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
FULL TIMERS still in PROGRESSION with seniority date by Aug 1st! Did you file your grievance!?!
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="zubenelgenubi" data-source="post: 4203258" data-attributes="member: 63706"><p>*TLDR* - the language in this section of the contract <em>is</em> poorly written, which is a result of adding on/subtracting select language, rather than rewriting the whole section for clarification</p><p></p><p>*Whole Text*</p><p>What would the people who are being left out, or not benefitting as much, hope to gain by "pushing the issue". The best they could hope for is to bring everyone down to their level, which would be fair, but you don't force the company to pay anyone less than the they are willing to.</p><p></p><p>As for contract language and interpretation, clearly written language is important to prevent challenges to the contract. Contracts often cover complicated situations, and sometimes the clearest way to communicate the intent of the two parties involved is still very complex. Interpreting language requires identifying what language applies to whatever challenge is being made, and then establishing tests based on the terms. Whichever interpretation best satisfies the tests and does not contradict other terms of the contract is deemed the correct interpretation.</p><p></p><p>In one of my previous posts I offer an interpretation that satisfies the language without contradiction, benefits all people it affects fairly and evenly, and is consistent with precedent. The company has chosen to pay certain people more than they are required to by the contract, and there is no language preventing this. You could possibly argue that it creates an unequal benefit among people who should be on equal footing, but the result of that would likely be that the company would stop paying the extra to the few, rather than paying everyone involved extra. </p><p></p><p>Another example of this type of behvior from the company is the centers that were paying part timers an attendance bonus that put them well ahead, in compensation, of more senior part timers who were not receiving the bonus. The contract does not prevent the company from doing that, but it is still a really <img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/group1/censored2.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":censored2:" title="Censored2 :censored2:" data-shortname=":censored2:" />ty thing to do to the more senior employees.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="zubenelgenubi, post: 4203258, member: 63706"] *TLDR* - the language in this section of the contract [I]is[/I] poorly written, which is a result of adding on/subtracting select language, rather than rewriting the whole section for clarification *Whole Text* What would the people who are being left out, or not benefitting as much, hope to gain by "pushing the issue". The best they could hope for is to bring everyone down to their level, which would be fair, but you don't force the company to pay anyone less than the they are willing to. As for contract language and interpretation, clearly written language is important to prevent challenges to the contract. Contracts often cover complicated situations, and sometimes the clearest way to communicate the intent of the two parties involved is still very complex. Interpreting language requires identifying what language applies to whatever challenge is being made, and then establishing tests based on the terms. Whichever interpretation best satisfies the tests and does not contradict other terms of the contract is deemed the correct interpretation. In one of my previous posts I offer an interpretation that satisfies the language without contradiction, benefits all people it affects fairly and evenly, and is consistent with precedent. The company has chosen to pay certain people more than they are required to by the contract, and there is no language preventing this. You could possibly argue that it creates an unequal benefit among people who should be on equal footing, but the result of that would likely be that the company would stop paying the extra to the few, rather than paying everyone involved extra. Another example of this type of behvior from the company is the centers that were paying part timers an attendance bonus that put them well ahead, in compensation, of more senior part timers who were not receiving the bonus. The contract does not prevent the company from doing that, but it is still a really :censored:ty thing to do to the more senior employees. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
FULL TIMERS still in PROGRESSION with seniority date by Aug 1st! Did you file your grievance!?!
Top