This isn't about whether the hazard pay cut was justified. IMHO it wasn't justified. The problem is that someone who didnt know hazard pay was in place could s

This isn't about whether the hazard pay cut was justified. IMHO it wasn't justified. The problem is that someone who didnt know hazard pay was in place could see the headline and infer that a reduction in pay from the normal rate happened. You could say that's unscrupulous on the reader's part, but it's equally unscrupulous of the publication to use a potentially misleading title.