Who gets the grievance money?

[brownIEman]

This is how management is trained. Perform bargaining unit work, divide and conq the hourlies, etc it goes on and on. There is no longer any integrity or good business with this company anymore, the past two to three years have been eye-opening for me personally.

All I see are hourlies making special deals with mgmt and leaving early, talking, taking breaks, doing basically whatever they please. We have hourlies that act as supervisors and tell other hourlies what to do. The union says "you don't have to listen" however that is not the point. These hourlies have walkie-talkies! and are clearly performing management duties, controlling hourlies.

It's just a bad place to work now adays for everyone and middle-upper management is mostly to blame.

No this is not how management are trained. There are some folks who believe that unions train there members how to be lazy and use rules just to avoid work. The one thing you have in common with those folks is that you are just as wrong. Most of the deals you see management making are not a trained thing, that is human nature. It is much easier to deal with someone who will work with you in a cooperative way and not always give you a hard time about everything you ask them to do. So friendships are built and favorites get played, often without the people realizing it. It happens on both sides.

It is often also easier to do the work oneself than hold others accountable to do what they should be doing. It is not right but it is what happens in many operations.

 

[menotyou]

Then file. Your sup is likely not making the decision on how many to hire. And if on paper you have plenty of staffing so the management cannot justify hiring more, you may have an attendance problem on your sort and your sup may not be doing what he should be to hold people accountable to show up for work or be terminated. I see it all the time. Either way, as long as you are putting in an honest effort and giving your fair days work, I see no reason why you would not file and make some extra money and in the process remove the financial incentive the company has in letting your sup continue to do the work.

Why can't the sup just follow the contract his superiors agreed to in writing?

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Why can't the sup just follow the contract his superiors agreed to in writing?

Did you ever stop to think that UPS may consider this to simply be part of the cost of doing business?

 

[brownIEman]

Why can't the sup just follow the contract his superiors agreed to in writing?

The contract does not say that a sup may not do bargaining unit work and any bargaining unit work done is a breach of contract. As such, a sup doing bargaining unit work is not in breach of the contract. The contract states that the company recognizes that the purpose of supervisors is to supervise and not to do bargaining unit work, further, it spells out penalties should a supervisor perform such work.

Some hourlies get really indignant and self righteous about supervisors doing hourly work. I do not understand that stance. If a sup is doing hourly work, file. If enough filing is done, it will cost the company money, and that sup's bosses will ask what the hell is going on and ask why they cannot get the work done as they should. Are they not holding their people accountable to come to work? Are they not holding their people accountable to actually do the work? Are they not able to train their people and hold them accountable to do the work right? Or do they not have sufficient staffing on role? Or whatever the reason.

 

[menotyou]

The contract does not say that a sup may not do bargaining unit work and any bargaining unit work done is a breach of contract. As such, a sup doing bargaining unit work is not in breach of the contract. The contract states that the company recognizes that the purpose of supervisors is to supervise and not to do bargaining unit work, further, it spells out penalties should a supervisor perform such work.

Some hourlies get really indignant and self righteous about supervisors doing hourly work. I do not understand that stance. If a sup is doing hourly work, file. If enough filing is done, it will cost the company money, and that sup's bosses will ask what the hell is going on and ask why they cannot get the work done as they should. Are they not holding their people accountable to come to work? Are they not holding their people accountable to actually do the work? Are they not able to train their people and hold them accountable to do the work right? Or do they not have sufficient staffing on role? Or whatever the reason.

Are you for real? Typical supervisor contradicting himself.

 

[menotyou]

Did you ever stop to think that UPS may consider this to simply be part of the cost of doing business?

I have always believed that UPS depends on us not holding their collectives asses to the fire. That does not make it right. They agreed to uphold the contract, just as they expect us to uphold it. Morals, just plain morals. Apparently, managers and sups leave them at the door.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I have always believed that UPS depends on us not holding their collectives asses to the fire. That does not make it right. They agreed to uphold the contract, just as they expect us to uphold it. Morals, just plain morals. Apparently, managers and sups leave them at the door.

Very few contracts have morality clauses.

 

[menotyou]

Very few contracts have morality clauses.

I thought is was a human trait.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I thought is was a human trait.

Very few, if any, corporations have human traits.

We all have contracts and all try to push the limits on them. We do this when we wait until April 15th to file our taxes or until the very end of the grace period before paying our credit card. Our house payment is due on the 1st but we know we can pay it penalty free up to the 15th.

 

[menotyou]

Very few, if any, corporations have human traits.
/QUOTE]

I was talking about the humans that work for the corporation.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

No this is not how management are trained. There are some folks who believe that unions train there members how to be lazy and use rules just to avoid work. The one thing you have in common with those folks is that you are just as wrong. Most of the deals you see management making are not a trained thing, that is human nature. It is much easier to deal with someone who will work with you in a cooperative way and not always give you a hard time about everything you ask them to do. So friendships are built and favorites get played, often without the people realizing it. It happens on both sides.

It is often also easier to do the work oneself than hold others accountable to do what they should be doing. It is not right but it is what happens in many operations.

You are laying into semantics by disagreeing with my post.

"human nature" and "trained" are virtually one in the same, for example. Human nature evolves from trial and error, past experiences and of course advice pr guidance (or misguidance ) from others sources. All of these things can fall into the "trained" camp.

One of the most important ideals to me is fair and equal treatment, which is NOTHING to do with what I see daily. There is no fair and equal, it is purely a divided workforce and in many ways, mgmt does dictate that. Yes there are exceptions with uncooperative union people, but those are generally isolated cases.

 

[brownIEman]

Are you for real? Typical supervisor contradicting himself.

That is not typical supervisor, that is typical lawyer. I was using nearly the exact verbiage that is in the contract. If there is contradiction, that also comes from the contract.

 

[brownIEman]

I have always believed that UPS depends on us not holding their collectives asses to the fire. That does not make it right. They agreed to uphold the contract, just as they expect us to uphold it. Morals, just plain morals. Apparently, managers and sups leave them at the door.

Are you saying that if I as a supervisor have 17 people call out on my sort, cannot get enough other employees on my various extra work sign up lists (and just cold calling people who are not on the list) to run my sort, the only way I can be moral is to watch the packages pile up, damage hundreds, and leave thousands in the building as service failures? Doing this would make me a moral person?

Well, if this is your definition and you want to see it as a moral issue, then so be it, in your eyes I guess I am immoral.

 

[brownIEman]

You are laying into semantics by disagreeing with my post.

"human nature" and "trained" are virtually one in the same, for example. Human nature evolves from trial and error, past experiences and of course advice pr guidance (or misguidance ) from others sources. All of these things can fall into the "trained" camp.

One of the most important ideals to me is fair and equal treatment, which is NOTHING to do with what I see daily. There is no fair and equal, it is purely a divided workforce and in many ways, mgmt does dictate that. Yes there are exceptions with uncooperative union people, but those are generally isolated cases.

You may see them as isolated cases, but seeing as that is what I wind up having to spend 80% or more of my day on, even though it represents just 5-10% of the work force, "isolated" is not really my experience of the situation.

 

[dillweed]

Leaving morales at the door - I believe many sups and hourlies alike must do this to keep their jobs. I also believe many of them struggle with it.

Not having enough staff for a sort is often caused by attendance issues. There is a policy and people can get fired for it. I have heard that the union will get someones job back once, but then lay into the employee that they have a responsibility to be at work and they will not be bailed out again. For some reason management lets a lot of chronic work missers get away with it.

 

[washington57]

Leaving morales at the door - I believe many sups and hourlies alike must do this to keep their jobs. I also believe many of them struggle with it.

Not having enough staff for a sort is often caused by attendance issues. There is a policy and people can get fired for it. I have heard that the union will get someones job back once, but then lay into the employee that they have a responsibility to be at work and they will not be bailed out again. For some reason management lets a lot of chronic work missers get away with it.

this is basically laziness on management's part. i have no sympathy for people who are chronically late or absent. they should be fired IMO.

 

[menotyou]

That is not typical supervisor, that is typical lawyer. I was using nearly the exact verbiage that is in the contract. If there is contradiction, that also comes from the contract.

The contradiction was in your wordage. Two parties agreed to the contract. You seem to be forgetting that. As for your staffing issues, my experience has been that is a direct result of a lack of supervision. Or, mere incompetence. Fire people who don't show up. Hire people who will.

Where does the lawyer comment come into play?

 

[menotyou]

Nice thought, menotyou, but these people are like wild dogs. They would come, snatch the cookie then bite the hand that fed them.

As with a pack of wild dogs they rip one person apart at a time. Everyone turns, hurts and attacks. Once the amusement has faded they pick another person and do the same. For some odd reason the "picked ons" seem to want back into the pack. I stand on my and watch, have never been much of a pack animal.

We had a group like this for about 6 months on my belt. It came to a head because one of them was "friends" with the preload sup at the time. They got caught, both got fired. The "pack" disbanded after that. Fun to watch the implosion from the sidelines. It was hell at work for a while, though. Suits and ties everywhere. My building is like the Twilight Zone!

It is too bad your belt has those who chose to participate in the pack. Approval Seekers never get it.

 

[brownIEman]

The contradiction was in your wordage. Two parties agreed to the contract. You seem to be forgetting that. As for your staffing issues, my experience has been that is a direct result of a lack of supervision. Or, mere incompetence. Fire people who don't show up. Hire people who will.

Where does the lawyer comment come into play?

I understand the contradiction in my wordage. What I was trying to explain, is that the wordage I chose I took directly from the contract. That contradiction you pointed out is in, and came to my post, from the contract. The lawyer comment comes from my assumption that it was lawyers who wrote the wordage of the contract.

As for attendance issues being a direct result of lack of supervision, no. It is a direct result of a lack of a work ethic, a lack of those people taking personal responsibility to show up for work. The lack of an appropriate response to people not showing up is absolutely due to lack of supervision, or lazy or weak supervision. That I will agree with.

"Fire the people who don't show up" - If only it were that easy. Not saying it cannot be done, not making excuses, it is my job. However, even if I spend the time and stay on top of every occurance, it can take a year or more to accomplish this. It is a very time consuming complex process, even in the best of circumstances. If it weren't, you should ask for your dues back.
As for hiring people who will, I do not do the hiring, but if you have crystal ball that will allow you to know exactly who those people are among the ones that show up to the interviews, I would appriciate it if you would loan it to HR, they are in desperate need.

 

[raceanoncr]

"Fire the people who don't show up" - If only it were that easy. Not saying it cannot be done, not making excuses, it is my job. However, even if I spend the time and stay on top of every occurance, it can take a year or more to accomplish this. It is a very time consuming complex process, even in the best of circumstances. If it weren't, you should ask for your dues back.

Just to interject a little example of "Fire the people who don't show up" and how time consuming it can be.

Here, yes, HERE, we had a feeder driver that FINALLY got the axe after being late/no show 62 times. Count em...62 times! Yeah, it did take a couple years. Union and Manag BOTH tried to work with him. No good.

Carry on.