Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
22.3 Pay rate question
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="gandydancer" data-source="post: 420001" data-attributes="member: 9310"><p>Nope. "(c)", or more properly, Article 40, Section 6 - Wages, Paragraph c reads, in its entirety, "c. All new hire full-time or part-time air drivers will be placed in the applicable progression in paragraphs a. or b. above." That is, it is about NEW-HIRE zero-company-seniority air drivers, not "NON air drivers". It is Article 40, Section 6 - Wages, Paragraph b(not c!), sub-paragraph 2 that ends, "Seniority full-time employees"(i.e., the non-new-hire currently "NON air drivers", e.g., seniority 22.3s) "entering a full-time air driver job will be slotted BASED ON THEIR COMPANY SENIORITY." You ignored my pointing out that "slotted based on their company seniority" cannot mean "go to the beginning of the progression, ignoring their company seniority", so I'll point at it again.</p><p> </p><p>And of course there IS "inside language". Most particularly Article 40, Section 6 - Wages, Paragraph friend, which reads, in its entirety, "friend. Employees who are in existing full-time combination jobs" (e.g., seniority 22.3s) "or who hereafter enter a full-time combination job shall be paid the appropriate full-time air rate" (i.e., at the point in the progression to which their company seniority entitles them) "for air driver work and appropriate inside part-time rate for the hours worked in other classifications. If an employee has no established inside rate, that employee will be paid the appropriate part-time rate in accordance with his Company seniority." This seems, unfortunately, incoherent. The clear implication of the last sentence is that if an employee DOES have an "established inside rate" (which an inside/inside 22.3 does) it should mean something different than that he should be paid at the same rate as soimeone who doesn't. But this contradicts the immediately preceeding sentence. Were I an arbitrator I might rule that the necessity of giving meaning to the last sentence means that the appearance of "part-time" in the preceeding sentence must be unintended. But I am not.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gandydancer, post: 420001, member: 9310"] Nope. "(c)", or more properly, Article 40, Section 6 - Wages, Paragraph c reads, in its entirety, "c. All new hire full-time or part-time air drivers will be placed in the applicable progression in paragraphs a. or b. above." That is, it is about NEW-HIRE zero-company-seniority air drivers, not "NON air drivers". It is Article 40, Section 6 - Wages, Paragraph b(not c!), sub-paragraph 2 that ends, "Seniority full-time employees"(i.e., the non-new-hire currently "NON air drivers", e.g., seniority 22.3s) "entering a full-time air driver job will be slotted BASED ON THEIR COMPANY SENIORITY." You ignored my pointing out that "slotted based on their company seniority" cannot mean "go to the beginning of the progression, ignoring their company seniority", so I'll point at it again. And of course there IS "inside language". Most particularly Article 40, Section 6 - Wages, Paragraph friend, which reads, in its entirety, "friend. Employees who are in existing full-time combination jobs" (e.g., seniority 22.3s) "or who hereafter enter a full-time combination job shall be paid the appropriate full-time air rate" (i.e., at the point in the progression to which their company seniority entitles them) "for air driver work and appropriate inside part-time rate for the hours worked in other classifications. If an employee has no established inside rate, that employee will be paid the appropriate part-time rate in accordance with his Company seniority." This seems, unfortunately, incoherent. The clear implication of the last sentence is that if an employee DOES have an "established inside rate" (which an inside/inside 22.3 does) it should mean something different than that he should be paid at the same rate as soimeone who doesn't. But this contradicts the immediately preceeding sentence. Were I an arbitrator I might rule that the necessity of giving meaning to the last sentence means that the appearance of "part-time" in the preceeding sentence must be unintended. But I am not. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
22.3 Pay rate question
Top