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 Discussions
UPS Cannot Take Away MRA?
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="Superteeth2478" data-source="post: 5143249" data-attributes="member: 73024"><p>I'm just going to say in advance that I'm typing certain things in all caps to emphasize, not to yell.</p><p></p><p>So now that you mention it I didn't interpret the language that way because of the wording. It just doesn't seem to be how anyone would interpret the language at first glance. If that was the intent of the language, why is it worded in this order: "Seniority part-time employees who are receiving an hourly rate higher than set forth above in Section (b), as a result of a Market Rate Adjustment..." It seems to say that IF you're receiving a rate higher than Article 22, Section (b), AS A RESULT of a Market Rate Adjustment, then...</p><p></p><p>So it seems to be referring to employees who are receiving an hourly rate that is higher DUE TO the Market Rate Adjustment. If the language was intended to say what you mentioned, then the wording would be swapped, like this: Seniority part-time employees who are receiving an hourly rate higher than set forth above in Section (b), shall not have their hourly rate reduced AS A RESULT OF A MARKET RATE ADJUSTMENT.</p><p></p><p>At least, I see no reason to make the language unnecessarily difficult to interpret by phrasing it the way it is phrased if the intent was to state what you stated. If the company were to claim that that was the intent of the language, I think any arbitrator would say that it flies in the face of typical reading comprehension to interpret the language in that manner.</p><p></p><p>I can't imagine a situation where a market rate adjustment results in a DECREASE in pay rate (economically speaking, technically it would be possible in a situation where the labor market is inundated with a surplus of workers and a company knows it can pay less and get just as many workers since there will be more than enough people willing to do it for less as long as they, at the very least, have a job). Anytime the words "market rate adjustment" are mentioned it's automatically assumed that the pay rate is increasing, based on a cursory Google search.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Superteeth2478, post: 5143249, member: 73024"] I'm just going to say in advance that I'm typing certain things in all caps to emphasize, not to yell. So now that you mention it I didn't interpret the language that way because of the wording. It just doesn't seem to be how anyone would interpret the language at first glance. If that was the intent of the language, why is it worded in this order: "Seniority part-time employees who are receiving an hourly rate higher than set forth above in Section (b), as a result of a Market Rate Adjustment..." It seems to say that IF you're receiving a rate higher than Article 22, Section (b), AS A RESULT of a Market Rate Adjustment, then... So it seems to be referring to employees who are receiving an hourly rate that is higher DUE TO the Market Rate Adjustment. If the language was intended to say what you mentioned, then the wording would be swapped, like this: Seniority part-time employees who are receiving an hourly rate higher than set forth above in Section (b), shall not have their hourly rate reduced AS A RESULT OF A MARKET RATE ADJUSTMENT. At least, I see no reason to make the language unnecessarily difficult to interpret by phrasing it the way it is phrased if the intent was to state what you stated. If the company were to claim that that was the intent of the language, I think any arbitrator would say that it flies in the face of typical reading comprehension to interpret the language in that manner. I can't imagine a situation where a market rate adjustment results in a DECREASE in pay rate (economically speaking, technically it would be possible in a situation where the labor market is inundated with a surplus of workers and a company knows it can pay less and get just as many workers since there will be more than enough people willing to do it for less as long as they, at the very least, have a job). Anytime the words "market rate adjustment" are mentioned it's automatically assumed that the pay rate is increasing, based on a cursory Google search. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
UPS Cannot Take Away MRA?
Top