california lunch class action

Discussion in 'UPS Discussions' started by I GOT ONE MORE, Jan 23, 2007.

  1. I'm sure this is old news for some, but how does this break down? for the lawyers? for the drivers?



    United Parcel Service Inc.

    A class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of 20,000 drivers against the courier service alleging unpaid overtime. The lawsuit claimed UPS improperly denied wages and/or overtime pay and meal and rest breaks. Plaintiffs sought back wages, penalties, interest and attorney's fees. A California federal court notes UPS has entered an agreement in principle to settle the wage and overtime class action lawsuit for $87 million. (Nov-06-07)
     
  2. rod

    rod retired and happy

    Lawyers will get $86,900,000 and the drivers will get 5 bucks apiece for the other $100,000.
     
  3. rushfan

    rushfan Well-Known Member

    I agree. That's how it goes-class action lawyers get it all, the drivers get 2 bucks.
    IMHO UPS should get held accountable for deducting the lunch hour. If we decide to skip it, we should get paid-If we take it, we shouldn't get harassed for taking it.
     
  4. wildgoose

    wildgoose WILDGOOSE

    The problem with skipping your lunch is the soup gets keen to that and takes work off of the underachiever and gives to you :w00t: . So in reality it just ain`t worth it !
     
  5. sendagain

    sendagain Member

    I told these lawyers to go hang themselves. Nobody ever forced me not to take a lunch, and how many of those drivers who did claim they didn't get a lunch, spent more time chatting with customers? This is just another example of our screwed up legal system. Lawyers just sit around hoping for a big score, there's no justice in it. Jesus chastised lawyers as much as anyone and time has made no difference.
     
  6. trickpony1

    trickpony1 Well-Known Member

    Could you quote the scripture verse with references regarding "....Jesus chastised lawyers as much as anyone....."?
    I'd like to research it.
    Thanks.
     
  7. sendagain

    sendagain Member

    Luke 11:44: "Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers."

    Luke 7:29-30: "And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him."
     
  8. trickpony1

    trickpony1 Well-Known Member

    Sendagain-
    Thanks.........
    I'm impressed! (no sarcasm intended)
     
  9. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    trick......"with Google, all things are possible.":)
     
  10. satellitedriver

    satellitedriver Moderator Staff Member

    Thats why I bought Google stock and not UPS.
     
  11. toonertoo

    toonertoo Most Awesome Dog Staff Member

     
  12. hey, it's really cool to banter here and there. I enjoy the threads!!

    But to get back to the point.....I live in CA and heard about this some time ago, but have forgotten and filed it.

    Time will tell how the dust will settle, but my math says 87 mil/20000 drivers = about $4300 per driver.

    Now if the lawyers take half, which I think is generous, that would leave about $2150 per driver.

    I'm not counting on anything here, just thinking out loud......maybe too loud.

    Comments?........and, respectfully, let's leave the scriptures on the sidelines. Not that there is nothing wrong with that(sic)!!
     
  13. Pkgrunner

    Pkgrunner Service Provider

    Just got my claim form today:w00t:

    Lawyers get ~ $22,000,000
    3 original plaintiffs get $25,000 ea
    1 other plantiff gets a $15,000 "enhancement"

    The rest of us get ~ $3,700--could be more could be less, depends on final settlement and days of service durring the timeframe of 1999-2006. Claim payment processing will begin early June if there are no objections, appeals, or Court ordered extensions.
     
  14. sendagain

    sendagain Member

    I'd rather take no money at all than something I didn't deserve. These lawyers asked me to get involved in this case even though I had not been restricted from lunch breaks. How many other drivers just sent in the paper work as though they deserved that money? If people are without conscience, we all pay eventually; there's millions of dollars leaving my company, affecting the value of my stock, because some greedy lawyers hoped to make a score.
     
  15. trickpony1

    trickpony1 Well-Known Member

    Was it greedy lawyers hoping to make a score or was it a company with a history of running their employees into the ground that inspired this lawsuit?
    If I recall correctly, a nationally known discount store (use your imagination) was recently investigated , and I believe sued, over the same intimidation, veiled threats and number juggling.
    I don't know what your "days of service" were between 1999 and 2006 but, just for conversation, let's use these numbers:
    20 workdays per month times 12 months = 240 workdays per year
    240 workdays times the aforementioned 7 years = 1680 workdays
    $3700 dollars divided by 1680 workdays = $2.20 a day, which isn't even close to what we make per hour for the hour of overtime that we've been screwed out of.
    This is, of course, assuming that no one never, ever worked off the clock which means they never came in early and groomed his load, helped the preloader, ran through lunch or did his turn-in off the clock to make production and time commits.
    I'm sorry but I think the persons who submitted their claim consider this to be "payback time".
    Is it a shame that this issue had to result in a lawsuit? No.....the people had to do something to get it to stop.
    Is it a shame that the company continued to overload drivers, continued to cuts routes, continued to deny "8 hour requests" while still expecting them to make production and adhere to strict time commitments and deadlines ("be in by 7:30 so you don't miss the air")? Yes.
    $2.20 a day is a drop in the bucket compared to what we, the hourly workers, have given/sacrificed to and for the company.
    Just my opinion.....your opinion may be different.
     
  16. helenofcalifornia

    helenofcalifornia Well-Known Member

    I agree with Tooner. If I stop for a lunch break, it's siesta time for me in afternoon. I never get back up to original speed. We are forced to take an hour lunch now in Norcal, though the company allows 1/2 hour if needed to "make service" if you call in. In the old days we would all be in the supervisors office at the end of the day sitting out our lunch hour. I don't know what the answer is because I can see both sides of the issue. Maybe at some centers they will load up stops on those that don't take lunches - not at mine. It's the youngsters that run everywhere that get dumped on.
     
  17. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    Was it greedy lawyers hoping to make a score or was it a company with a history of running their employees into the ground that inspired this lawsuit?
    If I recall correctly, a nationally known discount store (use your imagination) was recently investigated , and I believe sued, over the same intimidation, veiled threats and number juggling.
    I don't know what your "days of service" were between 1999 and 2006 but, just for conversation, let's use these numbers:
    20 workdays per month times 12 months = 240 workdays per year
    240 workdays times the aforementioned 7 years = 1680 workdays
    $3700 dollars divided by 1680 workdays = $2.20 a day, which isn't even close to what we make per hour for the hour of overtime that we've been screwed out of.
    This is, of course, assuming that no one never, ever worked off the clock which means they never came in early and groomed his load, helped the preloader, ran through lunch or did his turn-in off the clock to make production and time commits.
    I'm sorry but I think the persons who submitted their claim consider this to be "payback time".

    As well they should. They should punish the company every chance they get. How dare the company pay them 27 an hour, 40 an hour overtime, six weeks vacation, sick days , optional holidays, retirement and beni's. This abuse of the employee must stop. The employee needs that extra lunch break after 10 hours so they can live, eat and sleep in their browns.

    Reality Trick is this is another example of why union membership continues to decline. No matter how well you compensate people there is always someone out there who thinks they are getting screwed. couple that person with a lawyer in a state as liberally screwed up as california and nothing good will come of it.
     
  18. Please.........the reality is that the drivers are underpaid. If the company gave a damn about honoring their contract, it wouldn't be hard to make sure everybody took their lunch. Immoral bastiges...
     
  19. browniehound

    browniehound Well-Known Member

    Tie, as usual another good post by you. I always enjoy reading your responses.

    Myself would never get a laywer involved here. If the compay that pays me 27+ an hour, pays overtime every week, pays for health and dental insurance, provides a good 401(k) plan and contributes to a defined benefit plan (pension), wants me to take a hour lunch, I'm going to take it. If for some reason I wish to work through it on a regular basis that is my (stupid) option. This isn't 1840. Nobody is standing over you with a wip forcing you to work when not paid to do so. So why the lawsuit?
     
  20. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    from CA.

    Tie....I'm trying to eliminate the liberals, but I'm just one person.....send troops!!:)