I just read most of the arbitration ruling and it isn't as big of a win for the union as it's being made out. The union was favored in ONE article, but lost like 5 others. The big one I would have liked to see won was the issue of subcontracting since pvds are definitely a form of subcontracting! The arbitrator found the union didn't provide enough evidence to support article 32, that is not good. The only thing in the unions favor is article 26 about being forced to use personal vehicles. Since the company specified in the job listing they would have to use their own vehicle, that's why the arbitrator ruled in our favor. So all the company has to do is change the wording in the job listing to say seasonal drivers could opt to use their own personal vehicle or be supplied with a ups package car or rental truck.
It sounded like a win, but we really lost that arbitration case because of current contract language!!! We need specific language on the use of these scab ass pvds in the next contract. I would rather not see another pvd deliver ever again, but we all know the union will cave and allow some use of them. I would like to see language that 1. ONLY allows the use of pvds in the month of December alone. 2. Limit the amount of pvds the company is allowed to use. 3. Limits the amount of work AND hours the pvds are allowed. 4. RPCD's will have to agree to what areas of their bid route will be affected. 5. The company pays DOUBLE the pension contributions and union dues for every pvd used.