Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Reservists lose out
The Hammond TImes ^ | January 29, 2005 | Andrea Holecek

Posted on 01/31/2005 4:21:43 AM PST by southlake_hoosier

Gary Cooley, a steelworker at Gary Works No. 2 caster, feels like he's been cheated.

Cooley, a veteran steelworker is on the job at the U.S. Steel Corp.'s plant for 50 work-weeks and 40 weekends a year; the other two weeks and 12 weekends he's on duty with U.S. Naval Reserve Unit NMCB26.

A member of the United Steelworkers of America Local 1014, Cooley, 51, of Valparaiso, works swing shifts. If he's scheduled to spend a weekend with the Navy at its International Guard Reserve Base in Selfridge, Mich., he's been allowed to make up the time. But active duty and the two weeks' annual training are another matter.

With more than 28 years in the Reserve, Cooley's military pay is more than enough to cover the money he lost when U.S. Steel stopped paying him for the seven months was called to active duty after 9-11.

The union's labor agreement stipulates that the company will pay a maximum of two weeks a year for those on military duty. And it doesn't allow those on military duty to earn profit-sharing for the periods when they're away.

Therefore, Cooley lost out on some profit-sharing funds when he was on duty in Germany last summer. During the period, U.S. Steel paid the steelworkers a record profit sharing of $5.69 an hour for up to 480 hours or a maximum of $2,731.12 for the quarter. Two weeks -- 80 hours -- less means a loss of $455.20.

"It was only a couple of hundred dollars, but I feel like I'm being treated like a second-class citizen because I'm serving my country. I feel the company should pay me just like the guy I work with every day.''

For Cooley and others in the same situation, the loss of profit-sharing soon may change.

Tom Conway, chief negotiator for the union and secretary of the Basic Steel Conference, said it's a "crazy situation'' and one that needs to be corrected, especially because the company gives the union a pool of money to be divided among its members. The union should determine how that happens, he said.

"It's lousy,'' Conway said Friday. "Right now, profit-sharing doesn't cover reservists and activists. We want to give them 40 hours just like they had worked.''

There needs to be a differentiation between a steelworker who joins the Armed Forces voluntarily and the one who is called up to serve their country during a crisis, he said.

"We're working on it," Conway said.

A U.S. Steel spokesman said she couldn't reach anyone for comment Friday.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: Indiana
KEYWORDS: military; navy; reserves; steel; steelworker; union
I believe our military deserves all our support all the time. In this day and time, it is hard to believe anyone or any company or any union would take anything away from a person involved in the military.
1 posted on 01/31/2005 4:21:43 AM PST by southlake_hoosier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: southlake_hoosier
I believe our military deserves all our support all the time. In this day and time, it is hard to believe anyone or any company or any union would take anything away from a person involved in the military.

I didn't get paid a bonus when I deployed for 9 mos. I got my job when I came back. That's pretty much the deal as I understand it. You deploy, you swap civilian pay for Army pay, you get back and your employer is obliged to give you your job back plus any promotion you would have had. I'm not aware that any employer is obliged to pay you a bonus. FWIW I lost about 2/3 of my salary when I was activated for 9 mos and I knew that going in. No regrets here.

2 posted on 01/31/2005 4:52:41 AM PST by 12B
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: southlake_hoosier

Does not read like the Steel Company is taking anything away from the reservist. The union needs a better negotiator.


3 posted on 01/31/2005 4:54:30 AM PST by Racehorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: southlake_hoosier
The union's labor agreement stipulates that the company will pay a maximum of two weeks a year for those on military duty. And it doesn't allow those on military duty to earn profit-sharing for the periods when they're away.

Well, well, well....

4 posted on 01/31/2005 5:11:00 AM PST by Angry Enough
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: southlake_hoosier
it is hard to believe anyone or any company or any union would take anything away from a person involved in the military.

Our major companies are publically held. For all we know, their senior investors may sympathize with our enemies.
5 posted on 01/31/2005 5:11:11 AM PST by ARCADIA (Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 12B

Thank you for your service.


6 posted on 01/31/2005 6:08:46 AM PST by marty60
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson