The union protested the compliance of the incentive administration language of the basic labor agreement. Changes in equipment and the elimination of one crew member resulted in the loss of incentive earning for the grievants. The company contended that the new featured reduced work requirements; thus, the incentive application was applied properly. The union argued that the new standards should have provided the same earnings opportunities. The board determined initially that the incentive application should be liberalized by 2% to reflect the changes retroactive to July 1, 1967. The union protested that the date should have been retroactive to December 3, 1966. The board determined no evidence was provided to suggest the retroactivity date should have been adjusted. Award: split-2% liberalization sustained retroactive to July 1, 1967, appeal to change retroactivity date denied. USS-6684-S (Sylvester Garrett, 1/22/71) (Nature of grievance-contract administration) (Reason for grievance(s) - Incentive application, incentive rates, incentive administration).
United States Steel Corporation
Gary Works (Gary Sheet & Tin Division)
United Steelworkers of America
Grievance 1 Date
Grievance 1 Step
September 1, 1965, Basic Labor Agreement
Contract Provisions Involved
Sections 9(c)(2), 9(c)4 of Basic Labor Agreement
Arbitration, Contact Interpretation, Incentive Administration, Incentive Compliance, Incentive Rate, Offset Earnings, Failure to Comply
Sustained in part
Dispute Resolution and Arbitration
Garrett, Sylvester, "United States Steel Corporation Gary Works (Gary Sheet & Tin Division) and United Steelworkers of America Local Union 1066" (1971). Arbitration Cases. 15.