<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CWA: No Strike at AT&amp;T, Yet</title>
	<atom:link href="http://technologizer.com/2009/02/07/cwa-no-strike-at-att-yet/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://technologizer.com/2009/02/07/cwa-no-strike-at-att-yet/</link>
	<description>Reviews, News, and Opinion About Personal Technology by Harry McCracken &#38; Friends</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:21:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: MaxAp</title>
		<link>http://technologizer.com/2009/02/07/cwa-no-strike-at-att-yet/comment-page-20/#comment-20654</link>
		<dc:creator>MaxAp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:59:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technologizer.com/?p=7782#comment-20654</guid>
		<description>I hope the three sides agree, the workers, their employer, and the union.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope the three sides agree, the workers, their employer, and the union.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://technologizer.com/2009/02/07/cwa-no-strike-at-att-yet/comment-page-20/#comment-20650</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:00:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technologizer.com/?p=7782#comment-20650</guid>
		<description>I hope the two sides will talk so that this dispute between them will be fixed. Hopefully everything will turn out ok...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope the two sides will talk so that this dispute between them will be fixed. Hopefully everything will turn out ok&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Q</title>
		<link>http://technologizer.com/2009/02/07/cwa-no-strike-at-att-yet/comment-page-20/#comment-15969</link>
		<dc:creator>Q</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2009 00:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technologizer.com/?p=7782#comment-15969</guid>
		<description>KOKOMO TEXAN..

Its a contract violation.  The company can not do a run around and excluide the union. CWA is the sole bargaining unit. It was a strategic move by the company to try and undermine the union. Asking the members to call their hall and ask to vote on something that was not bargained for or passed across the bargaining table... BAD move on the company part... 

How can you claim poor and on the verge of asking for a bail-out, while you have 14 billion dollars in the bank. THe employee&#039;s helped them make that money and need to be compensated justly.  Why are the top executives healthcare free for life (including whiticare and his whole family)for them and their whole family, but asking us to come out of pocket up to 6,000 per family.. 

If you are so poor that you do not have money for healthcare, where did you get the money for investments... 

AS far as why you arent treated fairly.. i have no idea.. if you work in a union shop then you will get whatever the union bargains....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>KOKOMO TEXAN..</p>
<p>Its a contract violation.  The company can not do a run around and excluide the union. CWA is the sole bargaining unit. It was a strategic move by the company to try and undermine the union. Asking the members to call their hall and ask to vote on something that was not bargained for or passed across the bargaining table&#8230; BAD move on the company part&#8230; </p>
<p>How can you claim poor and on the verge of asking for a bail-out, while you have 14 billion dollars in the bank. THe employee&#8217;s helped them make that money and need to be compensated justly.  Why are the top executives healthcare free for life (including whiticare and his whole family)for them and their whole family, but asking us to come out of pocket up to 6,000 per family.. </p>
<p>If you are so poor that you do not have money for healthcare, where did you get the money for investments&#8230; </p>
<p>AS far as why you arent treated fairly.. i have no idea.. if you work in a union shop then you will get whatever the union bargains&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KokomoTexan</title>
		<link>http://technologizer.com/2009/02/07/cwa-no-strike-at-att-yet/comment-page-20/#comment-15968</link>
		<dc:creator>KokomoTexan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 23:32:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technologizer.com/?p=7782#comment-15968</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t get why the timing matters. There can’t be a vote before the leadership can talk to members. They could write it on the bathroom wall at 2:30 a.m. and it wouldn&#039;t make any difference where the leaders are or what they’re doing so long as a vote doesn’t happen before enough time for discussion.

What difference does the Verizon deal make? If Verizon had to unload some assets, I’m guessing they were a pretty good deal. Someone always says, “Look how much they spent” whenever the company spends anything or “If they can afford to do THAT” like it shouldn’t spend any money at all. The Verizon deal isn’t making benefits more expensive, and I don’t expect the company to stop doing business until it can pay for every increase in the cost of health care first.

The company is in a no-win situation. How does investing in assets justify keeping CWA benefit costs where they are but everyone else needing to pay more for their benefits doesn’t matter? If they try to keep costs down for current members, people make an issue about what future employees would get when it’s what the rest of the company already has. It’s like pick a mix, just not with candy.

None of this has anything to do with this being a fair offer and it doesn’t explain why the union should pay less for coverage than everyone else. This offer looks better than what the rest of the company gets, so why does the CWA deserve more for less other than what it’s used to paying? Everyone else was used to paying less too.  Where was the CWA while everyone else was being treated this unfairly?

That’s the real question, not when or where or how the company made a press release or pointing to any time the company has spent money like it should mean the company must be able to spend more. Any offer that costs the CWA less than everyone else more than fair. If it wasn’t, all the discussion would be about everyone else being treated better than the CWA instead of every other reason under the sun that has nothing to do health care being more expensive and why it shouldn’t affect the union like everyone else.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t get why the timing matters. There can’t be a vote before the leadership can talk to members. They could write it on the bathroom wall at 2:30 a.m. and it wouldn&#8217;t make any difference where the leaders are or what they’re doing so long as a vote doesn’t happen before enough time for discussion.</p>
<p>What difference does the Verizon deal make? If Verizon had to unload some assets, I’m guessing they were a pretty good deal. Someone always says, “Look how much they spent” whenever the company spends anything or “If they can afford to do THAT” like it shouldn’t spend any money at all. The Verizon deal isn’t making benefits more expensive, and I don’t expect the company to stop doing business until it can pay for every increase in the cost of health care first.</p>
<p>The company is in a no-win situation. How does investing in assets justify keeping CWA benefit costs where they are but everyone else needing to pay more for their benefits doesn’t matter? If they try to keep costs down for current members, people make an issue about what future employees would get when it’s what the rest of the company already has. It’s like pick a mix, just not with candy.</p>
<p>None of this has anything to do with this being a fair offer and it doesn’t explain why the union should pay less for coverage than everyone else. This offer looks better than what the rest of the company gets, so why does the CWA deserve more for less other than what it’s used to paying? Everyone else was used to paying less too.  Where was the CWA while everyone else was being treated this unfairly?</p>
<p>That’s the real question, not when or where or how the company made a press release or pointing to any time the company has spent money like it should mean the company must be able to spend more. Any offer that costs the CWA less than everyone else more than fair. If it wasn’t, all the discussion would be about everyone else being treated better than the CWA instead of every other reason under the sun that has nothing to do health care being more expensive and why it shouldn’t affect the union like everyone else.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Q</title>
		<link>http://technologizer.com/2009/02/07/cwa-no-strike-at-att-yet/comment-page-20/#comment-15960</link>
		<dc:creator>Q</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 20:02:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technologizer.com/?p=7782#comment-15960</guid>
		<description>As most you know by now, AT&amp;T has made a last,best and final offer on healthcare for district 6. This was not bargained for with the union, the company put it together and gave it out and they are asking district 6 CWA memeber to call their union and ask to vote on it
The Company was prepared with an eight (8) page, “AT&amp;T News Now Article,” complete with a calculator, and a video from John Stankey, President CEO AT&amp;T Operations addressing employees with the Company’s detailed version of their package.  All this was planned at a time where the Company knew that all the CWA Local Presidents would be out of town attending a joint CWA/AT&amp;T Common Interest Forum (CIF) Meeting, therefore would be unable to communicate with their members promptly.  Keep in Mind, this was just the SECOND DAY after face to face bargaining with the Company had resumed. 

The Company’s proposed rates for current employees range from $5.00 to $45.00 per month, and up to 15% of the FULL PREMIUMS for New Hires.  The Company’s projection for 2010 is that New Hires will pay up to $321.00 per month.  


MONTHLY CONTRIBUTIONS FOR FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES
Coverage Tier 2010 2011 2012
Individuals   $5   $10  $15
Individual +1 $10  $20  $30
Family        $15  $30  $45

NETWORK DEDUCTIBLES
Coverage Tier % of Annual Rate of Pay Maximum Amount
Individuals          1%     $500
Individual +1        2%     $1,000
Family               3%     $1,500

COINSURANCE
Network Type Employee Portion
Network        10%
Non-Network    40%

DRUG COPAYS
Drug Type Retail (up to a 30-ay supply)
                                    Mail Order (up to a 90-day supply)
Generic       $10                       $20
Formulary     $35                       $70
Non-Formulary $60                       $120

NETWORK OUT-OF-POCKET MAXIMUMS
Coverage Tier % of Annual Rate of Pay Maximum Amount
Individual       4%         $2,500
Individual +1    6%         $4,000
Family           8%         $5,300

Mr. Stankey called these &quot;modest&quot; amounts. I guess when you have free healthcare,.... this would seem modest too..
This is horrible, from a company that has 16 billion in the bank, and can afford to buy 2.5 billion worth of Verizon assets.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As most you know by now, AT&amp;T has made a last,best and final offer on healthcare for district 6. This was not bargained for with the union, the company put it together and gave it out and they are asking district 6 CWA memeber to call their union and ask to vote on it<br />
The Company was prepared with an eight (8) page, “AT&amp;T News Now Article,” complete with a calculator, and a video from John Stankey, President CEO AT&amp;T Operations addressing employees with the Company’s detailed version of their package.  All this was planned at a time where the Company knew that all the CWA Local Presidents would be out of town attending a joint CWA/AT&amp;T Common Interest Forum (CIF) Meeting, therefore would be unable to communicate with their members promptly.  Keep in Mind, this was just the SECOND DAY after face to face bargaining with the Company had resumed. </p>
<p>The Company’s proposed rates for current employees range from $5.00 to $45.00 per month, and up to 15% of the FULL PREMIUMS for New Hires.  The Company’s projection for 2010 is that New Hires will pay up to $321.00 per month.  </p>
<p>MONTHLY CONTRIBUTIONS FOR FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES<br />
Coverage Tier 2010 2011 2012<br />
Individuals   $5   $10  $15<br />
Individual +1 $10  $20  $30<br />
Family        $15  $30  $45</p>
<p>NETWORK DEDUCTIBLES<br />
Coverage Tier % of Annual Rate of Pay Maximum Amount<br />
Individuals          1%     $500<br />
Individual +1        2%     $1,000<br />
Family               3%     $1,500</p>
<p>COINSURANCE<br />
Network Type Employee Portion<br />
Network        10%<br />
Non-Network    40%</p>
<p>DRUG COPAYS<br />
Drug Type Retail (up to a 30-ay supply)<br />
                                    Mail Order (up to a 90-day supply)<br />
Generic       $10                       $20<br />
Formulary     $35                       $70<br />
Non-Formulary $60                       $120</p>
<p>NETWORK OUT-OF-POCKET MAXIMUMS<br />
Coverage Tier % of Annual Rate of Pay Maximum Amount<br />
Individual       4%         $2,500<br />
Individual +1    6%         $4,000<br />
Family           8%         $5,300</p>
<p>Mr. Stankey called these &#8220;modest&#8221; amounts. I guess when you have free healthcare,&#8230;. this would seem modest too..<br />
This is horrible, from a company that has 16 billion in the bank, and can afford to buy 2.5 billion worth of Verizon assets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CryMeARiver</title>
		<link>http://technologizer.com/2009/02/07/cwa-no-strike-at-att-yet/comment-page-20/#comment-15760</link>
		<dc:creator>CryMeARiver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 21:11:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technologizer.com/?p=7782#comment-15760</guid>
		<description>Thanks for that info Mike, but all I keep seeing are percentages when it comes to the &quot;cost shifting&quot;.  I&#039;d like to know exactly what areas will be affected (i.e. co-pays for visits...) because not everyone has the same health coverage.  I agree that I&#039;d rather be at work than on strike while they work it out, but I&#039;d like to see some bending from both sides.  I guess we&#039;ll see what happens when the next update is posted on the website.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for that info Mike, but all I keep seeing are percentages when it comes to the &#8220;cost shifting&#8221;.  I&#8217;d like to know exactly what areas will be affected (i.e. co-pays for visits&#8230;) because not everyone has the same health coverage.  I agree that I&#8217;d rather be at work than on strike while they work it out, but I&#8217;d like to see some bending from both sides.  I guess we&#8217;ll see what happens when the next update is posted on the website.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://technologizer.com/2009/02/07/cwa-no-strike-at-att-yet/comment-page-20/#comment-15709</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 12:45:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technologizer.com/?p=7782#comment-15709</guid>
		<description>The company is proposing a 30 to 40 percent cost shift in health care cost to the employees.  That is double to triple to what we are paying now.   That is more than a little more.

The company is refusing to look at other ways to reduce the  health care costs with out huge cost shifting.

I rather work under the current conditions than be on a strike line while they hammer this thing out.  As it stands, I am still at work making the same money with the same benefits I have been receiving for the last 5 years. And if you take that into account, the company is not hurting either, they posted a 3.3 billion profit in the first quarter of this year.

This contract is not about asking for a bunch of additional benefits that would break the company or lower their profits, it is all about just keeping what we currently have and job security and the company has proven that they can easily make huge profits under the current contract conditions and could in fact easily pay for more benefits to it employees if necessary, but the Union is not asking for any additional benefits they are just asking for job security issues for those who don&#039;t currently have them. 

I feel the union is taking the right approach this time and not flying off the handle and walking off the job which would hurt the company, employees and customers alike.

The last report on the contract talks stated that they are talking again in a meaningful way, so maybe for the good of all this may be able to be resolved with out any strike being needed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The company is proposing a 30 to 40 percent cost shift in health care cost to the employees.  That is double to triple to what we are paying now.   That is more than a little more.</p>
<p>The company is refusing to look at other ways to reduce the  health care costs with out huge cost shifting.</p>
<p>I rather work under the current conditions than be on a strike line while they hammer this thing out.  As it stands, I am still at work making the same money with the same benefits I have been receiving for the last 5 years. And if you take that into account, the company is not hurting either, they posted a 3.3 billion profit in the first quarter of this year.</p>
<p>This contract is not about asking for a bunch of additional benefits that would break the company or lower their profits, it is all about just keeping what we currently have and job security and the company has proven that they can easily make huge profits under the current contract conditions and could in fact easily pay for more benefits to it employees if necessary, but the Union is not asking for any additional benefits they are just asking for job security issues for those who don&#8217;t currently have them. </p>
<p>I feel the union is taking the right approach this time and not flying off the handle and walking off the job which would hurt the company, employees and customers alike.</p>
<p>The last report on the contract talks stated that they are talking again in a meaningful way, so maybe for the good of all this may be able to be resolved with out any strike being needed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CryMeARiver</title>
		<link>http://technologizer.com/2009/02/07/cwa-no-strike-at-att-yet/comment-page-20/#comment-15667</link>
		<dc:creator>CryMeARiver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 00:57:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technologizer.com/?p=7782#comment-15667</guid>
		<description>Actually, depending on what department you work in, you can wear shorts, and cut off pants.  In my department in particular we don&#039;t have a dress code, so I could come to work in whatever I wanted and it not be a problem. For those who climb the poles and work in areas where safety is an issue, I&#039;m sure the dress code is very different.  I would have to agree that it&#039;s starting to feel like the union is prolonging this whole thing, and it doesn&#039;t make sense. Most people that work at AT&amp;T including myself, do make GREAT money, and have great benefits (not sure how mgt benefits are).  I would like to know in more detail what the HECK IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE HEALTHCARE PROPOSAL THE COMPANY IS PUTTING OUT, because i&#039;m sick of the union saying it&#039;s too high, but not giving any further information.  Most of us wouldn&#039;t mind paying some out of pocket as long as it doesn&#039;t put us in the poor house.  Get this thing over and done with already....I want to breath easily for a change and not worry about what&#039;s going to happen. *SIGH.....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, depending on what department you work in, you can wear shorts, and cut off pants.  In my department in particular we don&#8217;t have a dress code, so I could come to work in whatever I wanted and it not be a problem. For those who climb the poles and work in areas where safety is an issue, I&#8217;m sure the dress code is very different.  I would have to agree that it&#8217;s starting to feel like the union is prolonging this whole thing, and it doesn&#8217;t make sense. Most people that work at AT&amp;T including myself, do make GREAT money, and have great benefits (not sure how mgt benefits are).  I would like to know in more detail what the HECK IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE HEALTHCARE PROPOSAL THE COMPANY IS PUTTING OUT, because i&#8217;m sick of the union saying it&#8217;s too high, but not giving any further information.  Most of us wouldn&#8217;t mind paying some out of pocket as long as it doesn&#8217;t put us in the poor house.  Get this thing over and done with already&#8230;.I want to breath easily for a change and not worry about what&#8217;s going to happen. *SIGH&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://technologizer.com/2009/02/07/cwa-no-strike-at-att-yet/comment-page-20/#comment-15638</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 19:12:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technologizer.com/?p=7782#comment-15638</guid>
		<description>Sam

I Don&#039;t know who you are or where you live, but i know you don&#039;t know any AT&amp;T employees.  First of all it is strictly against company policy to wear Cut Off Pants or any types of shorts.  Second, it would be very unsafe because of the type of job we do.  Let me see you climb a telephone pole or crawl under dirty house with spiders and who knows what else in shorts    Third, on the average I go through 4 to 6 pairs of jeans per year which I have to buy myself.  At&amp;T only gives us 6 Branded t-shirts, a few hats and a jacket every few years.  All other clothing including rain gear I pay for.

Also, the family health insurance does not cover adult children except for those who are enrolled in college and that insurance is cut off at age 21 or if they drop out of school.

Our health insurance is not free.  We pay currently 10 percent to health care and have co-pays.

We get the same amount of standard days off as everyone else does in the country and in some cases less we actually get less.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sam</p>
<p>I Don&#8217;t know who you are or where you live, but i know you don&#8217;t know any AT&amp;T employees.  First of all it is strictly against company policy to wear Cut Off Pants or any types of shorts.  Second, it would be very unsafe because of the type of job we do.  Let me see you climb a telephone pole or crawl under dirty house with spiders and who knows what else in shorts    Third, on the average I go through 4 to 6 pairs of jeans per year which I have to buy myself.  At&amp;T only gives us 6 Branded t-shirts, a few hats and a jacket every few years.  All other clothing including rain gear I pay for.</p>
<p>Also, the family health insurance does not cover adult children except for those who are enrolled in college and that insurance is cut off at age 21 or if they drop out of school.</p>
<p>Our health insurance is not free.  We pay currently 10 percent to health care and have co-pays.</p>
<p>We get the same amount of standard days off as everyone else does in the country and in some cases less we actually get less.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam Says</title>
		<link>http://technologizer.com/2009/02/07/cwa-no-strike-at-att-yet/comment-page-19/#comment-15625</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam Says</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 17:34:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technologizer.com/?p=7782#comment-15625</guid>
		<description>Those who I know that work at AT$T make good money $20+ and hour. They wear t-shirts and cut off jeans so they have no clothing expense.

They also seem to get alot of days off not including vacation time. They have great insurance that even covers children in their 20&#039;s who are not enrolled in school.

Seems to me with all the companies going out of business that these employees would be willing to give some.

Based on customer service I have received from them they are overpaid. I will be happy to come work for AT$T for what they have on the bargaining table.

I am afraid (not really) that these employees will find the Union has ruined a good thing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Those who I know that work at AT$T make good money $20+ and hour. They wear t-shirts and cut off jeans so they have no clothing expense.</p>
<p>They also seem to get alot of days off not including vacation time. They have great insurance that even covers children in their 20&#8217;s who are not enrolled in school.</p>
<p>Seems to me with all the companies going out of business that these employees would be willing to give some.</p>
<p>Based on customer service I have received from them they are overpaid. I will be happy to come work for AT$T for what they have on the bargaining table.</p>
<p>I am afraid (not really) that these employees will find the Union has ruined a good thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
