We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Work Dilemma, need a little advice.

I would definitely file. You worked those hours and it's stated in the contract. One of the main purposes of a union is to ensure fair compensation for labor and to protect against things like this happening. Plus, money is money.
 
jspangs said:
I want to start by saying thanks for chimming in but I'd prefer if this doesn't turn into a union vs non union argument.

Anyways, last night I got called out to do some work and was told they need some guys and they are going to pay "premium" pay. So I say sure. We meet at 9 pm last night then drive 4 hours to the hotel, getting in at 1:30 am and we have to be back at work @7 am. Now I asked first thing what we were getting paid and no one answered.

Our Union Contract clearly states that when being called out without 8 hours of rest that whole day is to be paid at Double Time. At the end of the day, our GF came and told us we were not getting that.

The difference between the two is roughly $500. And this will be they second time this month they've screwed me out of money. The first time being $300.

So my question for you guys is do you think its worth the time/hassle of filing a grievance for what is owed? I'm only going to be working for this company for another 3 weeks or so and I don't know if worth it.

But I also feel that every time a company gets away with not having to following the contract gets us closer to not having one at all. They only use the parts that are convenient for them.

Sorry for the long post and thanks for reading.
Click to expand...


I'll ask a question or-2 out of curiosity. It's not meant to be a challenge since I don't know what line of work you're in, and have limited experience with union agreements and routines . The "8 hour rest" rule; what is the purpose of it? Is it a safety-related rule?

Another question: Who notified you there was going to be an offer for work and at "premium" pay? Does this typically come from the company, or a union rep?
 
Management Here (i.e. I was a supervisor/manager) - file the grievance. From the sounds of it you are entitled to the pay. I know if I was in your situation, I would certainly file a grievance.

Also, it is so bush league for management to retaliate against anyone that files a grievance. That just is not right!
 
subvet said:
I'll ask a question or-2 out of curiosity. It's not meant to be a challenge since I don't know what line of work you're in, and have limited experience with union agreements and routines . The "8 hour rest" rule; what is the purpose of it? Is it a safety-related rule?

Another question: Who notified you there was going to be an offer for work and at "premium" pay? Does this typically come from the company, or a union rep?
Click to expand...

I start by answering your question as best as I can. Safety has a lot to due with that rule. I work, with live powerlines, it can be anything up to 20k volts I'm holding in my hands, so you really dont need anybody over tired in the air with you. But it's also to keep the companies from taking advantage of the workers. When my grandpa was working in the field 40 some years ago the companies would have the guys working 25-30 straight with no compensation.

Well my boss called me and said they were paying premium before I left. I guess, it's my fault for not asking premium was. Regardless of what Premium pay is to them. We still only had 5.5 hours off the clock.

I will add an update. I have talked to the union hall and they are dealing with the company. I have since left this company, this situation compounded with my paycheck being late and short every week this month was enough for me. I can say that it's probably last time I ever work for this company again.
 
Good on you for filing the grievance. If they've shorted you $800 in the last month alone what have they done to others and how much does that add upto money in there pocket ($800 x 50 employees is 40k in their pocket)

I would have filed it in a heart beat as I've filed over much dumber things than this. The point of the contract is to make sure the employees get what is due to them, safety standards are being followed and both parties know what is expected from the other.

Good luck with the new company.
 
jspangs said:
I start by answering your question as best as I can. Safety has a lot to due with that rule. I work, with live powerlines, it can be anything up to 20k volts I'm holding in my hands, so you really dont need anybody over tired in the air with you. But it's also to keep the companies from taking advantage of the workers. When my grandpa was working in the field 40 some years ago the companies would have the guys working 25-30 straight with no compensation.

Well my boss called me and said they were paying premium before I left. I guess, it's my fault for not asking premium was. Regardless of what Premium pay is to them. We still only had 5.5 hours off the clock.

I will add an update. I have talked to the union hall and they are dealing with the company. I have since left this company, this situation compounded with my paycheck being late and short every week this month was enough for me. I can say that it's probably last time I ever work for this company again.
Click to expand...

OK, thanks for the insight. My personal opinion is that; if the rule is primarily related to safety, then conditions around pay rates shouldn't be part of the equation at all, as it could incentivize workers to work tired. However, I also agree there should be dis-incentives for the company to take advantage of workers, especially if it can cause accidents. It's an issue with the way the contract is written and there are probably a whole lot of ways to skin this cat contractually. I don't want to take the thread there so wont take that discussion any further.

Based on everything else you've articulated, I'd encourage filing a grievance as well. Sounds like your crew was scammed for the sake of getting some high visibility work done.
 
subvet said:
OK, thanks for the insight. My personal opinion is that; if the rule is primarily related to safety, then conditions around pay rates shouldn't be part of the equation at all, as it could incentivize workers to work tired. However, I also agree there should be dis-incentives for the company to take advantage of workers, especially if it can cause accidents. It's an issue with the way the contract is written and there are probably a whole lot of ways to skin this cat contractually. I don't want to take the thread there so wont take that discussion any further.

Based on everything else you've articulated, I'd encourage filing a grievance as well. Sounds like your crew was scammed for the sake of getting some high visibility work done.
Click to expand...

In my experience the premium pay in this case is more about incenting personnel to participate in storm work & therefore limit outage times especially when the work requires overnight and/or long duration travel or occurs during traditional free time (weekends, holidays etc.). Mutual aid amongst utilities and the fact some organizations contribute resources more readily or on a larger scale than others is a pretty controversial topic in the industry currently.

Also in my experience the language in most union contracts in the utility business (IBEW especially) is very clear about what pay is appropriate for what work hours, shifts etc.. A grievance seems very appropriate. It is usually the work rules and application of the work rules that are much more grey and open to interpretation or in many cases where some give & take can happen between the bargaining unit & the company(s).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top