Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="100%ORIONComplianceGuy" data-source="post: 5916524" data-attributes="member: 109837">That part of the article is about working over 9.5 hours. Anything over 9.5 is excessive. The new language states we&#039;re to get paid penalty for the other two days. Plain English. The only issue I have with the process is there may people like you involved farther up the process.&nbsp; There are plenty that see the language for what it is. An obvious payout for two days over 9.5. Then there are those that are blinded for some reason and end up siding with management. I guess you&#039;re only die hard about the language when your members throw you soft balls. Whatever, company man. If people like you who&#039;s handling it for us then we are doomed.&nbsp; I don&#039;t know why that is so hard to understand. It should be &quot;interpreted&quot; as such all the way to the top. Hopefully, that is the plan. But when you have so many of our guys sounding like management (who definitely knows the intent but always fights regardless) and defeatists it is very concerning.&nbsp; The intent is clear. Context is everything. But none of it matters if we have more company man minded people involved, such as some of those in this thread, once it gets through the system. Either way....we&#039;re probably screwed.&nbsp; Best contract ever!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="100%ORIONComplianceGuy, post: 5916524, member: 109837"] That part of the article is about [U][B]working over 9.5 hours[/B][/U]. Anything over 9.5 is excessive. The new language states we're to get paid penalty for [U][B]the other two days[/B][/U]. Plain English. The only issue I have with the process is there may people like you involved farther up the process. There are plenty that see the language for what it is. An obvious payout for two days over 9.5. Then there are those that are blinded for some reason and end up siding with management. I guess you're only die hard about the language when your members throw you soft balls. Whatever, company man. If people like you who's handling it for us then we are doomed. I don't know why that is so hard to understand. It should be "interpreted" as such all the way to the top. Hopefully, that is the plan. But when you have so many of our guys sounding like management (who definitely knows the intent but always fights regardless) and defeatists it is very concerning. The intent is clear. Context is everything. But none of it matters if we have more company man minded people involved, such as some of those in this thread, once it gets through the system. Either way....we're probably screwed. Best contract ever! [/QUOTE]

Verification