origin of 1984 seniority for transfers?

[mechanic]

when and why did the practice of giving transfers 1984 senority happen?

 

we were talking about it and some thought it was to keep high seniority transfers from taking all of the good jobs when they moved, but no one knows for sure,

also when did it start?

any info appreciated

[dtpm]

when and why did the practice of giving transfers 1984 senority happen?

 

we were talking about it and some thought it was to keep high seniority transfers from taking all of the good jobs when they moved, but no one knows for sure,

also when did it start?

any info appreciated

 

If I am not mistaken it started with the AAI assembly plant and was to ensure that Senior employees do not have to start the plant seniority over each time a relocation occurs. I could be wrong about when it started but I know it it is leveling date that ties to the AAI plant but I want to say the contract in the very early 90's was when the language was changed to allow these changes in the relocation of employees as far as plant seniority. The most anyone can take as far as plant is the 84 leveling date now. It most likely will be changed in the next contract since the idea needs to be updated.

[RockofCashel]

If I am not mistaken it started with the AAI assembly plant and was to ensure that Senior employees do not have to start the plant seniority over each time a relocation occurs. I could be wrong about when it started but I know it it is leveling date that ties to the AAI plant but I want to say the contract in the very early 90's was when the language was changed to allow these changes in the relocation of employees as far as plant seniority. The most anyone can take as far as plant is the 84 leveling date now. It most likely will be changed in the next contract since the idea needs to be updated.

 

Actually, it's part of the 1984 contract. Hence the year. It's probably not going to change either. With all the movement goin on, the UAW is going to protect seniority employees regardless of how you feel. It should never have been put in in the first place.

[dtpm]

Actually, it's part of the 1984 contract. Hence the year. It's probably not going to change either. With all the movement goin on, the UAW is going to protect seniority employees regardless of how you feel. It should never have been put in in the first place.

 

Could you explain your reason why you think it would not change. The whole idea was to keep senior employees on the active rolls as long as the jobs are open at other plants in the case of a plant closing or massive layoff. The October 1984 Level date allows employees to transfer to another facility and maintain current company and plant seniority and in the event of an employee that has more time then the 1984 Level date the plant seniority would be adjusted to match and have no more than the 1984 date.

At some point the current language would need to be changed to say October 1994 to keep current levels where they are and not cause a conflict with someone coming in. I would think by the next contract that would be looked at.

 

Just so you know I am a senior employee and from what it looks like most are being taken care of and yes it may take a bit to get relocated but it is happening. Shoot guys I work with that thought they were not coming back to DTP got letters saying to come back and they got 1999 seniority.

 

One last thing would you state why the Level date should not have been put in place. You have to understand that most places that are even private allow employees to transfer to another store, factory, etc. It really is in place to protect our status...

[Fatso]

when and why did the practice of giving transfers 1984 senority happen?

 

we were talking about it and some thought it was to keep high seniority transfers from taking all of the good jobs when they moved, but no one knows for sure,

also when did it start?

any info appreciated

I first heard about that idea at a Union hall in 1985/86.It was a compromise between those who wanted company wide seniority and those who did not.As usual whether you like it or not depends on if you benefit or not.

[Livonia]

One last thing would you state why the Level date should not have been put in place. You have to understand that most places that are even private allow employees to transfer to another store, factory, etc. It really is in place to protect our status...

It only protects the status of an employee that has greater than Oct. 29th 1984 seniority in their home plant. It serves no purpose to the rest of us and I believe is only useful in the purpose of job bids and upgrades. It should be omitted from the next contract to make it fair for everyone. Why should a 30 plus employee have protected staus when the rest of do not?

[dtpm]

One last thing would you state why the Level date should not have been put in place. You have to understand that most places that are even private allow employees to transfer to another store, factory, etc. It really is in place to protect our status...

 

It only protects the status of an employee that has greater than Oct. 29th 1984 seniority in their home plant. It serves no purpose to the rest of us and I believe is only useful in the purpose of job bids and upgrades. It should be omitted from the next contract to make it fair for everyone. Why should a 30 plus employee have protected staus when the rest of do not?

 

It helps everyone that is above the cut line when they start to cut jobs and not just the ones that have above the 84 level date.

 

Look at it like this a guy with say 28 years transfers to Wayne right now on this day. He arrives thinking he has the top top seniority and finds out that he actually has only 24 towards plant seniority due to the language. He would then be placed by the 24 years, then by avail of job, then by ability.

 

What I was trying to explain that if they change the language and move up the level date to say 1994 that same employee that transfers today with 28 years of company and plant would only have only 14 years of Plant, thus not pissing too many people off. I talked with guys from Sterling when I was their and they got bounced from Van Dyke to Sterling and each time they had to start the plant part of the seniority over.

I am glad language is set into the contract about the transfer of seniority but I do hope they update the time table they give senior employees towards transfers.

[Captain723]

I first heard about that idea at a Union hall in 1985/86.It was a compromise between those who wanted company wide seniority and those who did not.As usual whether you like it or not depends on if you benefit or not.

I agree, if you are at a plant and get transfers and you have more than 84 seniority and someone comes in with more seniority than you...you like it, but if you have less than 84 seniority and someone comes in with more seniority it really doesn't help you. I think that it protects the senior employee at the plant and the senior employee transfering.

[end of time]

I first heard about that idea at a Union hall in 1985/86.It was a compromise between those who wanted company wide seniority and those who did not.As usual whether you like it or not depends on if you benefit or not.

I to heard about this back in the mid 80's and believe you are correct it was a compromise. Many in the Union did not want a leveling date, but I remember a lot of employees who had been laid off and called back felt it wasn't fair because they never had a chance to go anywhere. I believe at the time it proably was a good compromise, but now its time for everyone to have true company senority. Not local senority, as we are all UAW members and all we have is and should be our senority.

[SOULJABOY]

I really do not know hy it was put in the contract other than what was told to me. question is should it have been there to begin with? Answer I don't have one I guess ask 100 people this question and you will get 100 answer's.

 

Now the reason it is in there according to our local leadership,Not the current leadership but one of the older leadership's I had when I hired in. The reason they put it in there, was that members were being transfered to other plants and they were going in with day one senority. You take a person who had 20 years in got transfered to a plant where that person could have been in the top 5% senority got knocked down to the bottom 1% senority. The IUAW thought that was unfair to the membership hence the leveling date.

 

Now for the ones that are saying that they are going into plants with day one senority my question to you is simple, Are you people from the parts suppliers like Visteon and the ACH'ers. If so this could be the problem. From what I am hearing, all those people are getting treated that way. Is it fair? More than likely not. We just have to put more pressure on the IUAW to correct that.

[Pioneer]

Now for the ones that are saying that they are going into plants with day one senority my question to you is simple, Are you people from the parts suppliers like Visteon and the ACH'ers. If so this could be the problem.

 

 

When you transfer out of an ACH plant and into a Ford plant, you take all of your seniority with you.

[Fatso]

The end result is Company wide seniority.Keep in mind if you are presently low seniority that one day you will have high seniority too.I know that is assuming you keep your job at Ford but we are all in that boat.

[TheScrutenizer]

I recently had a class with a Chrysler employee who has been with Chrysler for something like 12 years. Chrysler does not have seniority retention for transfers. She has been tranferred 5 times during her career, most recently a couple months ago. Imagine having to start over at every plant in these uncertain times.

Seniority leveling is an equitable solution to an unstable auto industry.

Your results may vary.

[lovelincolns]

I to heard about this back in the mid 80's and believe you are correct it was a compromise. Many in the Union did not want a leveling date, but I remember a lot of employees who had been laid off and called back felt it wasn't fair because they never had a chance to go anywhere. I believe at the time it proably was a good compromise, but now its time for everyone to have true company senority. Not local senority, as we are all UAW members and all we have is and should be our senority.

I feel the only time seniority should be taken with a transfer is when a plant's work transfers to another plant. It is not fair for people in any given plant to have others come in and displace them with incoming seniority unless that plant has received the benefit of more work. It is a hard issue and can be argued both ways.

[RockofCashel]

Could you explain your reason why you think it would not change. The whole idea was to keep senior employees on the active rolls as long as the jobs are open at other plants in the case of a plant closing or massive layoff. The October 1984 Level date allows employees to transfer to another facility and maintain current company and plant seniority and in the event of an employee that has more time then the 1984 Level date the plant seniority would be adjusted to match and have no more than the 1984 date.

At some point the current language would need to be changed to say October 1994 to keep current levels where they are and not cause a conflict with someone coming in. I would think by the next contract that would be looked at.

 

Just so you know I am a senior employee and from what it looks like most are being taken care of and yes it may take a bit to get relocated but it is happening. Shoot guys I work with that thought they were not coming back to DTP got letters saying to come back and they got 1999 seniority.

 

One last thing would you state why the Level date should not have been put in place. You have to understand that most places that are even private allow employees to transfer to another store, factory, etc. It really is in place to protect our status...

 

Seniority should be based on your time in the union, plain and simple. I think if you transfer to a different plant, you should have a one year freeze on job bids, but after that all of your seniority should count. We are all in the same union and the benefits should not be site specific.

[TheScrutenizer]

I feel the only time seniority should be taken with a transfer is when a plant's work transfers to another plant. It is not fair for people in any given plant to have others come in and displace them with incoming seniority unless that plant has received the benefit of more work. It is a hard issue and can be argued both ways.

You will change your tune when you have to take a job at another plant.

[Wlbren]

You will change your tune when you have to take a job at another plant.

 

I would not wish transfer on anyone, but if you have to transfer and you go to a plant and didn't have a leveling date, then as it happened in 1983 till the time they put this in the contract, you went as a rehire no seniority. Well at the time I was happy that they didn't take my job, but I also watched the people in their 50s and even 60s having to work the worst jobs in the plant on the evening shift, 58 hrs a week. Now at this point in my career, I will never go back to assembly line as I am almost to turn out as an electrician, I would have hated to be in a situation where I would have to go to a plant zero seniority getting the worst job at 52 years old. I think it is a good thing to have the leveling date, but I think it should have been adjusted every contract so that the higher seniority employees that deserve the jobs they worked up to can't loose them to someone that is transfering in. In 6 years the leveling date won't make a difference because everyone will come with the seniority they have, which is good and bad depending on whose shoes you are in. I guess all a person can do is hope this company that we all work for can get through this downturn and every person working here has a job and is reasonably happy with their situation.

[chriper]

One last thing would you state why the Level date should not have been put in place. You have to understand that most places that are even private allow employees to transfer to another store, factory, etc. It really is in place to protect our status...

 

It only protects the status of an employee that has greater than Oct. 29th 1984 seniority in their home plant. It serves no purpose to the rest of us and I believe is only useful in the purpose of job bids and upgrades. It should be omitted from the next contract to make it fair for everyone. Why should a 30 plus employee have protected staus when the rest of do not?

 

gee ,,,how about one word ,,seniority,THE ONE THING THAT MAKES ALL THING EQUAL FOR ALL OF US

[chriper]

I recently had a class with a Chrysler employee who has been with Chrysler for something like 12 years. Chrysler does not have seniority retention for transfers. She has been tranferred 5 times during her career, most recently a couple months ago. Imagine having to start over at every plant in these uncertain times.

Seniority leveling is an equitable solution to an unstable auto industry.

Your results may vary.

 

thank you ,,we all have one equalizing factor in all of this and that is plain and simply,,,,,,SENIORITY,which is the fairest for all

[longball]

10/29/84 was put into the contract with the closing of the Canton,Ohio plant. At the time transferring due to a closure was fairly new. There were a large number of guys with 77 seniority, and plants didn't want these transfers taking jobs away from the younger people in their own plants. So they came up with this leveling date so you couldn't take your 77 seniority with you. The date is actually the date that the contract was agreed on.That year it took until the end of October to get an agreement.

 

Hope that helps

[Fatso]

10/29/84 was put into the contract with the closing of the Canton,Ohio plant. At the time transferring due to a closure was fairly new. There were a large number of guys with 77 seniority, and plants didn't want these transfers taking jobs away from the younger people in their own plants. So they came up with this leveling date so you couldn't take your 77 seniority with you. The date is actually the date that the contract was agreed on.That year it took until the end of October to get an agreement.

 

Hope that helps

Interesting.Times were much better back in the 1980`s for the UAW.

[Goober]

Interesting.Times were much better back in the 1980`s for the UAW.

Not really, Ford closed several Plants in the early 80's and went to one shift in others. I know Los Angeles, San Jose and Mahwah all closed. Things got better for Ford in 86 and a lot of Plants needed people. Ford wanted to hire new people but the UAW wanted their laid-off people to have a chance to transfer first. They negotiated and 10/29/84 became the leveling date for people who transferred to a new Plant. Moving allowances and RTBU were some other things negotiated in that contract.