Regarding the rules in a contract continuing until they expire, there are cases where this is not so, and these cases deal with unions, so I have to think it's possible that such might be the case in some railroad somewhere. Yes, I'm speaking about teaching, but it isn't impossible elsewhere. My personal contract does exactly what GBN was talking about: if it expires, all but the salary continues uninterrupted, and as far as salary goes, you're in a holding pattern.
I am personally familiar with another contract where it states that when it ends, it ends. Would it hold up in court? I have to think not, but it's possible to bargain away rights.
Think I might be wrong? In the Family-Medical Leave Act (FMLA), there are very specific rules about what can and cannot be done, but there is a stipulation that if both sides agree to waive something that is considered a right, the contract holds. Specifically, I'm talking about the part of the Act that deals with whether or not you are per-diem. If the contract says it, even if it's not being practiced, it's the case, despite the protections of the Act.
So, when viahogger says they have been without a contract, do ALL of the former contract's provisions hold up? For all crafts? Like GBN, I'd like to hear from someone who knows.
By the way, in New York, teachers cannot, by law, strike. In Pennsylvania, they can.
Moderator: Fairbanks-Morse Forum