......I want a retirement the same as the mechanics (IAM) get along with that annuity.......trade that for more part-timers & pt jobs and less ft jobs.
Contract - What do you want and what would you give up for that?
- Thread starter Catatonic
- Start date
HBGPreloader
Well-Known Member
As a part-timer, with no intentions of going full-time, I would like to be able to give up my health benefits for higher pay.
.....No No No........if that was an option the ft people would never be able to sustain the current benefits. what you suggest will never happen due to the pt people % never voting. ft always trumps pt.
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
I have suggested this several times in the past. It makes sense, especially for those employees who do not plan on making this their career and who have benefits in place already.
island1fox
Well-Known Member
Just to kick around a few ideas for any open minded people.Upstate has mentioned quite a few times a two tier driver rate.
I agree but with a little more detail.
Major disagreement today is the forced overtime issue.
Much of this is related to cost initiatives and staying competetive to fx ground.
Solution that both Company and Union should be able to live and grow by :
1. Strong limit on Ot over nine hours (most drivers would love a little ot)
2. A Second driver rate for Residential deliveries --in the area of 12-to 15$ per hour.
3. Develop real combination jobs with half day -Unload commercial drivers p/u -gas vechicle -load resi"s
deliver resi's---take one hour lunch --work four to five hours midnight hub.
Allows union to extremely limit overtime and create decent paying full time jobs with seniority list to progress to regular driver as positions open.
Allows the company to remain competetive with Fedx ground, re-price and take new business, help to create less tunover with Staffing of Mid night hubs.
The additional miles and gas would be offset by driver rate,delivering residentials when people are home(less handling and cost of send agains)and by gaining business away from non-union fed x.
The union wins and the company wins---growth and security for both.
I am sure contract language could easily be developed that both Union and Company could agree.
Sometimes it takes a little out of the box thinking to solve problems for both the Union and the Company that will keep the employees secure and a little more satisfied.
What say you ??
island1fox
Well-Known Member
hembone,
At least think in the box:
1. Customers would go bonkers with super late deliveries --
2. Mid night hubs have to be staffed !!
They would go bonkers allright. Last Christmas drivers were running out of hours and the supervisors had to finish the routes. My supervisor had a complaint called in on him because he had a signature required and sheeted it as not in 1 at 11:30 pm and the lady said she was at home watching the late show. One of the supervisors didn't finish up until 3:30 in the morning. This is a true story, I'm not making this up.
island1fox
Well-Known Member
Christmas !!!! No offense intended , remember I said open minded people.
Christmas is Christmas ----51 other weeks in the year ----also with more "resi" drivers ---Peak would also be alot smoother !!!
Christmas is Christmas ----51 other weeks in the year ----also with more "resi" drivers ---Peak would also be alot smoother !!!
menotyou
bella amicizia
Peak, at my center, starts around my birthday- Nov 15. If you have drivers at two different pay rates, not counting air, I see it leading to elimination of the regular routes. IMO. I am open minded, before someone says I'm not. It was a great thought, I just don't see that particular solution working. Maybe, use air drivers to deliver all the air, so ground drivers can actually get to their business customers a lot earlier.
None taken. I'm just not sure what your idea is. Is it to have drivers start in the p.m. to go take "resi" stops off the drivers that start in the a.m.?
Upstate has mentioned quite a few times a two tier driver rate.
I agree but with a little more detail.
Major disagreement today is the forced overtime issue.
Much of this is related to cost initiatives and staying competitive to fx ground.
Solution that both Company and Union should be able to live and grow by :
1. Strong limit on Ot over nine hours (most drivers would love a little ot)
2. A Second driver rate for Residential deliveries --in the area of 12-to 15$ per hour.
3. Develop real combination jobs with half day -Unload commercial drivers p/u -gas vehicle -load resi"s
deliver resi's---take one hour lunch --work four to five hours midnight hub.
Allows union to extremely limit overtime and create decent paying full time jobs with seniority list to progress to regular driver as positions open.
Allows the company to remain competitive with Fedx ground, re-price and take new business, help to create less turnover with Staffing of Mid night hubs.
The additional miles and gas would be offset by driver rate,delivering residential when people are home(less handling and cost of send agains)and by gaining business away from non-union fed x.
The union wins and the company wins---growth and security for both.
I am sure contract language could easily be developed that both Union and Company could agree.
Sometimes it takes a little out of the box thinking to solve problems for both the Union and the Company that will keep the employees secure and a little more satisfied.
What say you ??
I've had similar thoughts kicking around in my head from time to time, I think from the company's standpoint it would make a lot of sense to run part time delivery routes. Most businesses want their stuff early, so you could have a 4-5 hour delivery shift in the morning that delivers all the commercial volume, and then the afternoon/evening shifts would handle all resi's and pickups. I think it would mean the beginning of the end for full time hourly positions, but it would allow UPS to be much more competitive and profitable. I think the union would fight it tooth and nail. Or maybe they wouldn't, it's hard to tell with Hoffa.
outafter30
Member
Our center is changing to staggered start times based on your production or your over-allowed from the previous week. Where in the contract does it say anything about being able to base your start time on your performance. These time studies of routes that are not even the same because our routes have changed so much. We need to push back now or they will keep coming up with more of this kind of ****.
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
Even I know that they can't do this and that it will fail miserably. Every driver starting after the first driver starts needs to file a grievance for the lost time.
packagemandan
Active Member
I don't know tough question, I say no to any consessions, this company is making a great deal of money and is leveraged to create a whole lot more in the coming years. I say yes to automatic 9.5 payouts, yes to health, welfare and retirement benefits and yes to wage increases. That about covers it. Hoffa and Hall said on the last teleconferance call to Stewards they are not considering consessions from a company making as much in profits as UPS is, don't forget our sweat got them there, not to mention the amont of family life you have sacraficed for the company.
I worked for a supervisor one time that had an idea to send each driver out with a 8.75 dispatch (this was in the early 80's) at 5 minutes intervals and they would return to the building at 5 minutes apart in the p.m. Actually the guy was very intelligent in an Einstein sort of way. I guess he was ahead of his time.
This was in response to post 57
Big Time Union Man
Banned
Wow, you union guys sure are a joke. You honestly think you deserve triple time ($90 an hour) just because the company forces you to work over 9.5 hours in a day?
You should all be ashamed of yourselves, you big babies.
By the way, my name is a joke. I hate the union.
You should all be ashamed of yourselves, you big babies.
By the way, my name is a joke. I hate the union.
Similar threads
