Originally Posted by
Jughead135
Simple:
- If/when the company elects to drag its feet during Section 6 (this or any other), they will feel additional pressure regarding the non-contract DL employees: do they give them raises to keep them happy (thus giving us a raise, while they're trying to hold our feet to the fire)? Or, do they risk unhappy work groups across the operation in order to withhold raises from us? Sooner or later, they have to give those raises, which (in this scenario) would trend our pay up toward the industry norm.
- Between negotiations, if there are significant gains made at other properties, the same non-contract raises will keep us moving in the right direction. Say we'd signed TA1 into being <*shudder*>.... The "new normal" being way above us, any raise to the non-cons would generate a raise for us, despite having just signed a 3.5 year contract.
- At all times, it can provide incremental pay bumps (we saw two of them last year). This is an unquestionable goodness to have--it can only help us. Why on earth would we want to give it up??
Happy to have a lob for a change!
It might be a lob if you choose to ignore the other given that No voters are assuring us is not at risk - full retro pay.
For if full retro is a given and industry average rates are also a given what difference does all the above that you posted make?
I am being told to vote No because the pay rates are a given and all we have to do to get full retro is demand it.
Well OK if that were indeed true - we are going to get full retro to industry average rates who cares if the company drags this out?
All 3.B.4 does is get us to industry average rates that the No voters are assuring us is an absolute certainty.
So either full retro and industry average rates are not a given or they are a given.
If they are not a given then 3.B.4 could help but since we are guaranteed full retro to industry average rates then we don't need 3.B.4.
You cant have it both ways.
The very argument that full retro pay to industry average rates is a given makes 3.B.4 unnecessary. Or is full retro with ensuing industry average rates all the way back to our amendable date not guaranteed with all the uncertainty that a No vote brings?
Scoop