Snapshot Summary

Takeaways: We spent a lot of time working on proposals in caucus, but were ultimately unable to reach any new TAs. Using what we discussed and learned at recent sessions, we intend to rework many open issues into a single package.
Upcoming Sessions: August 26–27
Workplace Issues: COVID-19 Policy Memorandum of Understanding
Union Proposals: Seniority, Layoff & Recall
TCGplayer Proposals: Payroll Deductions for Dues & Fees, Stewards, Complete Agreement

Full Report

On July 23rd, 2024, we had our 23rd bargaining session on the path to our first contract. Our Union’s team consisted of Briana Thomas, Ethan Salerius, Robert Guy, and CWA staff representative Mike Garry. The company’s team for this session included Alan Model, Sarah Shepard, Nicole Paluch, and Mike Pretty.

As we continue to work through open issues, the first half of our session consisted of comparing our lists of open issues and finding places where movement could be made. After deciding what each side could work on, we broke for caucus and each side prepared several proposals to pass. Despite thorough discussion on these topics, we remained unable to reach any new tentative agreements at this session.

While the lack of forward progress is disappointing, we committed to rework some of our open proposals with the hope of addressing the company’s outstanding concerns. As we consider the items for which concessions may or may not be acceptable, collective action continues to be our best tool to move eBay’s team at the bargaining table.

Workplace Issues

COVID-19 Policy MoU: While the company remains theoretically committed to safe practices around COVID-19, they ultimately declined to sign off on this memorandum of understanding. Their position is that they do not want to agree to language that would require them to renegotiate reduced protections in the event of changes to the law, instead electing to rely on the law to define a minimum of responsibility for the company.

Our Proposals

Seniority: The most significant hurdle to agreement on this article has been the applications and impacts of seniority beyond layoff and recall decisions. In order to move this article forward, we removed the section from the company’s proposals which would severely restrict seniority applications in favor of defining a seniority basis for decisions in other relevant articles. We previously compromised on nine months as the timeframe for possible recall following layoffs, defined what constitutes job abandonment, and clarified how leaves of absence may impact seniority on return. With all of this progress we are very close to agreement on this item.
Layoff & Recall: This issue is intrinsically tied to seniority, as we remain committed to using seniority as the sole deciding factor for layoff and recall. While we left language that leaves the decision to initiate layoffs at the sole discretion of the employer, we proposed that the company must meet with us to discuss the impact of such layoffs, though such meetings will not delay implementation. Our proposal outlines a retraining period for employees returning from layoffs, as well as defining the timeframe by which employees must respond to recall and return to work.

Management’s Proposals

Payroll Deductions for Dues & Fees: While the company agreed to much of the language from our previous proposal, their counter included language that insists the company will not terminate employees who do not pay union dues or agency fees. This language is simply inconsistent with New York State law, as such payments are not optional. We intend to bundle this in a broad counter proposal on union administrative issues at a later session.
Stewards: The company continues to refuse to pay stewards for their time spent engaging in Union business, such as meetings with management or committees outlined in the contract, and added language that would restrict the number of stewards to a total of three. They similarly maintain they will not pay future bargaining committee members for their time spent in negotiations, and seek to restrict the number of bargaining committee members to three. We were unable to agree to this proposal and will counter at a future session.
Complete Agreement: This proposal includes zipper clause language removed from the Intent article before our TA on that item. Clauses such as this are common in many union contracts to clearly define what is and is not covered by the agreement. While we remain open to reasonable language on this topic, the company continues to ask for excessively broad restrictions on our right to bargain over the effects of unilateral changes made by the company.

Upcoming Dates

8/18: August Members’ Meeting
8/26: Bargaining Session
8/27: Bargaining Session
9/2: Labor Day Parade at the NYS Fair
9/15: September Members’ Meeting