I have agreed with them? Well then let me take all these grievances off off deadlock, it would be a lot more simple lol.
Not my opinion. Its a fact based on the financials alone. Our raises are something like 3.3% annualized. Do some research on inflation vs how much the company profited (despite spending billions on stock buy backs) and try not to toss your laptop or phone. And anyone close to retirement around contract changes are likely to vote yes to speed things up and secure whatever new amount the company and union has proposed. I know ours did.Saying it’s a “bad deal” is your opinion and you’re entitled to it you pay dues I’m assuming. 80% of the people didn’t believe that. And “muh pension” was fixed the year before.
In my over 25 years I've never seen anyone talk to so much BS about deadlines and what we're going to negotiate first only to cave on each. Customers (seasoned ones anyway) know what our normal level of hype is. That wasn't it. That, combined with the company calling bluffs and not even showing up at first, caused unnecessary fear that we hadn't seen in decades. And only to end up with allot less than we deserved. And less volume.
So over 25 years you saw substandard contracts and you’re mad because someone tried something different?
I said every contract has its Blindspot, but I would say this contract had more people involved than any in my recent memory.
If the people on those panels think its vague then we are screwed. I haven't talked to a single person that thinks its vague. Because they don't look at it as retaliating for the sake of retaliating. They look at it as loading us down two days because they can't for three days. They don't question what is "excessive" overtime because it's already been established as anything over 9.5 once the third day triggers it. So logic dictates the same applies when a two day penalty is triggered. Maybe we need to start hiring modern English language consultants to the negotiating committees to make sure any such language (or future language) is extra clear and free of scrutiny? The goal of the next contract should be that and to close any loop holes.
Make sure you attend your locals contract proposal meetings. They actually do listen because that’s why we got some of the things we got in this contract.
You can go alllllllll the way back to the beginning of this and see that no one agreed with UPS at any point. The point was that you'll have to PROVE retaliation, and experience shows that "excessive" is not an exact term, even with 9.5 being the standard. Again, I wish you good luck.
I've done that but opted out our for the mail-ins this time because or reps tend to try and go through the proposals as quickly as possible and be done with it. So, when any of us have proposals they act like college professors that want to lecture and not take any questions. But I make them listen anyway. And ours always ends up turning into local disputes concerning feeder runs among the hub and extended centers. Which is funny to me because we don't have a local rider or anything in writing about any of that.
That whole section covering 9.5 needs to be thrown out and start over its total trash. If you tell them you don’t want to work over 9.5 put some teeth in it so you don’t All this getting on some list and then working so many days over 9.5 is some of the worst language in the contractWell, they they are weak and scared to acknowledge/force something that is crystal clear.
Let me put it to you another way. If that is the route the union is taking then they are acknowledging that UPS can work us over 9 1/2 hours two days a week every week with no recourse, despite having two pieces of language in the article that specifically addresses that. If that is the case, WTF even bother putting that in there?
The entire thing started with the language saying they are not to work us over 9.5 the other two days. Then they added a language that included penalty for just that. It’s Crystal clear in both the grammar/language aspect and in regard to context.
If the union agrees with the company on this issue, then that will be one of their biggest failures in recent memory.
I'd be down for scrapping and staring over. Our dispatchers can't seem to distribute the volume right to save their lives. Those MFs watch us everyday/all day and know how much work we need to fulfill those needs. Those of us that don't more seem to get more. The ones that are on the extra work list get less. And most of them won't do anything more than running misloads or grabbing air pickups from those of us that were over dispatched. There should be an overtime sign up list. Meaning....you get more stops. Not to be confused with the BS "extra work list" scam.
I wish we didn’t have to file it to begin with. Once we were on the list it would have more teeth if it was automatic.
I was talking about the company or panel if you representing yourself or anyone else.
I can assure you no one that works for this company or the union has ever, or will ever, tear me a new anything. That isn't false bravado. I just don't put up with BS from anyone. That doesn't mean I'm always right. But a new hole is definitely not being torn metaphorically or literally.
Could you elaborate on what you mean by that?
Uh huh.
When management allows a driver to do “extra” work instead of their route. Such as preload only. Or reduces their route to a partial day so they can still do the extra work without a DOT violation. For example.
Don’t hate because you’re a pushover.
Never heard of it, you have an “extra work” list or something like this?
Doesn't every building?
Not for something like that. The extra work sign-up sheet we have would be for extra work,like Saturday for Monday through Friday drivers or Monday for Tuesday through Saturday drivers. Or EAM work,I don’t know of any reason you would have a right to do something else other than your bid job.
