Retroactive checks

[Bubblehead]

Screwing them over? Seems pretty clear to me. They never worked under the contract that gave raises

Not trying to validate it, it's in the contract. You have to work under the new contract, not just old

"All economic improvements are retroactive".

Definition of RETROACTIVE

 

[Bubblehead]

Not trying to validate it, it's in the contract. You have to work under the new contract, not just old

Do you know what article?

No, it is in the terms of the contract "extension"....which were never published to the membership.

But what was made public is "All economic improvements are retroactive".

 

[Brownslave688]

"All economic improvements are retroactive".

Definition of RETROACTIVE

It only becomes retroactive AFTER the contract is finalized. If you’re not employed when it becomes retroactive then it stands to reason you don’t get that.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

No, it is in the terms of the contract "extension"....which were never published to the membership.

But what was made public is "All economic improvements are retroactive".

Then there is an agreement between the company and union about eligibilty for back pay being contingent on active employment upon implementation of the contract?

 

[Bubblehead]

It only becomes retroactive AFTER the contract is finalized. If you’re not employed when it becomes retroactive then it stands to reason you don’t get that.

That doesn't mesh with the definition of "retroactive".

Definition of RETROACTIVE

 

[Bubblehead]

Then there is an agreement between the company and union about eligibilty for back pay being contingent on active employment upon implementation of the contract?

I see no reason to make that assumption, nor does "All economic improvement are retroactive" suggest that is the case?

 

[zubenelgenubi]

I see no reason to make that assumption, nor does "All economic improvement are retroactive" suggest that is the case?

You mentioned the terms of the contract extension in response to @Rutherford B Hays' post about the requirement of still being employed to get retro pay being in the contract, and I was just trying to clarify what you meant. If such an agreement exists, even if it was not made public, that would change things.

 

[Brownslave688]

I see no reason to make that assumption, nor does "All economic improvement are retroactive" suggest that is the case?

Remember the president has the power to do whatever he wants

 

[Bubblehead]

You mentioned the terms of the contract extension in response to @Rutherford B Hays' post about the requirement of still being employed to get retro pay being in the contract, and I was just trying to clarify what you meant. If such an agreement exists, even if it was not made public, that would change things.

Those who separated prior to ratification worked under the same extension as those who didn't.

Unless it is specifically outlined in the extension itself, I don't see how this anybody can assume anything here???

....yet they do, wholesale.

 

[Bubblehead]

Remember the president has the power to do whatever he wants

Not in this scenario, not now, unless it was already documented in the "extension".

 

[Brownslave688]

Those who separated prior to ratification worked under the same extension as those who didn't.

Unless it is specifically outlined in the extension itself, I don't see how this anybody can assume anything here???

....yet they do, wholesale.

Because that’s how it was last time?

 

[Bubblehead]

Because that’s how it was last time?

That isn't my recollection....???

I have been as active as most on this site since 2007, and I don't recall this being an issue or a thread topic back in 2014.

....yet there are months worth of helpers and dues withheld threads annually.

 

[Bubblehead]

If I had to guess, there will be many live checks issued to separated employees, that ultimately sit in a drawer at most hubs for 180 days, before being discarded uncashed.

That's what I would do if I were the Company???

 

[zubenelgenubi]

If I had to guess, there will be many live checks issued to separated employees, that ultimately sit in a drawer at most hubs for 180 days, before being discarded uncashed.

That's what I would do if I were the Company???

That creates all sorts of accounting headaches. It'd be better to not bother to cut the checks unless someone comes asking

 

[Driverwithabeard572]

So apparently payroll crapped the bed big time and checks won't be out until next month now. There are guys and girls in progression that got $3 raises based on some formula that aren't supposed to get a raise. So the extra they got last week has to be paid back and several of their checks are still showing raises this week that aren't supposed to be there

 

[CoffeeStainedUniform]

"All economic improvements are retroactive".

Definition of RETROACTIVE

If the new contract had never been ratified, none of us would be owed backpay at all. The contract only covers current employees. Those who quit/fired are in the same position as if the contract had never been implemented.

 

[Bubblehead]

If the new contract had never been ratified, none of us would be owed backpay at all. The contract only covers current employees. Those who quit/fired are in the same position as if the contract had never been implemented.

If my Aunt Sally had a dick, she would be my Uncle Charlie???

None of us were working in a "state of limbo", we were working under a defined, but indefinite extension.
I just don't see how you can make that assumption?

Let me pose to you a parallel scenario; if you have 3 weeks of vacation scheduled for later this year, but quit before those week get here, is the Company obligated to pay you out for those weeks?

I say they are and they do.

 

[CoffeeStainedUniform]

...None of us were working in a "state of limbo", we were working under a defined, but indefinite extension...

Exactly my point. We worked under the contract that had my pay rate at $21/hour. The 2013 contract was extended, otherwise I have a week of 'qualifying' to be put on the 9.5 list to grieve.

 

[Bubblehead]

Exactly my point. We worked under the contract that had my pay rate at $21/hour. The 2013 contract was extended, otherwise I have a week of 'qualifying' to be put on the 9.5 list to grieve.

"All economic improvements are retroactive".

 

[CoffeeStainedUniform]

"All economic improvements are retroactive".

I guess this is why lawyers are paid so much. I think we just disagree on the contract theory to be applied. Both arguments have some merit but not worth us debating anymore. I hope you weren't caught on the wrong side of this one.