I agree, and it makes it harder to prove.
You don't have to prove anything! You get paid if you go over twice now!!! PERIOD!!!!!
Oh yeah, I forgot lol
For the record, I haven’t asked one management person what their opinion is on this lol. I’m sure there opinion will be completely opposite of mine. I have asked other stewards. and BAs, and some people I trust on this website their opinion. I’m glad the language is there. It certainly gives us an argument, although I do not believe it’s very clear….yet
Literally not one manager in my building even knows that language exists, much less has an opinion on it.
What? LOL. No one is claiming we should get paid penalty for every day over 9.5. But over 9.5 is clearly excessive wether its paying out penalty or not. The third day trigger isn't meant to be a qualifier for whats excessive. Its only the qualifier for the penalty. And now it is supposed to include the other two days. It was meant to add teeth to the previous language.
I don't like the word either but when a driver is routinely (with a paper trail of grievances going back months) worked over 9.5 hours two days per week then it should be very hard to hide behind vagueness.
This is definitely different than what you've been spouting, and sets a foundation for a retaliation grievance. Not at all the point you've been pushing.
That should be what every local in every region sites at every level to make it rock solid language.
What Vaguness? Why would anyone need multiple grievances for something so clear?
My point is that the language states we are to get paid penalty for those two days. Me even making the point about the paper trail was in direct response to how several of you have stated retaliation as the reason the language is faulty.
Those people were worked over 11 hours the other two days and had already filed 9.5 and gotten paid.
Exactly! But if you people that are supposed to be on our side are doing your jobs then we don't need a paper trail. Now you're getting it!
You obviously didn’t get the sarcasm
Oh i got. And you missed the point. Which is that we shouldn't need a paper trail. But, unfortunately, with you guys at the helm that might be necessary. Contract language is supposed to be settled, signed, and put into practice before it goes into affect. Not on the fly after at the mercy of company man minded individuals.
OK gotcha well, I’m sorry but I gotta get back to you being a company, man. Have a good day.
If the excessive overtime is assigned in order to retaliate against the driver for opting onto the 9.5 list.
So that means you guys have already set a bad precedent by letting management dictate that we are required to work 11 hours in order to qualify? Sounds like extra contractual agreements to me. That undermines the actual language to boot.
No, obviously you reading comprehension isn’t very strong. The other grievances are deadlocked.
