Very strange. I think the thread titled “Ponzi Scheme” got deleted. John had a very good post in there and I posted the question below in it, got a couple really good answers from Hawespiper & Captain Phoenix and was looking for more to finally get my answers and then I went to sea with no internet. Now the whole thread is gone?
I’m curious did that thread get heated and deleted while I was offline? What went on, must’ve gotten pretty hot to gave been deleted?
And…back to my original question. Would appreciate input again;
I have a real basic union question. In another thread it was mentioned that all maritime unions should unite instead of competing. The net result would make them stronger. So I mentioned this to a guy I’m sailing with now and he said one union can’t go after another unions business, even when the contract is up for renewal. He said it was called “raiding”. That just didn’t seem right to me. I’ve seen unions switch during contract renewal. For instance Pasha is switching from MMP to AMO.
So is it legal for a company to switch unions?
Previous two responses (got it from my email);
what I’ve been told when I’ve ask reps in the halls (take it for what it’s worth), is that if it can be shown that the company did not negotiate in good faith with the current union and then goes with another union, then this is illegal. It is my understanding that an example of this was when Liberty kicked the MEBA engineers off their bulk ships at midnight of the last day of the contract, and AMO engineers walked right on. In this case, it’s pretty obvious that Liberty and AMO were dealing with each other in the leadup to contract expiration (and thus not in good faith to MEBA). MEBA took Liberty to court for this and won a settlement.
Additionally, there’s “pension liability”. Basically, under a defined benefit (DB) plan, (which is what MEBA has and AMO does not), a company is somehow liable for future benefits??? Somehow?? Not sure of the details, but that is another reason why I was told that our long time, good contracts (APL, Maersk, Matson) won’t go to AMO because they’d be liable for some very large sum of money.
As far as Pasha, maybe the pension liability didn’t transfer to Pasha when they bought out Horizon lines due to the ability to shed liabilities during bankruptcy proceedings? If so, maybe that’s why they are feeling free to go with AMO? Not sure. I’m sure if MMP loses Pasha then so will MEBA.
Once again, all this is what I’ve been told by MEBA reps in the hall, so if anyone has any concrete, unbiased answers, I’m all ears.