Here is a simple illustration of what I will euphemistically call the no-cut-in-pay fallacy.
Let's say the current wage is $10 an hour for a 40 hour standard week. Which would be a better outcome of contract negotiations: a 37.5-hour week at $10.67 an hour or a 32-hour week at $11.25 an hour? The wage increase for the 32-hour week would be twice as large as for the 37.5-hour week and the reduction in working time would be more than three times larger. But the 37.5-hour week meets the "no cut in pay" criteria and the 32-hour week doesn't. The Sandwichman __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
