Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
22.3 Facts/Origins
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="gandydancer" data-source="post: 176877" data-attributes="member: 9310"><p>I have a situation in my building ("San Bruno" enter, South San Francisco) where early start work (setup and operation of a out-of-building air sort and susbsequent shuttle) until recently performed by high-seniority part timers was combined with "work as directed" (turned out to be rewrap work) into new 22.3 jobs, filled by full-timers. </p><p> </p><p>Now, 22.3 reads, in part, "The commitment shall include the obligation to create at least ten thousand (10,000) new full-time jobs FROM EXISTING PART-TIME JOBS...No part-time employee shall be laid off OR SUFFER THE LOSS OF A JOB as a result of creating a full-time job under this Article...the Employer shall provide a quarterly report...containing the location of each job created...and the identity of the jobs combined to create the positions."(emphasis added)</p><p> </p><p>Now, as I read that, the campany can't reassign work being performed by an existing part-timer to a new 22.3 job unless he's the one that takes the new combo job (what happened to me in 2000) or otherwise voluntarily takes another job. Am I missing something? What's the practice elsewhere?</p><p> </p><p>The Local seems to be grieving on the basis that they weren't properly notified what existing 2nd job became the "work as directed" part (and there weren't any before with those hours), ignoring the basis (no loss of job allowed) I suggested one of the part-timers grieve, and if they succeed and the company can't cure it this may all be moot. Still, I'd like the input.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gandydancer, post: 176877, member: 9310"] I have a situation in my building ("San Bruno" enter, South San Francisco) where early start work (setup and operation of a out-of-building air sort and susbsequent shuttle) until recently performed by high-seniority part timers was combined with "work as directed" (turned out to be rewrap work) into new 22.3 jobs, filled by full-timers. Now, 22.3 reads, in part, "The commitment shall include the obligation to create at least ten thousand (10,000) new full-time jobs FROM EXISTING PART-TIME JOBS...No part-time employee shall be laid off OR SUFFER THE LOSS OF A JOB as a result of creating a full-time job under this Article...the Employer shall provide a quarterly report...containing the location of each job created...and the identity of the jobs combined to create the positions."(emphasis added) Now, as I read that, the campany can't reassign work being performed by an existing part-timer to a new 22.3 job unless he's the one that takes the new combo job (what happened to me in 2000) or otherwise voluntarily takes another job. Am I missing something? What's the practice elsewhere? The Local seems to be grieving on the basis that they weren't properly notified what existing 2nd job became the "work as directed" part (and there weren't any before with those hours), ignoring the basis (no loss of job allowed) I suggested one of the part-timers grieve, and if they succeed and the company can't cure it this may all be moot. Still, I'd like the input. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
22.3 Facts/Origins
Top