California drivers....the one hour lunch is back for peak!!! Yea!

[BrownArmy]

Steve,

There are several routes in my center where there is NO OPPORTUNITY to take the full lunch break within the contractually allowed times, due to the level of business deliveries and pickups.

Of course, you could always take your lunch at 1800, after all the pickups are finally completed, but then you'd be falsifying your timecard (at least in my center, lunches must be entered in the DIAD during the contractually agreed window). So, either you take your lunch when you're supposed to, and message the center that you're going to miss x and x amount of business stops, or you falsify your timecard and take your lunch at a later time than you document, or you falsify your timecard by inputting a lunch but not actually taking it.

But more to the point, how did these routes get into such a state that it's LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE to take your lunch within the contractually agreed upon window?

Because driver upon driver took their lunch when they weren't supposed to, or more likely, didn't take it at all. So the route go so loaded up that an honest lunch one way or another is impossible.

Some may say, "why does it matter if I don't take my lunch at the agreed upon window, as long as I take it?", which is at least better than running lunch, but still only half right. On a route, when you take your lunch when you want to rather when your supposed to (maybe not for your route or Upstate's route), you are skewing the numbers of the route, probably in the company's favor.

It's interesting that you and others will quote the contract regarding OJS rides or injuries or etc. etc., but when it comes down to the contract's position on lunch, you're loosey-goosey. I'm not trying to bust on you, but I know you're not dumb and you seem to be playing dumb. Again, when you take your lunch on your route may not make a difference , but for most routes, it makes a huge difference.

Bottom line: if every driver took their full lunch, and took their full lunch within the contractually agreed upon period, it would equal more drivers on the road and a lot less routes dispatched with a boot to the neck.

Just sayin'.

 

[stevetheupsguy]

Steve,

There are several routes in my center where there is NO OPPORTUNITY to take the full lunch break within the contractually allowed times, due to the level of business deliveries and pickups.

Of course, you could always take your lunch at 1800, after all the pickups are finally completed, but then you'd be falsifying your timecard (at least in my center, lunches must be entered in the DIAD during the contractually agreed window). So, either you take your lunch when you're supposed to, and message the center that you're going to miss x and x amount of business stops, or you falsify your timecard and take your lunch at a later time than you document, or you falsify your timecard by inputting a lunch but not actually taking it.

But more to the point, how did these routes get into such a state that it's LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE to take your lunch within the contractually agreed upon window?

Because driver upon driver took their lunch when they weren't supposed to, or more likely, didn't take it at all. So the route go so loaded up that an honest lunch one way or another is impossible.

Some may say, "why does it matter if I don't take my lunch at the agreed upon window, as long as I take it?", which is at least better than running lunch, but still only half right. On a route, when you take your lunch when you want to rather when your supposed to (maybe not for your route or Upstate's route), you are skewing the numbers of the route, probably in the company's favor.

It's interesting that you and others will quote the contract regarding OJS rides or injuries or etc. etc., but when it comes down to the contract's position on lunch, you're loosey-goosey. I'm not trying to bust on you, but I know you're not dumb and you seem to be playing dumb. Again, when you take your lunch on your route may not make a difference , but for most routes, it makes a huge difference.

Bottom line: if every driver took their full lunch, and took their full lunch within the contractually agreed upon period, it would equal more drivers on the road and a lot less routes dispatched with a boot to the neck.

Just sayin'.

Thanks for the explanation, I finally understand the point, and I wasn't playing dumb, just didn't get the point. I now see the point about taking lunch at the "agreed" upon time because some people are taking them based upon being overloaded, or "unable" to because it would cause service failures. I can't speak for Upstate, (or he'll whip out his red pen again), but you are right when it comes down to there being no such problem on my route. I also see that you are right when it comes to obeying the contract on one side, while disregarding it on another. I am guilty as charged.

 

[stevetheupsguy]

I spoke to our Shop Steward about the lunch "time" matter. He told me that he takes his lunch at the end of the day. He also said that lunch must be taken/started between the 3rd to 5th hour and completed by the 8th hour, meaning, you can take like 5 minutes of "lunch" at 1pm and as long as it's completed by the 8th hour, you're obeying the contract. I guess this means I'm within range.

On another note, he said mgmt was attempting to discipline a driver for taking their full lunch at midday on a route that has over 90 business stops, causing the driver to fall way behind on deliveries and pick ups. Apparently this route needs to be fixed, or should the driver have to take their break toward the end of the day?

 

[Anonymous 10]

I spoke to our Shop Steward about the lunch "time" matter. He told me that he takes his lunch at the end of the day. He also said that lunch must be taken/started between the 3rd to 5th hour and completed by the 8th hour, meaning, you can take like 5 minutes of "lunch" at 1pm and as long as it's completed by the 8th hour, you're obeying the contract. I guess this means I'm within range.

On another note, he said mgmt was attempting to discipline a driver for taking their full lunch at midday on a route that has over 90 business stops, causing the driver to fall way behind on deliveries and pick ups. Apparently this route needs to be fixed, or should the driver have to take their break toward the end of the day?

if he wants to be a nice guy and take it at the end of the day I would have know problem with that. If he is getting an unreasonable dispatch and he wants to take his lunch between the third and fifth hour he has every right but my opinion is that he better take it at that time from now on.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

Breaking up any lunch is playing into management games. Sad your steward is making deals, but not surprising.

Our contract language up here is different - it says specifically 'lunch shall occur between 4-6 hr, or as early as 3.5 hours for inside'. I'm fairly certain the language was not designed to force a driver to take 5 minutes at 12:55pm and the rest of the 55 at 8pm.

 

[over9five]

Breaking up any lunch is playing into management games. Sad your steward is making deals, but not surprising.

Our contract language up here is different - it says specifically 'lunch shall occur between 4-6 hr, or as early as 3.5 hours for inside'. I'm fairly certain the language was not designed to force a driver to take 5 minutes at 12:55pm and the rest of the 55 at 8pm.

+1. Time for a new steward.

 

[Catatonic]

Originally Posted by Sleeve_meet_Heart
Breaking up any lunch is playing into management games. Sad your steward is making deals, but not surprising.

Our contract language up here is different - it says specifically 'lunch shall occur between 4-6 hr, or as early as 3.5 hours for inside'. I'm fairly certain the language was not designed to force a driver to take 5 minutes at 12:55pm and the rest of the 55 at 8pm.

+1. Time for a new steward.

Don't forget local supplements and customs are different in the various parts of the country.

 

[stevetheupsguy]

Breaking up any lunch is playing into management games. Sad your steward is making deals, but not surprising.

Our contract language up here is different - it says specifically 'lunch shall occur between 4-6 hr, or as early as 3.5 hours for inside'. I'm fairly certain the language was not designed to force a driver to take 5 minutes at 12:55pm and the rest of the 55 at 8pm.

That's true, IF, you're doing it to please mgmt, and I agree that if the driver takes their lunch at 12pm on a messed up route, they need to take it at that same time each time they do that route, though, as I type this I'm having trouble agreeing with what I type. Lunch should be taken, and that, as the driver sees fit. Does that sound better? As for taking lunch at 8pm, I meant before the 8th hour, which in our center is 17:45.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

That's true, IF, you're doing it to please mgmt, and I agree that if the driver takes their lunch at 12pm on a messed up route, they need to take it at that same time each time they do that route, though, as I type this I'm having trouble agreeing with what I type. Lunch should be taken, and that, as the driver sees fit. Does that sound better? As for taking lunch at 8pm, I meant before the 8th hour, which in our center is 17:45.

Which region are you in S FL, southern I'm guessing?

 

[UnconTROLLed]

Don't forget local supplements and customs are different in the various parts of the country.

I don't think so, to any great degree. I understand that language has "intent" that isn't necessarily a reflection of the literal interpetation, but generally a lunch is an hour consecutive, and anything less is simply an employee being weak and caving into the tactics and dispatches employed by the management team.

I.E.You cannot possibly say in good faith a supplment negotiated intended on having lunch defined as a period of 5 minutes or anything less than a full meal period, consecutive.

 

[Catatonic]

I don't think so, to any great degree. I understand that language has "intent" that isn't necessarily a reflection of the literal interpetation, but generally a lunch is an hour consecutive, and anything less is simply an employee being weak and caving into the tactics and dispatches employed by the management team.

I.E.You cannot possibly say in good faith a supplment negotiated intended on having lunch defined as a period of 5 minutes or anything less than a full meal period, consecutive.

I understand your viewpoint but I RTS (Refuse To Sign-off) on it.

 

[KodakaTime]

We just went through this fight in our center after they told us we needed to take an hour. We filed a grievance that just about everybody signed. Now we are required to take 30 with the DRIVER option to take up to 60. You guys need to stick together and fight it if you don't want it.

 

[stevetheupsguy]

Which region are you in S FL, southern I'm guessing?

We just moved to North, er, I guess, Central Florida. We're connected to Orlando, which is 1 1/2 hours north of here.

 

[Catatonic]

I.E.You cannot possibly say in good faith a supplment negotiated intended on having lunch defined as a period of 5 minutes or anything less than a full meal period, consecutive.

Anything coming from I.E. has no credibility. You are right.