if 22.4 was eliminated and just more RPCD's were hired would you vote yes

[542thruNthru]

if RPCD routes and work are cut on the weekdays, wouldn't it logically make sense that many of them would turn to the weekend to recoup those hours, theyd be coming in droves, and since they have first dibs at the work, the 22.4 would again be at bay and the 25 percent figure wouldnt come into play, those bricked routes would go to RPCD's

You're reading the language wrong. First off 22.4 are guaranteed 8 hours 5 days a week. T-S

Second it's in the event the company needs additional staffing to cover Saturday or Sunday. RPCDs can not just bump 22.4 out of the weekend to get their hours.

 

[Grey]

So there will literally be zero resi to deliver on Monday if they’re working Sat/Sun?

 

[zubenelgenubi]

its outlining some of the hypocrisy in the counterarguments ive seen so far, if you make more RPCD's coming for your work instead of a 22.4, its no longer the moral high ground to say that they get paid less for the same work, its clear they just want all the work to a select few much like it is now so they rack up OT

Just because you don't understand the arguments doesn't make them hypocritical.

Almost everyone who is against the 22.4 has explicitly stated they should hire more ground drivers. Ttku.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

if RPCD routes and work are cut on the weekdays, wouldn't it logically make sense that many of them would turn to the weekend to recoup those hours, theyd be coming in droves, and since they have first dibs at the work, the 22.4 would again be at bay and the 25 percent figure wouldnt come into play, those bricked routes would go to RPCD's

But, you have to understand, drivers complaining about working weekends is the preeminent reason the union is using to justify 22.4 positions. You can't just come through and say, well drivers can recoup their hours on the weekends. That goes against the supposed purpose of 22.4. I'd post a circular logic foul meme, but one I found misspelled arguer, the other defined circular logic incorrectly. But I call foul anyway.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

I don't blame UPS for trying to stay competive and having some sort of way to mitigate volume spikes, diluting the work force with 5000 RPCD's would crash the basic model they've been using of supply and demand for drivers. they have that extra driver in on deck when need be helps them be more competitive then im all for it because it drives the stock up and helps the ptimers move up in pay, and alleviates OT

You really think hiring 5000 rpcds would have a different impact on "supply and demand" of drivers than 5000 22.4's? You aren't making any sense.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Please stop talking about 22.4's until you have something that hasn't already been hashed out in dozens of other threads. The other people pushing the job are apparently much better equipped to defend them, and they couldn't get anywhere either.

 

[just chillin']

ok so this is assuming sat ground and not sun for now. say you have 40 drivers in your center. they can hire 10 22.4s to reach the 25% limit (for now). if all other rpcds are forced back to mon-fri that leaves only ten routes they can run on sat correct? i mean the only guys who can now deliver on sat are 22.4s and again, you can only have 25% of your staff. so realistically how much of mondays volume for a 40 route center can be delivered by 10 guys in 12 hours? if they want to run more than 10 routes then they have to have rpcd work a 6th day OR can they have the guys we assume are going to get laid off on monday work sat instead and basically still have tue-sat rpcd. in no way am i justifying this TA or implying anything, just food for thought

 

[Brownslave688]

ok so this is assuming sat ground and not sun for now. say you have 40 drivers in your center. they can hire 10 22.4s to reach the 25% limit (for now). if all other rpcds are forced back to mon-fri that leaves only ten routes they can run on sat correct? i mean the only guys who can now deliver on sat are 22.4s and again, you can only have 25% of your staff. so realistically how much of mondays volume for a 40 route center can be delivered by 10 guys in 12 hours? if they want to run more than 10 routes then they have to have rpcd work a 6th day OR can they have the guys we assume are going to get laid off on monday work sat instead and basically still have tue-sat rpcd. in no way am i justifying this TA or implying anything, just food for thought

Well that 40 route center probably runs 30ish on Mondays already.

With 10 routes running 13 hours I'd guess you'll be looking at maybe 20 routes on Monday now.

 

[just chillin']

Well that 40 route center probably runs 30ish on Mondays already.

With 10 routes running 13 hours I'd guess you'll be looking at maybe 20 routes on Monday now.

yeah, no matter how you do the math, i think it all adds up to layoffs on monday for locals who dont have strong language protecting there 40 hr guarantee and for the locals that do its just gonna be a show and i dont see any easy solution for a 6 day ground work week that keeps everyone happy from the OT whores to the guys who only want to drive 3 days a week. 22.4s aint it

 

[Brownslave688]

yeah, no matter how you do the math, i think it all adds up to layoffs on monday for locals who dont have strong language protecting there 40 hr guarantee and for the locals that do its just gonna be a show and i dont see any easy solution for a 6 day ground work week that keeps everyone happy from the OT whores to the guys who only want to drive 3 days a week. 22.4s aint it

Very simple solution.


T-S schedule for RPCD.

 

[Big Package]

Would it be fair to have a two tier preloader?

Like preload and skilled preload?

 

[Been In Brown Too Long]

so realistically how much of mondays volume for a 40 route center can be delivered by 10 guys in 12 hours?

Pretty simple. A minimum of 10 routes worth of volume. That's provided they only run them a normal 9.5ish day. You say 12hrs, and I see no reason they wouldn't run them 14hrs. Nothing preventing it in the TA language.

A 40 route building could see itself minus 12 routes on Monday easily. Give them Sunday, Monday will be bad, and there will be shortages of volume for Tuesday as well. Both Monday and Tuesday 22.4s will be off, and the "no RPCD will be laid off while a 22.4 is working" language becomes irrelevant.

That's where the "as long as work is available" language screws over the RPCDs. It literally gives permission to management to manipulate the volume to save $6/hr. x 10-12 routes x (your)12hrs/day × 52 weeks. Company saves easily $35-45k per year and I didn't do the math to figure OT, that's straight time pay rate only. That's a small 40 route building. Multiply that times all buildings, most being larger, and the incentive for UPS to exploit this soft language is huge!

 

[squirting is 10% pee]

I've lived around this type problem for years in Houston. home Depot would offer installation services for any project but will charge u an arm and a leg...but if u walk outside, the south of the border guys would do the same job for $25 and a case of cerveza. home Depot eventually got pissed from losing money and made the border people move (across the street). now I understand UPS/Home depots ideas to preserve revenues, and I understand the upcoming 22.4/south of the border workers willing to do whatever for whatever to survive....but if we don't vote NO, we're part of the problem. & maybe the border guys should raise their prices to HD standards. idk idk but I'm voting NO

 

[Grey]

Pretty simple. A minimum of 10 routes worth of volume. That's provided they only run them a normal 9.5ish day. You say 12hrs, and I see no reason they wouldn't run them 14hrs. Nothing preventing it in the TA language.

A 40 route building could see itself minus 12 routes on Monday easily. Give them Sunday, Monday will be bad, and there will be shortages of volume for Tuesday as well. Both Monday and Tuesday 22.4s will be off, and the "no RPCD will be laid off while a 22.4 is working" language becomes irrelevant.

That's where the "as long as work is available" language screws over the RPCDs. It literally gives permission to management to manipulate the volume to save $6/hr. x 10-12 routes x (your)12hrs/day × 52 weeks. Company saves easily $35-45k per year and I didn't do the math to figure OT, that's straight time pay rate only. That's a small 40 route building. Multiply that times all buildings, most being larger, and the incentive for UPS to exploit this soft language is huge!

So lowest seniority in the loop gets cut on Monday? Plus no work for swing drivers unless the RPCD’s go home?

 

[AutoZone]

Im not trying to convince anyone to vote yes, i could less give a damn what you do. Im telling you that im voting yes, and the reasons im voting yes, and want to discuss the different angles of the contract, this is like a part 2 to a post i made yesterday, but what i got from it made me think, If this 2 tier wage scale is such a problem, then how would you feel if every 22.4 was hired as RPCD driver, theyd have protections etc, there would be not enough work for the majority of them due to the lack of seniority so itd be more of a dog and pony show to say they added more FT work, hell their qualification period would take as long the progression. If they were actually implemented into the lineup itd be even more detrimental to those who desire OT, if they end up shuffling the lions share of the work for the weekends, then theres even less work on the weekdays and everyone loses, with this new 22.4 idea, theres some language limiting the amount of them being able to be implemented to 25 percent, which is high, not that its perfect, but thats why its a negotiation, to not get into debates about different regions lets use the southern region supplemental agreement as a base language and if yours is different then you can mention that. Im focusing on the 22.4 aspect of the contract because thats what seems to make people balk at it the most.

It would be a start to hire all full timers as reg drivers and pay them the same and same protections and benefits.

I’d still vote no as long as the other issues aren’t fixed.

*70 hours added into contract is trash
*harrasment still has no real language to protect us.
*feeder language regarding subcontractors is a joke
*feeder language regarding ONLY 200 new jobs across the country by end of 2019 is a joke...
*feeder language regarding ONLY 2000 new jobs by end of contract is a joke.
*still no 9.5 clock out guarantee language.
*$4.15 raise over life of contract is a joke with making them 10s of BILLIONS over the life of the contract. While the ceo just gave himself a 17% raise on our backs. (And I’m sure he’ll give himself another during this new contract for the great job he did screwing us)
*$4300 a month pension after 35 years of breaking your back could be more! (Most of us probably won’t even make it that long anymore with all the overweights in system these days)
*overweights should come off package cars and in bulk trucks with a qualified driver and driver helper since this is the direction we seem to be going. (Employee safety should be at top of list)
*verbiage of “as long as work is available needs to be removed from all language and guarantees put in place!
*do NOT eliminate 22.3s!! (Drivers should have the option at the end of their careers to come back in building and slow down before retirement after years of bodily abuse)

If you have more concerns, feel free to add...

 

[Sissy Brown Short Shorts]

Workers want more full time jobs. The union wants more workers to pay dues. Two very simple things could have been done to work this out and they all decided to make it as difficult and bureaucratic as possible to justify why we need them. Automatic enrollment in 9.5 if you don’t want it than opt out and no working after 9pm with 60 hour weeks. That would have created all the full time jobs in the world. It would be ing raining full time jobs. Full time jobs WOULD BE EXPLODING FROM ING VOLCANOES. Vote NO!

 

[Db2400]

Im not trying to convince anyone to vote yes, i could less give a damn what you do. Im telling you that im voting yes, and the reasons im voting yes, and want to discuss the different angles of the contract, this is like a part 2 to a post i made yesterday, but what i got from it made me think, If this 2 tier wage scale is such a problem, then how would you feel if every 22.4 was hired as RPCD driver, theyd have protections etc, there would be not enough work for the majority of them due to the lack of seniority so itd be more of a dog and pony show to say they added more FT work, hell their qualification period would take as long the progression. If they were actually implemented into the lineup itd be even more detrimental to those who desire OT, if they end up shuffling the lions share of the work for the weekends, then theres even less work on the weekdays and everyone loses, with this new 22.4 idea, theres some language limiting the amount of them being able to be implemented to 25 percent, which is high, not that its perfect, but thats why its a negotiation, to not get into debates about different regions lets use the southern region supplemental agreement as a base language and if yours is different then you can mention that. Im focusing on the 22.4 aspect of the contract because thats what seems to make people balk at it the most.

Im not trying to convince anyone to vote yes, i could less give a damn what you do. Im telling you that im voting yes, and the reasons im voting yes, and want to discuss the different angles of the contract, this is like a part 2 to a post i made yesterday, but what i got from it made me think, If this 2 tier wage scale is such a problem, then how would you feel if every 22.4 was hired as RPCD driver, theyd have protections etc, there would be not enough work for the majority of them due to the lack of seniority so itd be more of a dog and pony show to say they added more FT work, hell their qualification period would take as long the progression. If they were actually implemented into the lineup itd be even more detrimental to those who desire OT, if they end up shuffling the lions share of the work for the weekends, then theres even less work on the weekdays and everyone loses, with this new 22.4 idea, theres some language limiting the amount of them being able to be implemented to 25 percent, which is high, not that its perfect, but thats why its a negotiation, to not get into debates about different regions lets use the southern region supplemental agreement as a base language and if yours is different then you can mention that. Im focusing on the 22.4 aspect of the contract because thats what seems to make people balk at it the most.

Put more drivers on the ground m-friend problem solved

 

[zubenelgenubi]

I'd be willing to put my money where my mouth is and bid on to a t-s shift or even w-s shift if it meant that 22.4 language was taken off the table. For whatever that's worth.

 

[Db2400]

So there will literally be zero resi to deliver on Monday if they’re working Sat/Sun?

Yes that's correct

 

[Db2400]

the bulk of the 22.4's is supposedly coming from pters, so i dont think the turnover rate will be that high, theres so many seasonal people that beg to just be on preload so that they can eventually drive, and about once a week someone will ask me if theyre hiring drivers, most people would love to not be a cashier or some other menial job and make decent money on the weekends, and are you referencing the southern supplement