Progression question

[Quigley]

But thats already in the contract:
Article 41 Section 2(c) of the prior Agreement shall remain in
effect for all employees in that progression as of the date of the rat-tification.

My question remains why have this if you have Article 41 Section 2(c):
They will be paid no less than what they are entitled to in accordance
with Article 41, Section 2 below.

 

[upschuck]

But thats already in the contract:
Article 41 Section 2(c) of the prior Agreement shall remain in
effect for all employees in that progression as of the date of the rat-tification.

My question remains why have this if you have Article 41 Section 2(c):
They will be paid no less than what they are entitled to in accordance
with Article 41, Section 2 below.

I guess to point you for further explanation of pay rates. Because if that wasn't in, then one could argue that only one of the raises would be gotten. Maybe a contractually legality thing.

 

[Quigley]

It just doesnt make any sense to to me. Assuming the old progression drivers are not entitled to the new rate because of Article 41 Section 2(c) and remain on the old progression rate, then why insert this in to the contract:

They will be paid no less than what they are entitled to in accordance
with Article 41, Section 2 below.

Maybe its just me but I dont get it.

 

[TooTechie]

It just doesnt make any sense to to me. Assuming the old progression drivers are not entitled to the new rate because of Article 41 Section 2(c) and remain on the old progression rate, then why insert this in to the contract:

They will be paid no less than what they are entitled to in accordance
with Article 41, Section 2 below.

Maybe its just me but I dont get it.

http://www.browncafe.com/community/threads/met-with.356112/

 

[Bottom rung]

Just heard back from payroll. The email states. Employee is a package car driver and follows package progression. Then it lists my seniority date stating when I became full time, and I follow that date for progression increases. No raise.

 

[baklava]

Just heard back from payroll. The email states. Employee is a package car driver and follows package progression. Then it lists my seniority date stating when I became full time, and I follow that date for progression increases. No raise.

They're wrong. Grieve it.



Sent using BrownCafe App

 

[Quigley]

Just heard back from payroll. The email states. Employee is a package car driver and follows package progression. Then it lists my seniority date stating when I became full time, and I follow that date for progression increases. No raise.

Have you talked to your BA? What does he say?

 

[Quigley]

Had another meeting this morning with the Center Manager and Business Agent. This is what was decided.

If you were in progression prior to Aug 1 2013, you get the .70 raise. If after getting the .70 you stll make less then the new rate, then you go to the new rate.
Example: Driver started June 2013 $16.10, after seniority $17.25, Aug 1 .70=$17.95, new rate is $18.75 so driver goes to $18.75.

Now I know there will people here say thats all wrong. Thats fine if you want to get payed less then this then do nothing. Me on the other hand will be happy to see my fellow drivers get the bigger checks.

 

[saintrick]

Had another meeting this morning with the Center Manager and Business Agent. This is what was decided.

If you were in progression prior to Aug 1 2013, you get the .70 raise. If after getting the .70 you stll make less then the new rate, then you go to the new rate.
Example: Driver started June 2013 $16.10, after seniority $17.25, Aug 1 .70=$17.95, new rate is $18.75 so driver goes to $18.75.

Now I know there will people here say thats all wrong. Thats fine if you want to get payed less then this then do nothing. Me on the other hand will be happy to see my fellow drivers get the bigger checks.

I appreciate the passion you have for your fellow workers. It would be nice to have more of you around.

I do question if a center manager has the authority to do what you have agreed.

Let us know how it works out.

 

[upschuck]

Had another meeting this morning with the Center Manager and Business Agent. This is what was decided.

If you were in progression prior to Aug 1 2013, you get the .70 raise. If after getting the .70 you stll make less then the new rate, then you go to the new rate.
Example: Driver started June 2013 $16.10, after seniority $17.25, Aug 1 .70=$17.95, new rate is $18.75 so driver goes to $18.75.

Now I know there will people here say thats all wrong. Thats fine if you want to get payed less then this then do nothing. Me on the other hand will be happy to see my fellow drivers get the bigger checks.

There is no time when the old contract rates plus GWI would be more than new contract rates, so why not say everyone gets new contract rates.

 

[Quigley]

But he doesnt stay at the old rates he goes to the new rates.. Take the above driver as example. June 2014 he goes to $19.50, Aug 1 2014 he goes to $20.20. Right there he goes to more then the new rate. June 2015 $21.00, Aug 2015 $21.70 again higher then the new rate.

 

[upschuck]

But he doesnt stay at the old rates he goes to the new rates.. Take the above driver as example. June 2014 he goes to $19.50, Aug 1 2014 he goes to $20.20. Right there he goes to more then the new rate. June 2015 $21.00, Aug 2015 $21.70 again higher then the new rate.

Not trying to be argumentative, but where does this part come in

Article 41 Section 2(c) of the prior Agreement shall remain in effect for all employees in that progression as of the date of the ratification.

which says they stay at old rates. Just trying to learn how you, center manager, and BA came up to this conclusion.

 

[Quigley]

Not trying to be argumentative, but where does this part come in

which says they stay at old rates. Just trying to learn how you, center manager, and BA came up to this conclusion.

First of it doesnt say anything about rates. It could just as easy mean "stay on 3 year progression".
Second I will ask again. If this
Article 41 Section 2(c) of the prior Agreement shall remain in
effect for all employees in that progression as of the date of the ratification" means you stay at the old rate then why have this:
They will be paid no less than what they are entitled to in accordance
with Article 41, Section 2 below.
The above statement has nothing to do with GWI. If it has nothing to do with the new rate then why put it in here?

 

[Quigley]

Not trying to be argumentative, but where does this part come in

which says they stay at old rates. Just trying to learn how you, center manager, and BA came up to this conclusion.

By the way no argument here. There is no reason why 2 inteligent people cant have a healthy debate about a subject they happen to have different opinions on. Life would be pretty boring if everybody agreed on everything. I learn alot from other peoples opinion and find them to right a lot of the times and it helps to look at a subject from different perspective.

 

[upschuck]

First of it doesnt say anything about rates. It could just as easy mean "stay on 3 year progression".
Second I will ask again. If this
Article 41 Section 2(c) of the prior Agreement shall remain in
effect for all employees in that progression as of the date of the ratification" means you stay at the old rate then why have this:
They will be paid no less than what they are entitled to in accordance
with Article 41, Section 2 below.
The above statement has nothing to do with GWI. If it has nothing to do with the new rate then why put it in here?

The progression for employees entering a package car driving, feeder or other full-time job (other than an air driver or a job covered
by Section 3 below) position after August 1, 2013 shall
be as follows:

Start $18.75

Seniority $18.75

Twelve (12) months $19.50

Twenty-four (24) months $21.00

Thirty-six (36) months $25.00

Forty-eight (48) months Top Rate

and down a couple paragraphs says old progression will remain in effect.(doesn't say just year progression). I guess we'll see when grievances are decided.

 

[Quigley]

and down a couple paragraphs says old progression will remain in effect.(doesn't say just year progression). I guess we'll see when grievances are decided.

Sorry I dont see where it says says old progression will remain in effect.

and down a couple paragraphs says old progression will remain in effect.(doesn't say just year progression). I guess we'll see when grievances are decided.

Do you find Article 41 Section 1 contradicts Article 41 Section 2C?

 

[upschuck]

Sorry I dont see where it says says old progression will remain in effect.

The last line of Article 41 Section 2(c)

Do you find Article 41 Section 1 contradicts Article 41 Section 2C?

No I don't. I see it as they get two smaller raises.

 

[Quigley]

You may be right. But I just cant get past the

"They will be paid no less than what they are entitled to in accordance
with Article 41, Section 2 below."
Considering Article 41 Section 2C, why include the above statement. Why not just say Full-time employees still in progression on the effective date of this
Master Agreement shall receive the above contractual increases.
and leave the rest out. Maybe I just have tunnel vision.

I know I'm beating a dead horse.

 

[upschuck]

You may be right. But I just cant get past the

"They will be paid no less than what they are entitled to in accordance
with Article 41, Section 2 below."
Considering Article 41 Section 2C, why include the above statement. Why not just say Full-time employees still in progression on the effective date of this
Master Agreement shall receive the above contractual increases.
and leave the rest out. Maybe I just have tunnel vision.

Because if they didn't put that in, then the drivers in progression would only get the 70¢ and never get to top rate.

 

[Quigley]

Because if they didn't put that in, then the drivers in progression would only get the 70¢ and never get to top rate.

Sorry but you are confusing me. You say you cant have the new rate because of Article 41 2C, but then you say you cant have the old rate if Article 41 Section 1 isnt there. Why would you need both?