Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bubblehead" data-source="post: 1398485" data-attributes="member: 14176">It&#039;s not semantics, it&#039;s clear language.There isn&#039;t 2 ways to read this article.It is not vague or incomplete.&quot;No employee shall be required&quot;.&quot;Except as otherwise provided&quot;You ask: If I am wrong.... how is it.... we have always run air products on that day?That&#039;s easy, Article 40 in the National Master supersedes any forward language contained in any supplement or adendum and clearly provides for premium services on these days and who will perform the work.That&#039;s where &quot;otherwise provided&quot; comes in.Article 40 doesn&#039;t however provide for ground to be delivered on these paid holidays, so Article 15 comes into play and&nbsp; clearly states:A regular seniority employee shall not be required to work on the following eight (8) named holidays-New Year’s Day, MemorialDay, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, day afterThanksgiving Day, Christmas Day and New Year’s Eve-regardlessof the day of the week on which the named holiday falls, providedthey comply with the qualifications set forth hereinafter.BUG, I don&#039;t doubt that if and when this is challenged at various state or JAC panels that it will be shoved straight up our backsides.We agree on this.The language in Article 15 of the Central Region Supplement is good, strong and clearly written and designed to protect the employee and their family during these 8 named holidays.Yet the powers that be elect to jump in bed once again with the company, instead of fighting for the member.Just another reason for a great big shake up in 2016, something needs to give.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bubblehead, post: 1398485, member: 14176"] It's not semantics, it's clear language. There isn't 2 ways to read this article. It is not vague or incomplete. "No employee shall be required". "Except as otherwise provided" You ask: [I]If I am wrong.... how is it.... we have always run air products on that day? [/I] That's easy, Article 40 in the National Master supersedes any forward language contained in any supplement or adendum and clearly provides for premium services on these days and who will perform the work. That's where "otherwise provided" comes in. Article 40 doesn't however provide for ground to be delivered on these paid holidays, so Article 15 comes into play and clearly states: [B][I]A regular seniority employee shall not be required to work on the following eight (8) named holidays-[/I][/B]New Year’s Day, Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, day after Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day and New Year’s Eve-regardless of the day of the week on which the named holiday falls, provided they comply with the qualifications set forth hereinafter. BUG, I don't doubt that if and when this is challenged at various state or JAC panels that it will be shoved straight up our backsides. We agree on this. The language in Article 15 of the Central Region Supplement is good, strong and clearly written and designed to protect the employee and their family during these 8 named holidays. Yet the powers that be elect to jump in bed once again with the company, instead of fighting for the member. Just another reason for a great big shake up in 2016, something needs to give. [/QUOTE]

Verification