UPS load "security"

[Duckwithapipboy]

I had two UPS "security" personnel come into my trailer tonight and give me a hard time about my load tier since I had some small gaps during a heavy large cube spree that never ended. They proceeded to just take packages and stuff them in. I stopped working and just stared at them until they finally got the message to leave while I was backed to our low volume.

Talked with a stewie afterwards and confirmed that they aren't considered supervisors, but what's the general consensus on handling them? Quick gut check says that I can't tell them to off like I do our safety committee members, but what protections do I have from them compared to PT and FT supers?

 

[upschuck]

What do you mean by "security"? LP here would never even think about touching a package.

 

[Duckwithapipboy]

Load auditors I would imagine, but they called themselves "UPS security."

 

[BigUnionGuy]

Talked with a Steward afterwards and confirmed that they aren't considered supervisors, but what's the general consensus on handling them?

They are still non-Union supervisory personnel, as defined by the NLRA.

Meaning.... they are the equivalent of your area supervisors.

They just wear a different "hat".



-Bug-

 

[burrheadd]

If they help progress pkgs
Grieve it and get paid

 

[dudebro]

I had two UPS "security" personnel come into my trailer tonight and give me a hard time about my load tier since I had some small gaps during a heavy large cube spree that never ended. They proceeded to just take packages and stuff them in. I stopped working and just stared at them until they finally got the message to leave while I was backed to our low volume.

Talked with a stewie afterwards and confirmed that they aren't considered supervisors, but what's the general consensus on handling them? Quick gut check says that I can't tell them to off like I do our safety committee members, but what protections do I have from them compared to PT and FT supers?

What "protection" did you need? Did one of them attempt to assault you?

 

[Duckwithapipboy]

What "protection" did you need? Did one of them attempt to assault you?

The same for PT and FT supers. The steward I was talking to was saying that since they weren't considered supervisors we were unable to grieve when they did process packages or the spree of harassment they have been on in the past.

 

[542thruNthru]

The same for PT and FT supers. The steward I was talking to was saying that since they weren't considered supervisors we were unable to grieve when they did process packages or the spree of harassment they have been on in the past.

This is not true. You have every right to grieve it . The only issue I can see you having is they may try and claim they were training you.

 

[Duckwithapipboy]

Likely. They came in, said hello, asked me what a cornerstone was, pointed out the gaps and asked if I could fix it. Once it was clear that I was more focused on keeping with the flow they spotted the boxes and proceeded to place them in the tier themselves without asking if they could. Maybe a few seconds between them asking and working.

 

[dudebro]

This is not true. You have every right to grieve it . The only issue I can see you having is they may try and claim they were training you.

But if the OP stopped and watched, technically, that WAS training. Now, if they instructed him to help while they loaded - contract violation.

 

[Duckwithapipboy]

I was still working when they began to load, but with what you are saying, it would then be construed that I accepted the premise of the "demonstration?"

 

[Turdferguson]

Talked with a stewie afterwards and confirmed that they aren't considered supervisors,

Doesn't matter if supervisor or not. They are not bargaining unit employees
Section 7. Supervisors Working
(a) The Employer agrees that the function of supervisors is the
supervision of Employees and not the performance of the work of
the employees they supervise. Accordingly, the Employer agrees
that supervisors or other employees of the Employer who are not
members of the bargaining unit shall not perform any bargaining
unit work, except to train employees or demonstrate safety, .
They shouldn't have been doing work while you were

 

[Duckwithapipboy]

Alright, then it seems I will be filing my first grievance.

 

[PT Car Washer]

Alright, then it seems I will be filing my first grievance.

Before you file you want to check with your Business Agent and see if he will back your grievance. Since they only loaded a few packages, it could be considered frivolous. Learn to choose your battles.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Alright, then it seems I will be filing my first grievance.

There is no basis for a grievance.

 

[trickpony1]

Learn to choose your battles.

These two "security" people may have been trying to see if they could get the OP to "go off" on them (a common tactic by management).

The fact there were two of them would alert a seasoned employee. The OP should be cautious about telling anyone to friend off.

Don't let 5 minutes of emotion cause an issue you will regret for a long time.

 

[brownburro]

I had two UPS "security" personnel come into my trailer tonight and give me a hard time about my load tier since I had some small gaps during a heavy large cube spree that never ended. They proceeded to just take packages and stuff them in. I stopped working and just stared at them until they finally got the message to leave while I was backed to our low volume.

Talked with a stewie afterwards and confirmed that they aren't considered supervisors, but what's the general consensus on handling them? Quick gut check says that I can't tell them to off like I do our safety committee members, but what protections do I have from them compared to PT and FT supers?

At least someone is looking out for the loads. Obviously you guys have never been to the Oakland CA hub.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

There is no basis for a grievance.

Sometimes, it's a good thing to file a grievance for clarification reasons.

Is it a true contact violation worthy of a monetary claim ? Doubtful.


But, it's an opportunity for education. Simple as that.



-Bug-

 

[Bubblehead]

Sometimes, it's a good thing to file a grievance for clarification reasons.

Is it a true contact violation worthy of a monetary claim ? Doubtful.


But, it's an opportunity for education. Simple as that.



-Bug-

I have purposely filed grievances, simultaneously on two different subjects, in order to pigeon hole the labor manager into taking a position that can't be maintained on both grievances.

Sometimes this tactic can knock the Company off of the fence, prohibiting them from having their cake and eating it too.

Unfortunately, in my Local, it's almost impossible to get our BA's to take that ball and run with it.
They find it detrimental to their quid pro quo relationship with the Company, which is easier than reading, writing, and actually formulating articulate arguments.

Not sure this is parallel to what's being discussed here, but it came to mind when -Bug- made his last point.



~Bbbl~™

 

[dudebro]

I was still working when they began to load, but with what you are saying, it would then be construed that I accepted the premise of the "demonstration?"

You don't have to accept anything. Security supervisors are management. So if one comes into the trailer, and says something like, "We're seeing a lot of damage claims in this lane, and I'd like you to load this truck this way, please step aside so I can show you". That's training.

If they just breeze into the load and load while you are, that looks like sups working. Whoever told you the security supervisors aren't "supervisors" had bad information. They ARE supervisors, and outside of a training situation, can't advance packages to save the expense of paying a union employee.