Q: Can you explain what it means to have published the “final text” of the TA?
The full text of the TA, originally published on July 20th, was thoroughly reviewed by AFA and management jointly. The final text (revised TA document with corrections) was published on August 8th, along with a list of changes from the July 20 document. The changes are not substantive. We encourage you to review the change document.
During negotiations, AFA and management reach tentative agreements on individual sections of the CBA. Each section TA is signed by both sides, so the language is agreed-to. Sometimes, one or two items in the section are not concluded and get “remanded to economics” for the economic discussion at the end of bargaining.
Additionally, items decided later may have an impact on an already concluded section TAs. That is where a lot of the confusion comes in – truing up all the agreed-to provisions. Usually, all the “big stuff” is decided at the end and there is always a rush to get that into concrete language to sign off and ensure it squares with what was written in prior section TAs.
In past negotiations, AFA has never posted TA language that was “final”. Language is always subject to review for true-ups, clarification, and ease of reading.
Additionally, since AFA was the party that combined all of the individual “section TAs” into one full TA document, management understandably wanted to review the full TA document prior to giving it a green light. AFA was confident that, since the full TA document was a combination of all agreed-to section TAs, it represented all of the agreements. We also understand management wanting their review.
Unfortunately, that created unnecessary skepticism and comments that the final language was not complete. It was complete except for the clean-up. Our goal was to get the actual language to membership as soon as possible and not wait for management’s review.
We sincerely hope the confusion surrounding the “draft TA” / “not final TA” situation does not cause someone to vote solely on that issue.