LOCAL 391 is GARBAGE

[What'dyabringmetoday???]

And if they don't pay dues?

 

[cachmeifucan]

This is the first time this excuse has ever been used to aid UPS with grievances. What’s ironic is they just paid all these back in April but now the union is saying the opposite of what the contract states.

And who does your local support varima or Obrien?

 

[CleanUpHitter]

MenInBrown you are a scab. You free ride the backs of your fellow Teamsters in Local 391. Even if you are right on the issue, you have no right to complain when you choose not to be part of our organization. Why don't you sign up like a real man instead of a scab internet cowboy?

 

[CleanUpHitter]

Local 391 has a proud history of representing their members. Yet you, a scab, want to disparage the Local Union. Why don't you sign up and become part of the solution instead of a rock thrower?

 

[burrheadd]

So we were just told that we are now only getting two 8hr request per month. Not that we get them, but we can only request 2 whether we get them or not. Doug Irving threw almost all of the 8hr grievances out? What a ing joke. We went months with no one getting 8hr days and thanks to the teamsters we never will again. So this doug guy is telling us that we don’t GET 2 a month but we only get to request 2 a month. local 391.

Do you pay dues?

 

[CleanUpHitter]

How about it MIB? Why don't you answer the question? C'mon you can say it. SCAB!

 

[I have been lurking]

Ahhh, regional infighting.

 

[542thruNthru]

Wow this thread just took a interesting turn. @CleanUpHitter coming in hot. I'm curious myself is he a dues paying member?

Also I am curious @CleanUpHitter
Is he telling the truth. Is the local disregarding all 8 hour request penalty grievances other than 2 a month?

 

[CleanUpHitter]

Still waiting for that dues receipt.

 

[CleanUpHitter]

He's not a dues paying member, however 542, he just may have a point on the language. Even if he is, there's no justification for trashing his business agent and local. No one at 391 did anything to this scab maliciously. The agents there work hard and they don't deserve that BS even if they misinterpret the language. BA's are human after all. Most are LOL.

 

[542thruNthru]

He's not a dues paying member, however 542, he just may have a point on the language. Even if he is, there's no justification for trashing his business agent and local. No one at 391 did anything to this scab maliciously. The agents there work hard and they don't deserve that BS even if they misinterpret the language. BA's are human after all. Most are LOL.

I'm not justifying his attack of his BAs especially if he's the scab he's been accused of being. Though I will say that I believe their interpretation of the contract is way off in my opinion and all denied or failed 8 hour requests should pay out the penalty pay.

 

[Bubblehead]

Your posts are confusing to me.

The Atlantic supplement does not address 8-hour requests, and you correctly state you are covered under the National.


"In addition, if an employee’s request is granted but the Employer fails to adjust the driver’s dispatch so as to provide an amount of work that can reasonably be completed within eight (8) hours which then causes the driver to work in excess of eight and one- half (8.5) hours to complete his/her route, the driver shall be entitled to a two (2) hour penalty payment at his/her straight time rate and the driver will retain the eight (8) hour request for later use. No penalty shall be due if the employee exceeds the eight and one- half (8.5) hour threshold as a result of events beyond the Employer’s control."

https://teamster.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/ups18nationalmaster.pdf

Were you personally affected by this and filed a grievance ?

Did you attend the Local hearing to personally witness this ? Or, is it what you heard happened.

How many drivers had their grievances denied ?


Being that your Local is in a right to work state.... how many of the affected "members" pay dues ?



-Bug-

All of the prudent questions were asked here by a sage veteran.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

He's not a dues paying member, however 542, he just may have a point on the language. Even if he is, there's no justification for trashing his business agent and local. No one at 391 did anything to this scab maliciously. The agents there work hard and they don't deserve that BS even if they misinterpret the language. BA's are human after all. Most are LOL.

I'm not justifying his attack of his BAs especially if he's the scab he's been accused of being. Though I will say that I believe their interpretation of the contract is way off in my opinion and all denied or failed 8 hour requests should pay out the penalty pay.

If his local did, in fact, collude with the company to avoid paying grievances (or in anyway for that matter), or simply refused to argue the driver’s case, then they deserve to be trashed.

 

[542thruNthru]

If his local did, in fact, collude with the company to avoid paying grievances (or in anyway for that matter), or simply refused to argue the driver’s case, then they deserve to be trashed.

If that's what went down then yes. I agree it's a BS interpretation of the contract. I have a feeling we are only getting a small fraction of the information... As always.

 

[CleanUpHitter]

How quickly you go to the "colluded". How about there may have been a misunderstanding about the language? Why does it have to be collusion? Those guys did not collude with the Co on anything. Good Teamsters have to be allowed to make a mistake every now and then without being accused of collusion.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

If that's what went down then yes. I agree it's a BS interpretation of the contract. I have a feeling we are only getting a small fraction of the information... As always.

Maybe. I’d believe either way though. We’ve had similar problems concerning over 9.5 grievances as well as some BAs and stewards just flat out refusing to process other grievances concerning language they “don’t agree with.” We already have trouble with getting new employees to join in these RTW states. Crap like this only makes it harder. And even causes members to get fed up an opt out.

 

[CleanUpHitter]

Believe me, BAs would much rather deliver the news to a member that they had won their grievance than the alternative. If they don't pursue the grievance its because they legitimately believe that it has no merit. No BA is tanking grievances for the fun of it. RTW states are tough but there's never a good reason for opting out and riding Teamster backs.

 

[Bubblehead]

Maybe. I’d believe either way though. We’ve had similar problems concerning over 9.5 grievances as well as some BAs and stewards just flat out refusing to process other grievances concerning language they “don’t agree with.” We already have trouble with getting new employees to join in these RTW states. Crap like this only makes it harder. And even causes members to get fed up an opt out.

Which is why OP has disappeared and has not perpetuated his fictional story.....troll alert

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Believe me, BAs would much rather deliver the news to a member that they had won their grievance than the alternative. If they don't pursue the grievance its because they legitimately believe that it has no merit. No BA is tanking grievances for the fun of it. RTW states are tough but there's never a good reason for opting out and riding Teamster backs.

I said refusing to process a grievance because they don’t like it. Not because they think it has no merit.

 

[CleanUpHitter]

No BA refuses to process grievances that they believe have merit. It has nothing to do with language they believe in. It has everything to do with grievances that they believe they can win. To pursue BS grievances would be a waste of time and real dues payers money.