Laserfiche WebLink
! <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />! <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> <br />I <br />! <br /> <br /> I have reviewed Stanton Group V, both as noted by the Union <br />and the City, and do note that almost every one of the Stanton <br />Group V have some form of premium pay for holidays worked. <br /> <br /> I believe involved here is a situation that requires the <br />City and this arbitrator to consider a gradual introduction int~ <br />the concept of additional holiday pay because almost all of the <br />other Stanton Group V cities provide for some form of additional <br />holiday pay for time worked on a holiday. I note that some, and <br />almost all of them, specify the number of holidays to be covered <br />and some list less~than the number of actual holidays named in the <br />contract, to which will be applied the premium pay. <br /> <br /> I have thus drafted a clause noted in my award which will <br />not go into effect until'January 1, 1990, in order to give the City <br />the opportunity of preparation-for premium pay and that is to be <br />applicable to three primary holidays at this time only - <br />Independence Day, Thanksgiving and Christmas Day. <br /> <br />ISSUE 9 - PROFICIENCY PAY - HOW TO BE PAID - ART. 20 <br /> <br />POSITION OF THE UNION <br /> <br /> The:.uni0n proposes that there be no change from the expired <br />contract language. <br /> <br />POSITION OF THE CITY <br /> The City proposes proficiency pay consistent <br />mandates of the Minnesota Comparable Worth Act. <br /> <br />with the <br /> <br />27 <br /> <br /> <br />