0% or 1% raise

A source claimed that Samuelsen would accept the ‘0% raise for the future contract of 2012 so long as we maintain what we have gained’. Why would you accept no raise? now what motivated Samuelsen to that idea?

Is Samuelsen out of step? is he aware of what wage policies that would need to satisfy the rank and file? is he aware our work offers less flexibility of hours, work pace, and involves higher level of injury and other work place hazards? and we are the most productive employees.

Maybe he lives in Utopia and is not affected like the rank and file with the cost of living increases or inflation maybe in his thinking he considers us affluent, rich or the truly ‘filthy’ rich maybe with nannies, private school, the choice of a Porsche or Mercedes and a piece of original artwork maybe he is not aware we live paycheck to paycheck, that is a definition of poverty. why he would deny the rank and file a raise? we would like to know why

He would come with an explanation that he fought against the employer and instead of a zero he got something. He completely ignores the fact that we are like all other employees, desire higher wages. How does Samuelsen decide to accept 0% as the wage to demand in bargaining? The rank and file should be primarily responsible for formulating the wage policy. This 0% or 1% will not maximize the union membership and its well-being

The rank and file knows the exact limits of what is obtainable and what is not, so Samuelsen has no discretion