IBT on the cameras

[Thebrownblob]

There is a California law to stop them from recording audio. I'm not talking about video. If they want to turn the video on in the cab then yes you're right there is no CA law that stops them.

Technology making lives miserable lol. Although I feel like UPS will just end up burying their selves with ridiculous paperwork, because they can’t control their selves when it comes to reports. they do now just with telematics.

 

[542thruNthru]

Technology making lives miserable lol. Although I feel like UPS will just end up burying their selves with ridiculous paperwork, because they can’t control their selves when it comes to reports. they do now just with telematics.

UPS is going to do what they feel is best for their company. We're going to do what we feels is best for ourselves and the members. All we can do is go through the process and hope for the best. Nothing is ever a sure thing.

 

[allahuakbar]

Yikes. Already waving the white flag? Why so soon brother?

I don’t want it at all. I just have zero faith in the Union stopping them.
They’ll fight for a minute then tell us “the cameras are there to protect you as well”

 

[Trucker Clock]

There is a California law to stop them from recording audio. I'm not talking about video. If they want to turn the video on in the cab then yes you're right there is no CA law that stops them.

There is no California law to stop them from recording audio with your consent.

The key is your consent. You say that it is not a condition of your continued employment to give them your consent.

That could change, and it doesn’t matter that it was not a condition the day you were hired.

If the Arbitrator says UPS has the contractual right to record audio, or if the Union agrees to it, there is no California law to stop UPS from enabling the audio option of the Lytx cameras.

You either give consent or refuse to drive that package car while it is recording audio.

 

[Box Ox]

There is a California law to stop them from recording audio.

If I were in 542 I'd probably start every conversation with management with "California law says".

 

[Whither]

I don’t want it at all. I just have zero faith in the Union stopping them.
They’ll fight for a minute then tell us “the cameras are there to protect you as well”

You don't faith in our officials brother. Help us fire up the brotherhood.

 

[542thruNthru]

There is no California law to stop them from recording audio with your consent.

The key is your consent. You say that it is not a condition of your continued employment to give them your consent.

That could change, and it doesn’t matter that it was not a condition the day you were hired.

Sure anything could change. If Sean wants to allow UPS to negotiate into the contract that every single member must give consent to being audio recorded then I guess I'll have to vote no and see what happens. Highly doubt that would happen though.

If the Arbitrator says UPS has the contractual right to record audio, or if the Union agrees to it, there is no California law to stop UPS from enabling the audio option of the Lytx cameras.

Nope I disagree. An Arbitrator does not have the right to supercede state law and nether does the union. This law does not have a CBA exemption.

You either give consent or refuse to drive that package car while it is recording audio.

I will not give consent and I will continue to drive while my lawsuit is going through the courts. Since it's already went through arbitration I will be well with in rights to seek outside legal actions.

 

[542thruNthru]

If I were in 542 I'd probably start every conversation with management with "California law says".

Laws are laws. If someone wants to roll over and allow them to be ignored that's on them. We receive plenty of things in CA that the contract and UPS says we don't. Yet we still get them becauae it's state law.

 

[Trucker Clock]

Sure anything could change. If Sean wants to allow UPS to negotiate into the contract that every single member must give consent to being audio recorded then I guess I'll have to vote no and see what happens. Highly doubt that would happen though.

Nope I disagree. An Arbitrator does not have the right to supercede state law and nether does the union. This law does not have a CBA exemption.

I will not give consent and I will continue to drive while my lawsuit is going through the courts. Since it's already went through arbitration I will be well with in rights to seek outside legal actions.

The law does not say consent for windshield cameras. It just says a notice had to be visible that conversations are being recorded.

• Notice must be posted in a visible place in the vehicle that notifies the passenger that conversations are being recorded.

New California Law Allows Video Cameras In Car – What It Means – Law Offices of Jerod Gunsberg

Ever been pulled over or arrested by the police following a traffic stop? Did you wish you had a video and audio recorder in your car so you could prove that the cop’s version of events was wrong? In California,...

www.gunsberglaw.com

 

[Buffet Master]

I think America is extremely divided. I also believe that most people hate anyone that gets something they don't get.

My worry is when UPS starts announcing our benefits for PT and FT and how much FT drivers make that many will treat us like we are baseball players on strike.

We'll have our support from certain groups but I think a lot of middle class will be upset with what we get.

We just saw this exact scenario in 2019 with the UAW and GM. That was a prolonged strike but very early on GM left the public know what the average employee was making per hour and what that number was including company paid benefits and pension and public support evaporated.
I suspect that public sentiment is likely more of a factor to our business than with automobiles. And if we are in the middle of recession next year like we very well may be, no way the average person is sympathetic with people making $60+ hr in pay and benefits.

 

[trickpony1]

I wonder why getting people to report for a 6th punch is/was a problem?

Google "burn out".
Google "stress".
Google "I can't count my money when I'm laying in a hospital bed".

 

[UnionStrong]

I think America is extremely divided. I also believe that most people hate anyone that gets something they don't get.

My worry is when UPS starts announcing our benefits for PT and FT and how much FT drivers make that many will treat us like we are baseball players on strike.

We'll have our support from certain groups but I think a lot of middle class will be upset with what we get.

Jealous bastards. All they see is the pay. Let them try an earn it, most can’t.

 

[542thruNthru]

The law does not say consent for windshield cameras.

Thats a different law. That's a vehicle code for windows and mirrors.

It just says a notice had to be visible that conversations are being recorded.

• Notice must be posted in a visible place in the vehicle that notifies the passenger that conversations are being recorded.

New California Law Allows Video Cameras In Car – What It Means – Law Offices of Jerod Gunsberg

Ever been pulled over or arrested by the police following a traffic stop? Did you wish you had a video and audio recorder in your car so you could prove that the cop’s version of events was wrong? In California,...

www.gunsberglaw.com

Nice find. Still not the same thing. For one you left out this bullet point.

"Recorder cannot store more than 30 seconds of video, audio and data before or after the “triggering event.”

Can't wait to try this part of the law...

"When a person is driving for hire as an employee in a vehicle with a video event recorder, the person’s employer shall provide unedited copies of the recordings upon the request of the employee or the employee’s representative. These copies shall be provided free of charge to the employee and within five days of the request."

Anyways, I'm just going to leave it with agree to disagree. When and if the time comes we'll find out. Like I said our labor lawyer has already spoke with us about this issue and no offense but I'll take her advice over Google articles you find.

 

[Trucker Clock]

Anyways, I'm just going to leave it with agree to disagree.

I can do that. I can debate without name calling.

"Recorder cannot store more than 30 seconds of video, audio and data before or after the “triggering event.”

I see you already found the actual law, so my "google" find seems legit. Do you think your labor lawyer actually knows the law. You were saying that UPS cannot record you in your package car because it violates California 2 party consent law. Now you realize that this is not true according to the law. The camera law overrides California's 2 party consent law, as long as a notice is placed within the vehicle. Maybe your labor lawyer has not actually seen the law either.

Like I said our labor lawyer has already spoke with us about this issue and no offense but I'll take her advice over Google articles you find.

Fair enough. I linked lawyer's website describing the law. Since you already found it, I will link the actual law so that others may see for themselves that it is legal in California to record without consent.

Particularly...

(13) (A) A video event recorder with the capability of monitoring driver performance to improve driver safety, which may be mounted in a seven-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield farthest removed from the driver, in a five-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield nearest to the driver and outside of an airbag deployment zone, or in a five-inch square mounted to the center uppermost portion of the interior of the windshield. As used in this section, “video event recorder” means a video recorder that continuously records in a digital loop, recording audio, video, and G-force levels, but saves video only when triggered by an unusual motion or crash or when operated by the driver to monitor driver performance.

(B) A vehicle equipped with a video event recorder shall have a notice posted in a visible location which states that a passenger’s conversation may be recorded.

(C) Video event recorders shall store no more than 30 seconds before and after a triggering event.

(D) The registered owner or lessee of the vehicle may disable the device.

(E) The data recorded to the device is the property of the registered owner or lessee of the vehicle.

(friend) When a person is driving for hire as an employee in a vehicle with a video event recorder, the person’s employer shall provide unedited copies of the recordings upon the request of the employee or the employee’s representative. These copies shall be provided free of charge to the employee and within five days of the request.

California Code, VEH 26708

 

[UnionStrong]

I can do that. I can debate without name calling.



I see you already found the actual law, so my "google" find seems legit. Do you think your labor lawyer actually knows the law. You were saying that UPS cannot record you in your package car because it violates California 2 party consent law. Now you realize that this is not true according to the law. The camera law overrides California's 2 party consent law, as long as a notice is placed within the vehicle. Maybe your labor lawyer has not actually seen the law either.



Fair enough. I linked lawyer's website describing the law. Since you already found it, I will link the actual law so that others may see for themselves that it is legal in California to record without consent.

Particularly...

(13) (A) A video event recorder with the capability of monitoring driver performance to improve driver safety, which may be mounted in a seven-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield farthest removed from the driver, in a five-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield nearest to the driver and outside of an airbag deployment zone, or in a five-inch square mounted to the center uppermost portion of the interior of the windshield. As used in this section, “video event recorder” means a video recorder that continuously records in a digital loop, recording audio, video, and G-force levels, but saves video only when triggered by an unusual motion or crash or when operated by the driver to monitor driver performance.

(B) A vehicle equipped with a video event recorder shall have a notice posted in a visible location which states that a passenger’s conversation may be recorded.

(C) Video event recorders shall store no more than 30 seconds before and after a triggering event.

(D) The registered owner or lessee of the vehicle may disable the device.

(E) The data recorded to the device is the property of the registered owner or lessee of the vehicle.

(friend) When a person is driving for hire as an employee in a vehicle with a video event recorder, the person’s employer shall provide unedited copies of the recordings upon the request of the employee or the employee’s representative. These copies shall be provided free of charge to the employee and within five days of the request.

California Code, VEH 26708

What he said pretty much. It’s limited to 30 seconds after a triggering event. I’m sure UPS will try and expand it.

 

[542thruNthru]

I can do that. I can debate without name calling.

Did I call you names?

 

[542thruNthru]

Now you realize that this is not true according to the law. The camera law overrides California's 2 party consent law, as long as a notice is placed within the vehicle. Maybe your labor lawyer has not actually seen the law either.

This is your opinion. This is the reason we have lawyers and judges. They'll make the decision. One is a vehicle code and the other is penal code. Again agree to disagree.

 

[UnionStrong]

Did I call you names?

Not yet…

 

[542thruNthru]

Not yet…

I didn't think so. Seemed strange to mention.

 

[Buffet Master]

So every single person in the company in a tractor or package car with a camera should at the end of every single day should request the footage of the entire day.