Need help with my Grievence

[trickpony1]

It's my understanding that "dirtnut" lost his grievance. In a related post, I believe it was mentioned that the company stood up and said, essentially, that they had no record of dirtnut ever being a coverage feeder driver.

I wonder why he has a Class "A" CDL with a "T" endorsement to drive a package car?

Honesty and integrity?..........

 

[tieguy]

It's my understanding that "dirtnut" lost his grievance. In a related post, I believe it was mentioned that the company stood up and said, essentially, that they had no record of dirtnut ever being a coverage feeder driver.

I wonder why he has a Class "A" CDL with a "T" endorsement to drive a package car?

Honesty and integrity?..........

1)realistically anyone can get a CDL with a T endorsement if they live in a state that has triples. Are you saying the company required him to have the CDL with a T?

2) In my humble opinion you folks are running off into too many directions with this issue and muddying the waters on this one.

a) Dirtnut was a qualified feeder coverage driver who somewhere along the way allowed himself to drop off the feeder qualified list. The list is required to be maintained and posted like any other seniority list. There are clear cut rules on the posting of the list and how to challenge any innaccuracies on the list. We can throw the seniority word around all we want but there are also things dirt has to do to protect his seniority bidding rights. Monitoring the seniority list and ensuring he continues to be listed if he so wants to is what he should have done. I find it very hard to believe they never needed him as a feeder driver in 10 years. There is a reason he dropped off the list completely and was not used in all that time.

b) When you look at this issue you also have to look at whats fair for the guy that bid the run. He did everything he was supposed to do and should not now be penalized because dirt pops up out of the blue ten years later to try to reclaim his lost seniority position.

There are very few centers that keep seniority lists that far back. The company is not obligated to provide proof for the driver. The union could have requested a payroll history showing dirt was previously paid as a feeder driver if they thought it would help. They apparently did not because that is really not the issue here. They probably did not because they knew the ultimate decision then would be based on the fact dirt was not carried on the feeder qualified list and that position was never challenged prior to this event ten years later. Thus the point I previously made about having your cake and eating it too.

I have seen too many issues over the years where someone did not challenge the accuracy of a seniority list when it first happened and then tried to get it changed five to 10 years down the road. At that point your chances of getting it changed are slim and none.

 

[trickpony1]

Tieguy-
"dirtnut was a qualified feeder coverage driver.....".

Where/whom qualifed him? I'm just guessing here but was it the company during a company feeder school? I seriously doubt dirtnut went to the local grocery store and got his CDL. He probably didn't go out a rent a truck on his own and qualify either.

Here's another guess.........
My state requires a class "A" CDL with a "T" endorsement (doubles, triples). Since the CDL license is federally mandated and supported by a nationwide computer database, would I be inaccurate to assume that the state that dirtnut lives in would require a class "A" as well as a "T" endorsement?

Your thoughts on the seniority issue are valid and I commend you. There is language in our contract that states, in effect, that any mistakes on the seniority list, after a certain length of time, will stand. I make it a habit of checking the seniority list frequently to assure that no one made a "mistake". I do think it is a crying shame that "whoever" dropped dirtnut from the coverage seniority list, "by accident" isn't held accountable for not being able to duplicate a list of names and dates, in it's entirity, without making a mistake.

So........who lost out on this one?
The company and dirtnut, simply because the company has to spend the time and money to qualify a new driver AND (here's the most costly factor) dirtnut will remember this.

If the company would put a little thought into the things they do instead of "act first, think later", it might benefit everyone.

 

[tieguy]

Tieguy-
"dirtnut was a qualified feeder coverage driver.....".

Where/whom qualifed him? I'm just guessing here but was it the company during a company feeder school? I seriously doubt dirtnut went to the local grocery store and got his CDL. He probably didn't go out a rent a truck on his own and qualify either.

Here's another guess.........
My state requires a class "A" CDL with a "T" endorsement (doubles, triples). Since the CDL license is federally mandated and supported by a nationwide computer database, would I be inaccurate to assume that the state that dirtnut lives in would require a class "A" as well as a "T" endorsement?

Don't understand your point here Trick. If his state allows triples then it could possibly be so. I don't doubt he earned his CDL at one time. Once acquired it does not take much to keep it.

Your thoughts on the seniority issue are valid and I commend you. There is language in our contract that states, in effect, that any mistakes on the seniority list, after a certain length of time, will stand. I make it a habit of checking the seniority list frequently to assure that no one made a "mistake". I do think it is a crying shame that "whoever" dropped dirtnut from the coverage seniority list, "by accident" isn't held accountable for not being able to duplicate a list of names and dates, in it's entirity, without making a mistake.

You assume someone made a mistake and dropped him. My point is there is a very good chance he either did not protect his seniority position or he decided to let it go. As you probably know the road to gaining seniority in feeders is sometimes a long one. Filled with many days of bouncing in and out to cover days off and weeks of vacations before you finally gain a permanent feeder position. For someone to not work feeders in any capacity in 10 years leads me to believe he decided he did not want to grind it out and thought he could just pop back in when he saw the chance to jump right into a senior position.

So........who lost out on this one?
The company and dirtnut, simply because the company has to spend the time and money to qualify a new driver AND (here's the most costly factor) dirtnut will remember this.If the company would put a little thought into the things they do instead of "act first, think later", it might benefit everyone.

Your still looking at this as a company did dirtnut wrong issue. There is a reason his union was not able to win this case on his behalf. If the company clearly violated the mans seniority then they have a loser. The company would love to take dirtnut in since he requires less training. Instead they ended up training another driver. There has to be clear cut contractual language that dictated what the company ended up having to do. Whether he ever worked feeders was totally irrelevant. He could have pulled a payroll history and he had his current CDL to provide to the panel if that was all that was required. The answer therefore clearly has to lie in the process of him retaining his status as a qualified driver all these years. He had to have let his status as a qualified feeder driver lapse either intentionally or unintenionally for him to lose this one.