I am sure you are right that it is not worth the effort. Unfortunately it allows sups to work all the time by just working 10 minutes here and 10 minutes there.
Or it could be that the union and most of the few people who actually vote, agreed to language that allows them to get away with it:
"in cases of unexpected absentees or to prevent service failures, supervisors may perform such bargaining unit work as necessary to complete that day's (or night's) work schedule."
Southern 46.3.A
One of our Supervisors is so doped up on depression medication she can barely speak yet alone supervise. One more worthless passenger on my ship along for the ride.
Or it could be that the union and most of the few people who actually vote, agreed to language that allows them to get away with it:
"in cases of unexpected absentees or to prevent service failures, supervisors may perform such bargaining unit work as necessary to complete that day's (or night's) work schedule."
Southern 46.3.A
Ok....I was going to point out the language about supervisors working, which has its own specific language. The post was about too much flow, not about absenteeism, I think.
Ok....I was going to point out the language about supervisors working, which has its own specific language. The post was about too much flow, not about absenteeism, I think.
Perhaps, but many places have unexpected absenteeism on a daily basis, not to mention the "or to prevent service failures" language. I'm not saying supervisor working grievances can't be won in the South, all I'm saying is the article I posted is perhaps some of the worst language in the entire contract... and a lot of people voted for it.
Or it could be that the union and most of the few people who actually vote, agreed to language that allows them to get away with it:
"in cases of unexpected absentees or to prevent service failures, supervisors may perform such bargaining unit work as necessary to complete that day's (or night's) work schedule."
Southern 46.3.A
Perhaps, but many places have unexpected absenteeism on a daily basis, not to mention the "or to prevent service failures" language. I'm not saying supervisor working grievances can't be won in the South, all I'm saying is the article I posted is perhaps some of the worst language in the entire contract... and a lot of people voted for it.
Absolutely some of the worst language....if it is abused. The language should be tied to language that states the company has to exhaust all laid off employees first, and there shall be a list that is maintained. This language may of been in your contract a long time and isn't "new" any more. Once a contract is in place a while, only the new language seems to get any attention.