AMO WINS AGAIN PART THREE

AMO WINS AGAIN PART THREE

MEBA has lost another round in the ongoing battle with AMO and Union representation of the Interlake fleet. This is just another stepping stone in path that may eventually lead to serious ramifications within the MEBA.

AMO prevails in Article XX case against MEBA

The Marine Engineers Beneficial Association violated Article XX of the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations Constitution when it claimed representation of the licensed personnel aboard the Great Lakes tug-barge combination Dorothy Ann and Pathfinder in March 2006, an impartial umpire has determined.

Ruling in a complaint brought before the labor federation by the Seafarers International Union of North America on behalf of American Maritime Officers, the umpire, Howard Lesnick, said MEBA "unquestionably displaced AMO" as the exclusive collective bargaining agent of the officers aboard the tug-barge. AMO, an affiliate of the SIUNA, had represented the Dorothy Ann and Pathfinder officers under a collective bargaining agreement with Interlake Transportation Inc., a unit of Interlake Steamship Co.

Article XX of the AFL-CIO Constitution prohibits encroachment upon one affiliated union’s jurisdiction by another affiliated union. A determination that Article XX had been violated could require the offending union to surrender all jurisdictional claims in the specific case, and it could open the offending union to sanctions. In this case, MEBA can no longer claim to represent the officers on the Dorothy Ann-Pathfinder without incurring penalties.

The jurisdictional dispute between AMO and MEBA arose on March 8, 2006, when AMO was notified by Interlake Steamship Co. that Interlake Transportation Inc. had been dissolved, and that the Dorothy Ann and Pathfinder had been transferred to the Interlake Steamship Co. fleet. Interlake Steamship Co., a longtime employer of AMO engineers, mates and stewards on the Great Lakes, had signed a 10-year collective bargaining agreement with MEBA in July 2003 while a valid three-year collective bargaining agreement between AMO and Interlake Steamship Co. was still in effect. The 2003 contract between MEBA and Interlake Steamship Co. covered the engineers and mates aboard Interlake’s seven self-propelled self-unloading bulk carriers

On the first day of the Dorothy Ann and Pathfinder’s sailing season in March 2006, "MEBA representatives boarded the vessels and advised the officers that they were now MEBA-represented and required to join it (MEBA) as a condition of continued employment," Lesnick noted in his decision.

In its Article XX complaint, SIUNA said AMO’s jurisdiction withstood the transfer of the Dorothy Ann and Pathfinder from Interlake Transportation Inc. to Interlake Steamship Co. SIUNA also charged that the Interlake Steamship Co. MEBA contract covering the officers on the Dorothy Ann and Pathfinder was the result of collusion between MEBA and the company.

Lesnick said SIUNA’s complaint of collusion between MEBA and Interlake Steamship Co. was "credible," and that the collusive "pattern" that led to the 10-year Interlake-MEBA contract in 2003 "was repeated three years later in relation to the Dorothy Ann."

Read more!