- 3 -
such plans; however, after several conferences and meetings
between the union and the company, an agreement was reached that
would allow union workers to operate the new mill. A memorandum
of understanding (the memorandum) was entered into between the
company and the two unions that represented the employees. In
the memorandum, the employees agreed that there would be "no
grievances, arbitrations, NLRB charges, or any other litigation
surrounding the new longwood chipping operations." This
provision represented a forfeiture of rights that the employees
had in the collective bargaining agreement. The new mill,
accordingly, was staffed by the company's union employees,
including petitioner. For the 2 years at issue, petitioner's
employment was at the new mill and was subject to the terms of
the memorandum.
For the year 1997, petitioner's wages with the company were
$60,300, and, for 1998, his wages were $60,461. On his Federal
income tax return for 1997, petitioner included the $60,300 as
income; however, he later filed an amended return for 1997 in
which he excluded from income the $60,300 in wages he earned with
the company. On his Federal income tax return for 1998,
petitioner did not include as income any wage or salary income,
including the $60,461 paid to him by the company.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011