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
PROPOSAL: ARTICLE 37-read and discuss
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: 259814" data-attributes="member: 9310"><p>And the non-grey areas, if the Union is in the bag. Article 22, Section 3, has (until/unless the new contract is accepted) the following unambiguous language: "No part-time employee shall be laid off or suffer the loss of a job as a result of creating a full time job under this Article or Article 40." So we've got this guy who's been driving irreg train for twenty years, but they create new 22.3's in the last go-round with "irreg" as the definition of their first half and bump him to the sort isle. And he grieves it and loses because the union guys don't back him, saying that as long as he's got a job he hasn't lost his job. Never mind that the "or" in the contract language cannot be explained if "layoff" and "losing your job" mean exactly the same thing.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gandydancer, post: 259814, member: 9310"] And the non-grey areas, if the Union is in the bag. Article 22, Section 3, has (until/unless the new contract is accepted) the following unambiguous language: "No part-time employee shall be laid off or suffer the loss of a job as a result of creating a full time job under this Article or Article 40." So we've got this guy who's been driving irreg train for twenty years, but they create new 22.3's in the last go-round with "irreg" as the definition of their first half and bump him to the sort isle. And he grieves it and loses because the union guys don't back him, saying that as long as he's got a job he hasn't lost his job. Never mind that the "or" in the contract language cannot be explained if "layoff" and "losing your job" mean exactly the same thing. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
PROPOSAL: ARTICLE 37-read and discuss
Top