1 / 3

Merit Pay Proposal in Detroit Typographical Union: Legal Implications at Impasse

Explore the legal implications of implementing a merit pay proposal in Detroit Typographical Union at impasse, based on a ruling in McClatchey. The proposal includes minimum 1% increase, averages 4% in yr 1 and 3% in yrs 2-3, based on employee evaluations. Learn about the employer's negotiation rights and the importance of setting standards for merit pay.

isaura
Télécharger la présentation

Merit Pay Proposal in Detroit Typographical Union: Legal Implications at Impasse

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Detroit Typographical Union • McClatchey: an employer may not unilaterally implement a standardless merit pay proposal at impasse • No details or plan provided • Merit pay proposal in Detroit Typo not “standardless” • Minimum Increase of 1% • Increases average of 4% in yr 1; 3% yrs. 2-3 • Based on annual ee eval process (100 page appendix) • Resort to grievance procedure

  2. Detroit Typographical Union (cont.) • Merit pay a mandatory subject of bargaining • Employer may negotiate for discretion in pay provided it is not full and complete discretion, as found unlawful in McClatchey • Must be some standards • Legal to implement merit pay proposal • At impasse as er had not violated 8(a)(5)

  3. Key Quote • “Management’s decision to propose a discretionary merit pay system – and to insist on retaining legitimate bounds of discretion – cannot (except for the limited McClatchy exception) be treated differently than other mandatory subjects of bargaining; it cannot be vetoed by the Board.”

More Related