I-9 Subject of Bargaining?
BKate
100 Posts
My company recently acquired another company that currently has a union contract in place for a large percentage of the workers. We want to complete I-9 forms for the employees in this company, requiring them to produce the appropriate documents, so we can be sure our paperwork is in order. The union representatives have said that we cannot require the employees to produce documents since they completed forms when they were hired to work at the company. We know we can require the completion of new forms legally, but is this a subject of mandatory bargaining? Has anyone dealt with this before?
Comments
Show them this: http://www.ioma.com/audioconferences/877.html and about a million other bits of info about the importance of I-9 certification AND recertification. My Union gets riled every time I ask an employee to show up on time, much less sign their job description or something.
But, at the end of the day employers are legally required to do these certifications and they can therefore be held as conditions of continued employment. I can't tell you what to do, but I would tell my business rep to show me the part of the negotiated language of the CBA that specifically says that "employees cannot be required to produce identifying documents for the completion of legally mandatory forms". if it is not there (which of course it would never be) then proceed. If they greave it, they would eventually have to demonstrate to an arbitrator that your actions are unduly harmful to the employees and therefore a violation of their Weingarten Rights.
When I run into these things I try to maintain a strong grasp on the reality that I and I alone make these decisions. It is never "up to" the union and ONLY violations of text in the CBA are clearly wrong. Anything else could go to arbritration and I would never treat someone in a way that any reasonable third party could find unacceptable.
Hope that helps.
I am not remotely surprised by their objection as it is very typical even when there is no merit whatsoever to their objection. The only part that makes me question their action is the timing... they should be in at least some kind of relationship building posture. If that's how they're going to act, next time they want something just say "Remember that time you caused trouble just for the sake of causing trouble for me? Moments like that make it harder for me to give you what you want now". They'll be ticked, but they'll know you're right and they'll either respect you for asserting yourself, or they won't.
I like to believe that the majority of Union reps out there are genuinely good people who want to partner with you to make a mutually beneficial environment, but I've never encountered a single one frankly.
"I like to believe that the majority of Union reps out there are genuinely good people who want to partner with you to make a mutually beneficial environment, but I've never encountered a single one frankly."
Where's the LOL smiley icon? I like to think there is a two headed man walking the streets of Mississippi somewhere too. But, I've yet to encounter him.