 |
Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested)
Author: JWL
Date: 06-03-2010 - 18:56
OPRRMS Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Robert, et al, your questions are way out of my
> area of expertise, so I looked into it and here's
> what I found out:
>
> On the Union Pacific, whenever a crew is relieved
> following a "Critical Incident", CMS will place
> you in "OS CI" status. You will be paid, usually
> for 3 days but it depends upon the specifics of
> the incident, a Basic Day for each calendar day
> you're off, at the rate of pay for the service you
> were performing when the "Critical Incident"
> occurred, which counts as a Compensated Day
> against your guarantee (i.e, the same as like
> taking a PL day). Thus, the higher your
> guarantee, the bigger the "hit" so to speak.
>
> The carrier takes the position that it was a
> choice you made to take the time off. Keep in
> mind that this is the UP's position. If your
> Local Chairman can do something for you, go for
> it!
Appears management found language in the aagreement to not compensate employees when they performed no service. Much athe same as the LC's do on some of their phony claims for employees to get paid for jurisdictional disputes.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Robert, et al, your questions are way out of my
> area of expertise, so I looked into it and here's
> what I found out:
>
> On the Union Pacific, whenever a crew is relieved
> following a "Critical Incident", CMS will place
> you in "OS CI" status. You will be paid, usually
> for 3 days but it depends upon the specifics of
> the incident, a Basic Day for each calendar day
> you're off, at the rate of pay for the service you
> were performing when the "Critical Incident"
> occurred, which counts as a Compensated Day
> against your guarantee (i.e, the same as like
> taking a PL day). Thus, the higher your
> guarantee, the bigger the "hit" so to speak.
>
> The carrier takes the position that it was a
> choice you made to take the time off. Keep in
> mind that this is the UP's position. If your
> Local Chairman can do something for you, go for
> it!
Appears management found language in the aagreement to not compensate employees when they performed no service. Much athe same as the LC's do on some of their phony claims for employees to get paid for jurisdictional disputes.
