No work was performed and they had not filled out the W-2s. Our local needs new language in thier agreement. We do have show up pay in the agreement but that applies to someone already working for the contractor.


The second they showed up they were working. I don't know of any local that has provisions for workers to go to the shop off the timeclock.


----------



## crazymurph (Aug 19, 2009)

Ocularpatdown said:


> The second they showed up they were working. I don't know of any local that has provisions for workers to go to the shop off the timeclock.


 At that point in time they were not workers. That would be a legal standpoint, but not my true opinion. L.U.86 does not have any wording in the agreement about this matter. I have no problem with a contractor refusing a guy for a good reason, but this contractor was fishing. He cast his net, got 10, kept 4. Sometimes Rochester is referred as Ratchester.


----------



## Ocularpatdown (Apr 27, 2010)

crazymurph said:


> At that point in time they were not workers.


At would point would they be workers? When would the payroll start?


I think I'm gonna call up your BA and yell at him :laughing:


----------



## crazymurph (Aug 19, 2009)

Ocularpatdown said:


> At would point would they be workers? When would the payroll start?
> 
> 
> I think I'm gonna call up your BA and yell at him :laughing:


 Dave Young 585-235-1510


----------



## sparky105 (Sep 29, 2009)

Ocularpatdown said:


> At would point would they be workers? When would the payroll start?
> 
> 
> I think I'm gonna call up your BA and yell at him :laughing:


:laughing::laughing:


----------



## RIVETER (Sep 26, 2009)

crazymurph said:


> I talked to the assistant BA today and he told me the contractor did not violate the agreement. What they did was unethical, but nothing that could have charges brought up. He also told me that the E board and the BA will be having some discussions on this issue.


It is a shame but it does happen; Some guys make a reputation for themselves that would make a contractor not want them. I've see it a couple of times. I know one guy who had his name changed so the new contractor would not know he was on his way. It's a shame because he was a good mechanic, as we called him.


----------

