NYer
Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2010
- Messages
- 4,167
- Reaction score
- 905
WeAAsles said:So under your scenario a guy gets in over his head (yes with family obligations) he buys a house and car that are really too expensive for him to afford. And he prefers that his wife doesn't work and stays home to be June Cleaver.
You're basically saying that I should step aside and let him have my OT because he made his choice? Maybe I shouldn't sign up for the rest of my career because I "chose" not to have the same things (priorities) as him?
Well tell you what. Here's my priority. When we get our JCBA I'm buying a 2016 Yellow Mustang Convertible (My priority or problem) and I just might want to start working OT to make those payments a little lighter?
What do you think? Should I leave those hours alone because YOU might again have different priorities?
If you want to do that go ahead.
But at the same time, it will help the Member that has a sick family Member, or a Member that is sick himself and needs to pay for medication, maybe it is someone that is taking care of sick parent, or someone that just want to fix up their kitchen. Whatever the reason is, they each will have the same reasonable chance to get the OT they may need.
You may choose to think of yourself and the "hogs," but the trick of union man is to think of the whole rather than just certain parts.
You don't like equalization because of the "hogs," so you've made yourself very clear.
Funny thing is that you also advocate for geographic pay, which goes against your argument in this post.
For equalization, you don't want to pay for the choices others make with their lives. On the other hand, you're perfectly OK with having some Members in the country receive less pay so others can receive more even though their choice is to work in a high expense area. Quite ironic.
The biggest proponents of the OT equalization that I have ever come across work in New York, by choice. (according to your logic)