Sponsored Links

AT&T makes public terms of labor agreement in Southeast region

Wed Aug 8, 2012 7:59pm EDT

* Agreement includes wage increase in each year of contract

* Includes 1 pct pension band increase in each year of contract

Aug 8 (Reuters) - AT&T Inc disclosed the terms of its tentative labor agreement with the Communications Workers of America in its Southeast region.

According to the tentative agreement, which was signed earlier this week, general wages of the covered employees would increase 2.25 percent in the first year, 2.75 percent in the second year, and 3 percent in the third year of the contract.

The tentative agreement covers more than 22,000 landline employees in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee.

AT&T, which has a total workforce of 252,330 people, has been in negotiations for months with labor unions to cut costs in its landline business, which has declined rapidly in recent years.

AT&T is still in negotiations with the CWA for several labor contracts. On Tuesday, the company said local union leaders in California, Nevada and Connecticut began strike action over labor contracts.

The agreement also calls for a 1 percent pension band increase in each year of the contract for most current employees and a modest increases in employee contributions towards healthcare plans provided by the company.

AT&T shares had closed at $37.43 on Wednesday on the New York Stock Exchange.

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (1)
RP623 wrote:
I couldn’t tell if this was an actual article or a canned company press release. I’m sure the wording and focus would be entirely different if written from the employee perspective.

Aug 09, 2012 10:38am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.