LdiJ;3302665]One thing that I would like to point out to everyone is that the contract says "up to 5%"...and its based on performance. That means that it could be anywhere from 0% to 5%. Therefore, even if one were to make a compelling argument (and I don't think its possible) that it should be 5% of the annual salary every quarter, the company could simply get around that by making the percentage smaller.
not disagreeing on the less than 5% thing. Whether there is something in the contract that gives some some calculation is not known. Without it, as to a compelling argument:
Bonus
"All Company full time and regular part time employees that are a part of the CBA will participate in a quarterly bonus program. The quarterly Company bonus program will be an incentive bonus based on an individual's performance with each such employee eligible for up to a five percent (5%) bonus of such employee's base annual salary"
what more do you need? The written word states an employee is eligible for a bonus every quarter of up to 5% of their annual income. The statement is clear. The intent is the only thing in question.
One of the key factors in protecting an employee's job is the profitability of their employer. I can think of only a handful of industries where it would be feasible that an employer could afford to pay out a potential additional 20% per year in employee bonuses, without it effecting the number of employees it could afford to hire.
seriously? If the company didn't figure that bonus pay in just like they did all the other employee costs, then shame on them.
but as to not being able to pay a 20% bonus of an employees wages? I know quite a few that could... if they wanted to.
