TDU & TOS - VS - 396 BA & the H STEWARDS

[ZJ NOMAD]

That all depends on your hub. Olympic has great stewards that are independent from H.

I'm sure Olympic has great stewards. But over here we have the 3 AMIGOS, the 3 AMIGOS to all the supervisors,leads, and managers in the hub. These 3 AMIGOS don't have targets in their backs, these 3 AMIGOS get special perks, these 3 AMIGOS get all the OT available and don't even have the top seniority, these 3 AMIGOS make special meetings/ special deals on how the hub will run for the day, these 3 AMIGOS will claim the hours I grievanced for themselves, these 3 AMIGOS can take it slower than me w/ less flow than me, and get no repercussions. ETC,ETC,ETC.

 

[olympicking]

I'm sure Olympic has great stewards. But over here we have the 3 AMIGOS, the 3 AMIGOS to all the supervisors,leads, and managers in the hub. These 3 AMIGOS don't have targets in their backs, these 3 AMIGOS get special perks, these 3 AMIGOS get all the OT available and don't even have the top seniority, these 3 AMIGOS make special meetings/ special deals on how the hub will run for the day, these 3 AMIGOS will claim the hours I grievanced for themselves, these 3 AMIGOS can take it slower than me w/ less flow than me, and get no repercussions. ETC,ETC,ETC.

I should have said my center at Olympic. We had ****ty me stewards when I was a part timer.

 

[ZJ NOMAD]

There's always three sides to every story.

(I'm a steward but I'm not your steward. So don't worry about what I think. It's my opinion.) Unfortunately this is exactly how most of our stewards in my building think, and they still want me to kiss their arsss to get a smidge of representation. I remember when I had some sort of trouble inside the hub I would go and look for a shop steward, and when they saw me next to one management would have a chit attack. Now you see the management & steward talking from a distance first, then once the deal is done you see them both coming towards you, and then the chit hits the fan, and then you have the super confident lead or manager tell you just to file a grievance, after that i ask myself wait a minute wasn;t my steward suppose to say that to me uhhhm! It all seems like its one sided to me! oh wait unless it is some sort of 3 dimensional prizm on a picture, and I have to unlock the secrets, yeah thats it.

Read more: http://www.browncafe.com/forum/f39/tdu-tos-vs-396-ba-H-stewards-350623/#ixzz2VVvOQnIR

 

[ZJ NOMAD]

I should have said my center at Olympic. We had ****ty me stewards when I was a part timer.

So that means that with this new TA I only have to take aproximately another 50 years as a part timer with chitty stewards, and harrasment by management, then aproximately another 20 years progression as a full timer w/chitty stewards and harrassing, and then finally on my last 3 years I will reach full time seniority, and even H will kiss my arssss, and finally represent me, with the exception that i will be under the Central States Fund, pay $10,000 deductibles, get paid less than Fed -ex drivers, get .25 cent raises, and my union dues will be $300 a month. Does this sound right members, VOTE NO! on the current TA.

 

[stink219]

Once again, you demonstrate that you dont understand the written word. What TDU says, what I say, and what the intelligent thinking members say is the SAME THING.

In this regard, TDU's posting is the correct explanation. THATS RIGHT. A member, who does not support TDU states that they are CORRECT with the explanation. Lets be clear. article 6 states that the company ONLY NEED TO PROVE THE FOLLOWING... AN INTENTIONAL ACT or an OMMISION to establish the the employee intended to defraud the company ( dishonesty )

THERE IS NO CAVEAT that says THE COMPANY must confirm by direct observation ANYTHING.

You are MIXING two separate paragraphs and attempting to make one paragraph out of them. Lets look at the whole context of article 6 and compare that to what YOU are representing to the folks on this board.

actual:

Section 6. Technology and Discipline
No employee shall be discharged if such discharge is based solely upon information received from GPS or any successor system
unless he/she engages in dishonesty (defined for the purposes of this paragraph as any intentional act or omission by an employee where he/she intends to defraud the Company).

The Company must confirm by direct observation or other corroborating evidence any other violations warranting discharge. The degree of discipline dealing with off-area offenses shall not be changed because of the use of GPS.

The Company acknowledges that there have been problems with the utilization of technology in the past. Therefore, at the request of the Union’s Joint National Negotiating Committee Co-Chair a
meeting will be scheduled with the Company Co-Chair to discuss any alleged misuse of technology for disciplinary purposes and what steps are necessary to remedy any misuse.

You have mistaken sentences whether intentionally or ignorantly and you are WRONG.

First, you have to understand that the first paragraph has NOTHING to do with the second paragraph. The first paragraph is "SELF DEFINING". In that, it contains the "defining clause" that separates it from the second paragraph. "(defined for the purposes of this paragraph as any intentional act or omission by an employee where he/she intends to defraud the Company). "

This you cannot ignore. It states the purpose of the language contained in the first paragraph. NOWHERE in the first paragraph does the company need direct observation or corroborating evidence other than information solely obtained from technological devices. All that is needed to be proven is either "an intentional act" or "an ommision" that proves that the employee intended on defrauding the company.

THIS MAKES TDU CORRECT IN ITS ASSESSMENT in the link you provided.

Now the word "defrauding" is too vague and general to be used. This makes it a BAD WORD.

Where you are in ERR is in the second paragraph. What you are claiming is the INCORRECT usage of the sentence structure. You stated:

"TA Language: The Company must confirm by direct observation or other corroborating evidence any other violations warranting discharge."

This sentence applies to "ANY OTHER VIOLATIONS" other than the violations in the first paragraph. You cannot ignore the words "ANY OTHER" as they are the CAVEAT of the sentence.

In cases other than violations where the company bases a discharge on technology, they must have direct observation along with "other" corroborating evidence.

This alone separates it from the first paragraph.

No matter how you try to explain it, or how your B.A. told you, your UNDERSTANDING is WRONG and you are giving the WRONG advice.

As to the issue of TDU being wrong on their site, you STAND CORRECTED AGAIN.



Peace

TOS

You just made yourself look ridiculous! Just because you say TDU is correct does not make it so. You say I'm mixing the language up? My grievance success rate speaks for itself. Just because I prove you wrong doesn't mean you need to lie right to our faces. I mean seriously dude! Do you think we believe the you do not support TDU? Hahaha. Read with me again......
TDU: The contract is very clear that the company does NOT need direct observation or corroborating evidence if a Teamster is terminated for “dishonesty.”

TA Language: The Company must confirm by direct observation or other corroborating evidence any other violations warranting discharge.

Just go home! At no point did your post contain a rational thought. Your being intentionally difficult and misleading.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Damn, I was so craving it.
How many Paffholes are on this site?

Which do you think are worse----Paffholes or Ma**holes?

 

[realbrown1]

You just made yourself look ridiculous! Just because you say TDU is correct does not make it so. You say I'm mixing the language up? My grievance success rate speaks for itself. Just because I prove you wrong doesn't mean you need to lie right to our faces. I mean seriously dude! Do you think we believe the you do not support TDU? Hahaha. Read with me again......
TDU: The contract is very clear that the company does NOT need direct observation or corroborating evidence if a Teamster is terminated for “dishonesty.”

TA Language: The Company must confirm by direct observation or other corroborating evidence any other violations warranting discharge.

Just go home! At no point did your post contain a rational thought. Your being intentionally difficult and misleading.

You claim on here to have an awesome grievance success record, but how do we know? As far as anyone knows, you can lose almost all your grievances, clock out at 4pm everyday, get days off when ever you want, be chummy with the UPS managers in your center, and represent yourself way more than the members in your area.
How do we know that anything you tell us on here is true?

 

[Anonymous 10]

You claim on here to have an awesome grievance success record, but how do we know? As far as anyone knows, you can lose almost all your grievances, clock out at 4pm everyday, get days off when ever you want, be chummy with the UPS managers in your center, and represent yourself way more than the members in your area.
How do we know that anything you tell us on here is true?

It's an Internet forum Einstein you don't know. You are putting to much stock in everything. I think you are a troll but for all we know you could be a 450 pound woman. We don't know. You could have been fired by ups and have an ax to grind with the teamsters and ups. You could also be a TDU plant for this forum which is monitored by everyone. So get over yourself this contract will pass and 98% of the members of this forum pray that after the ink dries on this contract you just go away. You've wore out your welcome here. Damn are you an annoying person. Really really really annoying.

 

[The Other Side]

You just made yourself look ridiculous! Just because you say TDU is correct does not make it so. You say I'm mixing the language up? My grievance success rate speaks for itself. Just because I prove you wrong doesn't mean you need to lie right to our faces. I mean seriously dude! Do you think we believe the you do not support TDU? Hahaha. Read with me again......
TDU: The contract is very clear that the company does NOT need direct observation or corroborating evidence if a Teamster is terminated for “dishonesty.”

TA Language: The Company must confirm by direct observation or other corroborating evidence any other violations warranting discharge.

Just go home! At no point did your post contain a rational thought. Your being intentionally difficult and misleading.

I think I have established that you are a ******* with respect to contractual language. You have been destroyed in your claims. You can twist and shout all you want, but given your description and the actual description word for word, any person on this board can see that you dont have the FIRST CLUE of what you speak of.

You can maintain the same point that was destroyed all you want, but it doesnt make you right.

As to your "success" rate, well, that has no bearing on this contract or its explanations. Your "ONLY" success rate on this board is to take wording out of context and apply some kind of ridiculous logic about it.

As to defending TDU, well, thats a challenge you placed in front of me, and I prefer to call a spade a spade, regardless of who it is.

TDU is absolutely correct in its explanation contained in the link you provided. YOU may have a subjective objection to their explanation based upon your "personal" feelings or intelligence, but that doesnt make you correct.

You stated that I didnt post any rational thought in my response to you, yet, you cant counter with anything that refutes what I said that can convince anyone of anything. You method of running away and attempting to change gears in the middle of a ash kicking is "WEAK" at best.

I believe its clear to the members on this board, that YOU cannot be relied upon for accurate information about this contract. If your "knowledge base" comes from your B.A., then he has to be just as ignorant to the contract as you are.

Let me challenge the members on this board to consider what you originally challenged me to, along with your definitions, and then compare that to the explanation I prepared and let them decide who has the language correct.

I am sure you will look like a goof.

Peace

TOS

 

[The Other Side]

It's an Internet forum Einstein you don't know. You are putting to much stock in everything. I think you are a troll but for all we know you could be a 450 pound woman. We don't know. You could have been fired by ups and have an ax to grind with the teamsters and ups. You could also be a TDU plant for this forum which is monitored by everyone. So get over yourself this contract will pass and 98% of the members of this forum pray that after the ink dries on this contract you just go away. You've wore out your welcome here. Damn are you an annoying person. Really really really annoying.

Amazingly, the majority of the board feels the same way about YOU and STINK.

GO figure.

Peace

TOS

 

[stink219]

You claim on here to have an awesome grievance success record, but how do we know? As far as anyone knows, you can lose almost all your grievances, clock out at 4pm everyday, get days off when ever you want, be chummy with the UPS managers in your center, and represent yourself way more than the members in your area.
How do we know that anything you tell us on here is true?

Funny how you question someone on the front lines everyday at UPS yet you blindly follow a TDU orgaization. What would you know about a grievance anyway? Leave that to the professionals.

 

[ZJ NOMAD]

Funny how you question someone on the front lines everyday at UPS yet you blindly follow a TDU orgaization. What would you know about a grievance anyway? Leave that to the professionals.

Professional Brownosers w/ all management, if you ask me. I have read the 2008-2013 contract about 2 complete times first page to last, and I also go to it when I need to go to something specific many much more times. when I file a grievance I need to go thru about 10 people including stewards, management, BA's, Teamster office receptionists, HR just to name a few, just to get my grievance HEARD, not to mention to settle a grievance another 10 people that i have to get in contact with to settle. The professional arsss kissing steward of which you speak of only hands out the grievance, and all get's settled right there and then. But your right Stink i've got a long way to go because my arsss kissing skills are not as good as yours. Oh and by the way which is more of a front line i'm confused going thru 20 people to settle a grievance, or just going to your beer buddy manager friend and obviously settling with no problems.

and you know who thought me how to file a grievance the normal union members, unofficial stewards of the hub, old timers independant of the H slate, the true fighters, the one's with targets in our backs. Simply because we dont brown nose. Now that is what you call and army in the frontlines. To A Better Future brothers and sisters. VOTE NO!

 

[Anonymous 10]

Amazingly, the majority of the board feels the same way about YOU and STINK.

GO figure.

Peace

TOS

A couple of trolls who e been here for a month and a ******** like yourself doesn't count.

 

[The Other Side]

A couple of trolls who e been here for a month and a wack job like yourself doesn't count.

Your avatar looks exactly like the expression i picture on your real face.

Peace

TOS

 

[Anonymous 10]

Your avatar looks exactly like the expression i picture on your real face.

Peace

TOS

A black man/hero. I am ok ith this.

 

[realbrown1]

Funny how you question someone on the front lines everyday at UPS yet you blindly follow a TDU orgaization. What would you know about a grievance anyway? Leave that to the professionals.

I said this before I am NOT TDU. I will challenge them whenever I think they are wrong. The only ones around here blindly following are you and 407.

 

[stink219]

A couple of trolls who e been here for a month and a wack job like yourself doesn't count.

Your avatar looks exactly like the expression i picture on your real face.

Peace

TOS

Naa nana boo boo, stick your head in doo doo!
TOS, your usually much more long winded than that. Btw, question: What do you do at UPS?

 

[smart girl]

Re: TDU & TOS - VS - 396 BA & the H STEWARDS

Your getting inaccurate information from your sources. 50% of the time, TDU is right 2% of the time. Brown Cafe is composed of about 80% of TDUers. I call bullshét on your post. This is a poor effort to "talk up" TDU and promote an organization that was started by a man that is a communist, who has not paid union dues in 38 years, was investigated by the FBI for attempting to overthrow the government and laid the ground work to form a multi marking scheme in order to collect his own dues from people. I don't even know what your last sentence means. Lol

Why can't you ever realize people have answers from more sources than IBT. In fact the IBT is
out of touch with the members say.

 

[stink219]

Funny how you question someone on the front lines everyday at UPS yet you blindly follow a TDU orgaization. What would you know about a grievance anyway? Leave that to the professionals.

I said this before I am NOT TDU. I will challenge them whenever I think they are wrong. The only ones around here blindly following are you and 407.

You think I and 407 blindly follow TDU?

*

 

[stink219]

Your getting inaccurate information from your sources. 50% of the time, TDU is right 2% of the time. Brown Cafe is composed of about 80% of TDUers. I call bullshét on your post. This is a poor effort to "talk up" TDU and promote an organization that was started by a man that is a communist, who has not paid union dues in 38 years, was investigated by the FBI for attempting to overthrow the government and laid the ground work to form a multi marking scheme in order to collect his own dues from people. I don't even know what your last sentence means. Lol

Why can't you ever realize people have answers from more sources than IBT. In fact the IBT is
out of touch with the members say.

Oh ok. Would you take investment advice from a homeless man?