UPS Bargaining Suspended

[RockyRogue]

Rocky in your short career with ups how have the teamsters wronged you? You so negative about the teamsters im sure they have wronged you, or are you just taking sides with others who have been wronged? I really hope your not making an opinion of the teamsters just from what you have read on here!

Wronged me? Never! Can I ask where you get the idea that I feel wronged by them? I don't trust them but I've never jumped on the APWA's "bash the IBT bandwagon." Have I? I'm leery of the IBT for perfectly legitimate reasons. Do you want them? I'll admit I'm leery of organized labor as it currently stands. I've been wronged by a union before, which certainly hasn't helped my opinion of the Teamsters.

I've had "run-ins" with an 'angelic' IBT steward working inside our Denver hub. Little p***k has gone looking for trouble, specifically with me. Not trying to be insulting, Red, but you and he would probably be best friends. I'm not taking a hardline with UPS management, which he does. He's asked me to be witness to grievances, which I've steadfastly refused to do. He had a p/t sup dead to rights for working for close to an hour and I refused to witness the grievance. She'd had a bunch of call-in's and was working to cover those call-ins. This little bag of **** has made my life MISERABLE every time I see him, partly as a result. This also hasn't helped my opinion of the Teamsters. Make sense, Red? -Rocky

 

[705red]

Wronged me? Never! Can I ask where you get the idea that I feel wronged by them? I don't trust them but I've never jumped on the APWA's "bash the IBT bandwagon." Have I? I'm leery of the IBT for perfectly legitimate reasons. Do you want them? I'll admit I'm leery of organized labor as it currently stands. I've been wronged by a union before, which certainly hasn't helped my opinion of the Teamsters.

Rocky to be honest with you your all over the place, bashing the teamsters, bashing the apwa, applauding the apwa. But if you have necer been wronged were does the hate for them come from?

I've had "run-ins" with an 'angelic' IBT steward working inside our Denver hub. Little p***k has gone looking for trouble, specifically with me. Not trying to be insulting, Red, but you and he would probably be best friends. I'm not taking a hardline with UPS management, which he does. He's asked me to be witness to grievances, which I've steadfastly refused to do. He had a p/t sup dead to rights for working for close to an hour and I refused to witness the grievance. She'd had a bunch of call-in's and was working to cover those call-ins. This little bag of **** has made my life MISERABLE every time I see him, partly as a result. This also hasn't helped my opinion of the Teamsters. Make sense, Red? -Rocky

Rocky when theres call ins the company has options to cover that work, if they do not use those options then its a grievable offense! We as stewards are elected to uphold the language in the contract that was agreed upon by management and the teamsters, what is so hard for you to understand? You have admitted to being disciplined by management without a steward and now you state that you refused to tell the truth about a supervisor working, and you are leary of the teamsters? I think we should be leary of you!

 

[RockyRogue]

Rocky to be honest with you your all over the place, bashing the teamsters, bashing the apwa, applauding the apwa. But if you have necer been wronged were does the hate for them come from?

I bash when its appropriate, Red. I'm a pretty reasonable individual. Why don't you convince me--unequivocally--that the Teamsters are the better choice. I'm asking APWA the same questions you are. Am I making it too easy for them somehow??? They've started demonstrating some credibility, which is what all of us wanted, isn't it? This radio show out of Cincinnati is a start. When it gets to Danny Eason and Co. on Fox or CNN, I'll be much more intrigued. I don't hate the Teamsters, Red. I'm annoyed with them, partly for reasons explained above. Do you want other reasons for my annoyance?

Rocky when theres call ins the company has options to cover that work, if they do not use those options then its a grievable offense!

I'm not friend'ing fighting that battle with management!!!!! "Supervisor working" grievances just p*ss them off, which I don't need. Staying under the radar is where I'm most comfortable. That's not to say management can do whatever the they want to me. They know that if I think I'm right, I'll make a fuss. And if I know I'm right, I'm gonna fight like its going outta style. Let me know if you want an example, Red.

We as stewards are elected to uphold the language in the contract that was agreed upon by management and the teamsters, what is so hard for you to understand? You have admitted to being disciplined by management without a steward and now you state that you refused to tell the truth about a supervisor working, and you are leary of the teamsters? I think we should be leary of you!

Great! Its not hard to understand, Red. We just have different approaches. As to being disciplined by management...nope, never had a write-up issued here in Denver. Last--and only--one was at my Illinois hub. I didn't have a problem with the discipline and still don't. I didn't refuse to tell the truth about a supervisor working, Red. I told the steward that if asked, I'd confirm seeing the supervisor working. My problem was with him putting my name on the grievance sheet. Once again, "on the radar." I don't need any more problems, Red. My personal life and school are enough, trust me! I have enough stress in my life, I don't need to be watching my back at work. UPS has been very good to me. I'm not going to start a fight without a very good reason. And ya know something? The fights I've started, I've won AND didn't involve the union. UPS's internal mechanism has sufficed. Most of the problems I've had are internal/operational, anyway. UPS handles those problems better itself IMHO.

As to being leery of me...that's your call. I'm an honest, hardworking individual. I'm just not starting a fight with management OR stepping into a fight I didn't start! Can you tell I pick my battles with extreme care? -Rocky

 

[tieguy]

Rocky when theres call ins the company has options to cover that work, if they do not use those options then its a grievable offense! !

Indeed that part time sup should. She should leave her belt unttended and try to call someone else in some other job or shift in while her belt gets destroyed from those call ins not being there. There is a chance someone out of the thirty she calls may decide to not go to the health spa and come in and load your trailers instead. Or someone may decide to crawl out of their warm bed to come to work. See the logic is all screwed up here. When a sup works due to mass call outs the teamsters should fine the hourlies that scratched not the company. Let them pay the grievance.

 

[870driver]

from what ive heard ups is expecting us to take a 3.00/hour cut in pay for the life of the new contract to pay for the buyout of central states. anyone heard of this?

 

[1989]

Indeed that part time sup should. She should leave her belt unttended and try to call someone else in some other job or shift in while her belt gets destroyed from those call ins not being there. There is a chance someone out of the thirty she calls may decide to not go to the health spa and come in and load your trailers instead. Or someone may decide to crawl out of their warm bed to come to work. See the logic is all screwed up here. When a sup works due to mass call outs the teamsters should fine the hourlies that scratched not the company. Let them pay the grievance.

Not much can be done, I worked the most when I was a pt sup...Never had a paid grievance.

On Tuesday my wife had a baby and I took the rest of the week off. My sup came to my house Thursday night asking me if I wanted to run a bulk stop on Fri for a couple hours. His only other option was to deliver it himself. Which I think he did.

 

[RockyRogue]

Not much can be done, I worked the most when I was a pt sup...Never had a paid grievance.

Indeed. Management got hit with a BIG grievance--close to 2 hours in one day--back in March or April, I think. They paid the steward an hour and a quarter on the spot, just to avoid the hassle of the grievance. I don't have a problem with a supe working, as long as its not to deliberately p*ss me off. I've posted a few of those stories, I think.

On Tuesday my wife had a baby and I took the rest of the week off. My sup came to my house Thursday night asking me if I wanted to run a bulk stop on Fri for a couple hours. His only other option was to deliver it himself. Which I think he did.

Congrats on the baby!!!! Oldest of a large family here, with a brother sixteen years my junior. Holding that little life is something else, isn't it? When I was a helper last Peak, one of my drivers' wife had a baby and he called in to be with her. I was told management was p*ssed off, with the center manager personally calling and asking the guy to come in. He refused. Management could do nothing about it. As to the supe delivering...I've come to agree with what somebody posted on here: "Its management's responsibility to staff the operation, not hourly employees' responsibility." I'm living by that same principle at my restaurant job. I work hard but I won't kill myself for my managers' decision to deliberately shortstaff the operation. I called him on that in a rather cranky, frustrated mood a few weeks ago. His face changed slightly--not angrily--when I called him on that. He thought I was an idiot but he'd forgotten I'd seen how many people he'd hired for other positions. Strangely enough, I'm getting full-staffing now . -Rocky

 

[705red]

Indeed that part time sup should. She should leave her belt unttended and try to call someone else in some other job or shift in while her belt gets destroyed from those call ins not being there. There is a chance someone out of the thirty she calls may decide to not go to the health spa and come in and load your trailers instead. Or someone may decide to crawl out of their warm bed to come to work. See the logic is all screwed up here. When a sup works due to mass call outs the teamsters should fine the hourlies that scratched not the company. Let them pay the grievance.

Tie its the contract language and you know it. Every ptime sup has a friend-time sup whos responsible for the area. If they make these calls then its not grievable, but if they dont someone is getting extra ot. Tie you being in feeder should know, every feeder driver thinks they know the contract inside and out. If you ever make a run i will beat money that you get grieved by feeder drivers, why shouldnt it apply to p-timers? If your short staffed either hire or use the call in double shifting list.

 

[705red]

Indeed. Management got hit with a BIG grievance--close to 2 hours in one day--back in March or April, I think. They paid the steward an hour and a quarter on the spot, just to avoid the hassle of the grievance. I don't have a problem with a supe working, as long as its not to deliberately p*ss me off. I've posted a few of those stories, I think.

Rocky when that sup wprks thats money out of your pocket! Would you let him go in your back pocket and take cash out of your wallet?

Rocky you know how big the hubs here are, i filed grievances for 31 sups working non-stop for 4 hours a piece for 1 twilight shift. Thats well over $2000 in sups working for 1 day, but they continue to work!

Congrats on the baby!!!! Oldest of a large family here, with a brother sixteen years my junior. Holding that little life is something else, isn't it? When I was a helper last Peak, one of my drivers' wife had a baby and he called in to be with her. I was told management was p*ssed off, with the center manager personally calling and asking the guy to come in. He refused. Management could do nothing about it. As to the supe delivering...I've come to agree with what somebody posted on here: "Its management's responsibility to staff the operation, not hourly employees' responsibility." I'm living by that same principle at my restaurant job. I work hard but I won't kill myself for my managers' decision to deliberately shortstaff the operation. I called him on that in a rather cranky, frustrated mood a few weeks ago. His face changed slightly--not angrily--when I called him on that. He thought I was an idiot but he'd forgotten I'd seen how many people he'd hired for other positions. Strangely enough, I'm getting full-staffing now . -Rocky

 

[tieguy]

Tie its the contract language and you know it. Every ptime sup has a friend-time sup whos responsible for the area. If they make these calls then its not grievable, but if they dont someone is getting extra ot. Tie you being in feeder should know, every feeder driver thinks they know the contract inside and out. If you ever make a run i will beat money that you get grieved by feeder drivers, why shouldnt it apply to p-timers? If your short staffed either hire or use the call in double shifting list.

Now Red I don't believe I said it was not in the contract. I believe I suggested a better way. You don't want the sups to work. I don't want the sups working. So why not have the union fine those folks who cause the sups to have to work. Let them pay the grievance red.

And since you're into following the contract to the tee and such why not let me file a grievance when someone asks for a day off outside of the personal holiday process. Let me file it and you as the steward submit it to pay the company.

Same for excessive abscences. Your job as a steward and union is to provide me reliable labor. So when your labor does not show up I should be able to file a grievance for your failure to follow the contract and have your union pay me for the heart ache it caused. I like this follow the contract stuff you just don't like it when its turned back on you and holds you accountable.

 

[705red]

Now Red I don't believe I said it was not in the contract. I believe I suggested a better way. You don't want the sups to work. I don't want the sups working. So why not have the union fine those folks who cause the sups to have to work. Let them pay the grievance red.

Tie we overstaff all areas to insure we have a sufficent work force, and even when we are staffed why is it the sups work anyways? Its about the numbers tie, everytime that sup works that is taking money out of someones pocket!

And since you're into following the contract to the tee and such why not let me file a grievance when someone asks for a day off outside of the personal holiday process. Let me file it and you as the steward submit it to pay the company.

Because your not a union employee and you dont have that right!

Same for excessive abscences. Your job as a steward and union is to provide me reliable labor. So when your labor does not show up I should be able to file a grievance for your failure to follow the contract and have your union pay me for the heart ache it caused. I like this follow the contract stuff you just don't like it when its turned back on you and holds you accountable.

Maybe you can get some management rights into the contract, as of right now you dont have that in there. I believe in accountability 100%, the problem is management only tells you when you did something wrong or you had a bad day, you seldom hear good job anymore! Show me in the contract were it says the union does the hiring? Maybe call your hr department and request someone with more than just a pulse. Hr will hire anyone to do any job! How many people do you know that actually has never worked at ups? Not to many almost everyone has worked here at one point and time. As to the abscences you do document the occurances, right? So unless they clean it up they will be gone in a matter of time.

As a company and union we cannot force people to come to work, not to steal and to do the job the right way, that my friend is on the person. You as a manager have to do what you have to do when this happens and myself and other stewards have to do the same according to the contract. It is what it is!

 

[hondo]

I've had "run-ins" with an 'angelic' IBT steward working inside our Denver hub. Little p***k has gone looking for trouble, specifically with me. Not trying to be insulting, Red, but you and he would probably be best friends. I'm not taking a hardline with UPS management, which he does. He's asked me to be witness to grievances, which I've steadfastly refused to do. He had a p/t sup dead to rights for working for close to an hour and I refused to witness the grievance. She'd had a bunch of call-in's and was working to cover those call-ins. This little bag of **** has made my life MISERABLE every time I see him, partly as a result. This also hasn't helped my opinion of the Teamsters. Make sense, Red? -Rocky

Let's see if I understand this, your local union steward tries to protect the rights of you (having to work in an understaffed area) and your fellow UPSers from other shifts (the ones who signed the extra work/double shift/call in sheet by filing a grievance (for $s which are really negligible if your consider the volume moved/revenue generated). This upsets you? You saw the supe working, the supe knew he/she shouldn't be working, x amount of $ was already budgeted for the work, heck, for all I know the supe gets some kind of reward specifically for trying to get away with it/having good #s on the report. I just don't see the problem here, Mr. Rogue. I do know I'd be livid if I was on the call-in list and wasn't called, how would you feel if you were on that list and could really use the extra jack? If you feel your steward was out of line, you should call him out at the next general membership meeting. J/K, I don't think that would go over too well. Seriously man, were people called and they all refused to come in or did the friend/t mgmt decide toeverybody and say hey, the report'll look good. Please step back and do some research, please tell me I'm wrong and it was the former and not the latter. Hondo

 

[tieguy]

Maybe you can get some management rights into the contract, as of right now you dont have that in there. I believe in accountability 100%, the problem is management only tells you when you did something wrong or you had a bad day, you seldom hear good job anymore! Show me in the contract were it says the union does the hiring?

I see. So you want no responsibility for the labor force. Just want the union to leech their dues minus any responsibility.

Maybe call your hr department and request someone with more than just a pulse. Hr will hire anyone to do any job! How many people do you know that actually has never worked at ups? Not to many almost everyone has worked here at one point and time. As to the abscences you do document the occurances, right? So unless they clean it up they will be gone in a matter of time.

As a company and union we cannot force people to come to work, not to steal and to do the job the right way, that my friend is on the person. You as a manager have to do what you have to do when this happens and myself and other stewards have to do the same according to the contract. It is what it is!

my point exactly. Your union is not interested in stopping the conditions that cause sups to work. No they are only interested in finding ways to use the grievance process to earn more dishonest money. Money they did not earn. Grievance money generated by union members not coming to work. Hell you probably arrange the conditions just so you can file on some poor sup with half her area missing. If you were really concerned about sups working then you would address the absenteeism issues without my help. Show some integrity my friend. File the grievance on the stiff that keeps missing time. Fine him down at the hall for doing a poor job of representing union labor.

 

[tieguy]

Let's see if I understand this, your local union steward tries to protect the rights of you (having to work in an understaffed area) and your fellow UPSers from other shifts (the ones who signed the extra work/double shift/call in sheet by filing a grievance (for which are really negligible if your consider the volume moved/revenue generated). This upsets you? You saw the supe working, the supe knew he/she shouldn't be working, x amount of $ was already budgeted for the work, heck, for all I know the supe gets some kind of reward specifically for trying to get away with it/having good #s on the report. I just don't see the problem here, Mr. Rogue. I do know I'd be livid if I was on the call-in list and wasn't called, how would you feel if you were on that list and could really use the extra jack? If you feel your steward was out of line, you should call him out at the next general membership meeting. J/K, I don't think that would go over too well. Seriously man, were people called and they all refused to come in or did the friend/t mgmt decide toeverybody and say hey, the report'll look good. Please step back and do some research, please tell me I'm wrong and it was the former and not the latter. Hondo

call in list in a hub? thats rich

 

[hondo]

my point exactly. Your union is not interested in stopping the conditions that cause sups to work. No they are only interested in finding ways to use the grievance process to earn more dishonest money. Money they did not earn. Grievance money generated by union members not coming to work. Hell you probably arrange the conditions just so you can file on some poor sup with half her area missing. If you were really concerned about sups working then you would address the absenteeism issues without my help. Show some integrity my friend. File the grievance on the stiff that keeps missing time. Fine him down at the hall for doing a poor job of representing union labor.

Mr. Tie, how would you feel if I filed and named those on the extra work list/but weren't called as the grievants? Would you consider that fair? BTW, I've never met Red, but I believe he's posted he's not averse to taking the "birds"(Area43's term) to the proverbial woodshed off the record. If not him, I know I've read that posted by some other steward here. But you do realize that responsibility for any and all discipline officially lies in the hands of management, don't you? I'm afraid standards have fallen so low, with the emphasis on making the #s look good at the expense of the first line/front line of service, this is what you're left with. Humbly yours, Hondo

 

[hondo]

call in list in a hub? thats rich

Article 3, sections 7b&c. The language is there for a reason. Use it. What would it hurt? Comply with it, throw it right back at us. I, for one would welcome it. It'd serve me right,damnit. But what do I know, I'm just a fat, lazy union worker ready to fake an injury any moment I decide I want a day off, ask my latest and greatest Sort Manager. Humbly yours, Hondo

 

[705red]

my point exactly. Your union is not interested in stopping the conditions that cause sups to work. No they are only interested in finding ways to use the grievance process to earn more dishonest money. Money they did not earn. Grievance money generated by union members not coming to work. Hell you probably arrange the conditions just so you can file on some poor sup with half her area missing. If you were really concerned about sups working then you would address the absenteeism issues without my help. Show some integrity my friend. File the grievance on the stiff that keeps missing time. Fine him down at the hall for doing a poor job of representing union labor.

Tie you know the sups work no matter if the area is staffed or not! If you abide by the contract and use the double shift call in or ask drivers to come in early or stay late than theres no grievance. But you want to piss and moan that the sups are working because of staffing, B.S! They work to make the numbers look better.

 

[tieguy]

Mr. Tie, how would you feel if I filed and named those on the extra work list/but weren't called as the grievants? Would you consider that fair? BTW, I've never met Red, but I believe he's posted he's not averse to taking the "birds"(Area43's term) to the proverbial woodshed off the record. If not him, I know I've read that posted by some other steward here. But you do realize that responsibility for any and all discipline officially lies in the hands of management, don't you? I'm afraid standards have fallen so low, with the emphasis on making the #s look good at the expense of the first line/front line of service, this is what you're left with. Humbly yours, Hondo

Yes hondo I do understand where the responsibility lies. The sup has half of her area missing in action. She now has to determine if they are just late or just absent no call. Meanwhile she has to keep her area running , and exhaust all means of finding other help and most importantly document her attempts to contact others for help. Why because some sniper from the ranks may either file a grievance on her for her working or file a grieavance on her because he did not hear his phone ring at 330 in the morning. Meanwhile many of those who worked knew those guys weren't going to show up the day before because it was discussed in the locker roomm or parking lot. So again you folks love to throw the grieavance and you love to hide behind the wording of the contract. But if you really were concerned about sups working and you really had any integrity then you would file the grieavance on the guys that actually caused that sup to work. Instead many of your "brothers" hope that sup running around like a chicken with her head cut off forgot to do something so you can unethically file a grievance on her for money you never earned.

This my friend is why teamster membership continues to dwindle. employers don't want the adversarial relationship. employees don't want to be beat into the adversarial relationship. Look at how you guys beat on rocky to push him to particiapate in the grieavance process. The fact is most of your brothers want to come to work, do the job and go home without all the extra curricular activities. If they wanted an adversarial relationship they would have become boxers.

 

[tieguy]

Tie you know the sups work no matter if the area is staffed or not! If you abide by the contract and use the double shift call in or ask drivers to come in early or stay late than theres no grievance. But you want to piss and moan that the sups are working because of staffing, B.S! They work to make the numbers look better.

Red I can honestly say that i have never had or seen where we worked sups because we wanted to make the numbers look better. I can honestly say they have worked when we either:
had too many quit, did not have enough show up for work or could not get enough to double shift when volume was heavy.

we want our sups running the areas, training, implementing quality control measures etc not loading cars.

 

[705red]

Red I can honestly say that i have never had or seen where we worked sups because we wanted to make the numbers look better. I can honestly say they have worked when we either:
had too many quit, did not have enough show up for work or could not get enough to double shift when volume was heavy.

we want our sups running the areas, training, implementing quality control measures etc not loading cars.

Not in chicago my friend, maybe rocky can agree with this one. The onlt time they stop is when we get announced over the radio, because we do building sweeps as many as 20 agents and stewards together to stop this violation. I can tell you that 1 building here last novemeber paid out over $9,000 in sups working for the month PAID OUT!