|
| |
ARBITRATOR RENDERS SPLIT DECISION ON DUPONT PENSION ISSUE
Back
in August 2006, the Union filed a grievance over DuPont's changes to the pension
and other benefit plans. These changes impacted the then current employees as
well as employees hired on or after January 1, 2007.
For employees hired before January 1, 2007, the changes cut their pension
calculation to 1/3 of what it was previously and froze the survivor benefit to
what it was as of December 31, 2007.
For employees hired on or after January 1, 2007, the changes excluded them from
the pension plan and from any subsidy for retiree health care or life insurance,
and limited their banking of vacation and accumulation of vacation.
The change that was beneficial - the initiation of a Company contribution to the
SIP plan and the increase in the Company match to the employee's contribution to
the SIP plan - was not a subject of the grievance.
Dupont refused to have our grievance decided by an arbitrator, forcing the Union
to go to Federal District Court and the Federal Court of Appeals, each of whom
agreed with the Union that the case should be heard by an arbitrator. The
Company even tried to get the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case but the Court
turned the Company down.
The case was heard by an arbitrator over a three day period back in May 2009.
The Union and Company then each filed a brief and a second brief.
In writing a 71 page decision, the Arbitrator ruled as follows:
The changes to the Benefit plans for unit employees hired BEFORE January 1 ,2007
were in accordance with the contract and the Company's bargaining obligation.
The change excluding unit employees hired ON OR AFTER January 1 ,2007 from the
pension plan was in violation of the contract - as the Company did not provide
one year's notice as required by the contract. All the other changes for these
employees - including to retiree health care, life insurance, and vacation , was
in accordance with the contract and the Company's bargaining obligation.
The Arbitrator directed the Company and the Union to identify the employees
hired after January 1, 2007 who were adversely affected by the change - the
change being that of their exclusion from the pension plan - and to calculate
the amount of harm and the most appropriate way of making them whole. The
Arbitrator said that if the Company and the Union cannot agree, the Arbitrator
will hold a compliance hearing and issue a decision on the remedy.
Accordingly, the Union will make every effort to work out these issues with the
Company but, if unsuccessful, the Union will have the Arbitrator resolve the
matter. Right now, we are considering various proposals to put before the
Company.
I know many employees are disappointed with the Arbitrator's decision. As your
attorney, I am also disappointed. A tremendous amount of time, effort and
expense went into this case, in an attempt to do all we could to protect the
best interests of our members. The facts are what they are, however, and
sometimes the contract language and bargaining history, which is essentially the
same at all DuPont plants, results in a decision that is not entirely to our
liking.
Richmond workers can take pride in the fact that their union is the only union
representing DuPont workers, at any DuPont site in the world, that has taken
this issue to an arbitrator.
Despite our disappointment over this decision, we will see this case through to
the end, and we will make every effort to secure the best possible resolution
for the "new hires".
|
