depends what the meaning of "is" is
Excellent post. These companies will agree to "give" wage increases but always try to include language and fine print that protects them from doing so:ranting::attention:
The things we need to look for in the new contract vary by personal opinion, but the guiding factor should be LIMITATION.
If there really is a proposal for temp $14 hr workers, are they limited to summer months only when we are very busy? Does it require that ALL classification employees in that region be recalled from layoff before they can be hired? Does it limit the number to a percentage of the work force? Any other factors we should consider?
If they want newbies at 80% for 4 yrs and thats okay w/you, fine. But, does it limit the number to a percentage of the work force? Will they realign the runs at the expense of full wage drivers, so they 80% drivers get the longer runs? Are drivers that move from one barn to another and rehire subject to this? Any other factors we should consider?
If they fund $1 to health and welfare and this is okay with you, fine. Are they going to absorb any additional increase in overall funding costs to maintain this over the life of the contract or will this be a loss of benefit in year 2 or 3? What other factors should we consider?
The biggest concern in this contract is not what the contract says, its what the company had in mind when they bargained for it. The company pays accountants and lawyers tons of money to figure ways to save millions in employee related expenses, then write them into obscure language that they can bargain for. The unions job is to translate the obscure language back into those ways and bargain against it, while trying to get more benefits for us. Unfortunately, our union leaders seem to have found it easier to ignore this portion of their duty. Instead, they seem to play on affiability of their relationships with the workers, to get a free pass on their obligations, at our expense.
