Facts of the Case. The grievant was employed on March 10, 1975, as an unscheduled, temporary, part-time Clerk D in the Customer Services Department. Subsequent to this, she submitted transfer applications to various full-time clerical jobs. In order to qualify herself for consideration to the position of Clerk D-Typist (now Utility Clerk-Typist), on February 2, 1978, she took and passed the required typing test. In May 1980 the grievant was the senior transfer applicant for a position of Utility Clerk-Typist in Xxxxxx District, Sacramento Division. Prior to being awarded this job, the grievant was notified by Company that she would have to requalify her typing skill level. The grievant requested and received a one week's delay in taking the test as she felt a need to brush up her typing skill which had not been utilized in her work as Cashier in the Customer Services Department. When the grievant retook the typing test on May 14, 1980, she failed to achieve a passing grade and was bypassed for the vacant position. The Union filed a grievance contending that Company had no right to require a retest of the grievant's typing skills and that once the grievant had qualified for the job in question, she remained qualified.
Facts of the Case. Xxxxxx Glass, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Schott group (German origin), is a manufacturer of Neutral USP-1 borosilicate glass tubes having unique properties (such as low thermal expansion co-efficient and highly resistant to chemical reaction), therefore are used to make glass ampoules, vials, cartridges, syringes, which *M/x. Xxxxxx Glass India Pvt. Ltd.vs CCI & Ors., decided by COMPAT available at xxxx://xxx.xxxxxx.xxx.xx/upload/PDFs/aprilordersApp2014/02_0 4_14.pdf and Kapoor Glass Pvt. Ltd. vs Xxxxxx Glass India Pvt. Ltd., decided by CCI available at xxxx://xxx.xxx.xxx.xx/May2011/OrderOfCommission/Case22of201 0MainOrder.pdf last accessed on 28th July 2014 1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘CCI’. 2 Hereinafter referred to as ‘COMPAT’. 3 Hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’. are used as packaging material for liquid injectables and drugs by the pharmaceutical industry. These glass tubes conform to the needs of the pharmaceutical companies. Kapoor Glass was the informant before the CCI wherein it alleged Xxxxxx Glass of anti-competitive practices, such as – (a) practices affecting the state of competition in the market for Neutral USP Type I Borosilicate Glass Tubes in India and (b) practices affecting the state of competition in market for downstream product of glass ampoules and other containers. Xxxxxx Glass and Nipro Glass India were the only two companies producing ‘neutral USP-I borosilicate glass tubes’ in India. Here, Xxxxxx Glass was alleged of engaging in anti-competitive practices such as offering discounts in lieu of bank guarantee of Rs.70 lacs from ampoules manufacturers. Further, it was alleged of forcing upon some anti-competitive agreements to the Converters. Application was filed regarding infringement of section 4(2)(a),4(2)(e),3(4), and sought reliefs under section 27 & 33 of the Act. The CCI after finding a prima facie case directed the DG to investigate the matter. The DG’s report stated that the unique characteristics of the glass manufactured by Xxxxxx Glass made it non- substitutable. DG took the territory of India as the relevant geographical market and categorised relevant product market broadly into two, (a) Market for 'Neutral Clear USP-I borosilicate Glass Tubes' (NGC) and (b) Market for 'Neutral Amber USP-I Borosilicate Glass Tubes' (NGA). The CCI found Schott Glass guilty of contravening section 4 of the Act and imposed a penalty of Rs. 5.66 crore (INR 56.6 mn) with a cease and desist order. The CCI ordered to cease and des...
Facts of the Case. 4.1 The applicant company, registered under provisions of the GST Act, engaged in providing manpower supply services based on requirement of the customers and contracts awarded. The applicant submitted that they had been awarded contract for supply of manpower, on acceptance of their tender by Karnataka State Rural Development and Panchayat Raj University, Gadag, Karnataka and consequently the applicant entered into an agreement. They also provide similar services to Karnataka State Warehouse Corporation, under the following terms and conditions.
Facts of the Case. Effective January 1, 2011, the parties agreed through General Negotiations to the establishment of a new beginner’s level classification: Service Representative I. The wage rate schedule for the classification consists of four steps: Start, 18 months, 3-year, and 54 months. Employees hired into this classification were placed at the starting wage step. The Clerical Hiring Rate Guidelines of Exhibit A provide for the hiring of employees with “directly related clerical job experience” at other than the starting wage rate for certain entry level classifications. When the Service Representative I classification was negotiated, the parties agreed that the Hiring Guidelines were applicable. At the time this grievance was filed, the Contact Center management was defining “directly related clerical job experience” as having held the Customer Services Representative classification at PG&E within the previous 12 months, and with at least 18 months of PG&E Contact Center work experience. Only individuals who met these criteria would be placed at the 18 month wage step.
