Cover Driving and Future FT Jobs

[Robert91]

I'm curious, what are your thoughts about the idea that cover drivers are preventing the company from creating new FT jobs? I think that in theory, it's true - utilizing PT employees to run regular routes negates the need for the company to hire more FT drivers. However, I was talking a co-worker (w/ 20+ years seniority) today, who said he doesn't cover drive for this very reason. He said, "I don't believe in cover driving." While I do think he makes a good point -if PT employees are willing to drive, there is no need for more FT drivers- I also think that this battle cannot be won by seniority employees abstaining from cover driving.

My center is to the point where they are taking the lowest seniority employees on as cover drivers, because they are the only ones willing. My point is, as long as there are any employees willing to do the job, it doesn't matter how many seniority guys pass up the opportunity, because the jobs will still be filled by new employees who have the time (and don't have other jobs that conflict with the occasional cover driving).

I think this sort of mentality isn't the way to fight the company's efforts to eliminate the need for more FT employees. Instead, I believe this battle can only be won through contract negotiations (tighter restraints on how many days a cover driver can drive before hiring another FT employee, the role of FT vs PT, etc...).

What do you think about the issue?

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Cover/casual drivers are an essential part of the operation.

 

[728ups]

When this was allowed in the 1992 National Master( the haters cant blame this on Hoffa/Hall!) I remember many of us thinking this was a terrible move. Management made it sound like they were doing us a favour by having cover drivers,to give us FT employees extra days off if we wanted

 

[Anonymous 11]

I'm curious, what are your thoughts about the idea that cover drivers are preventing the company from creating new FT jobs? I think that in theory, it's true - utilizing PT employees to run regular routes negates the need for the company to hire more FT drivers. However, I was talking a co-worker (w/ 20+ years seniority) today, who said he doesn't cover drive for this very reason. He said, "I don't believe in cover driving." While I do think he makes a good point -if PT employees are willing to drive, there is no need for more FT drivers- I also think that this battle cannot be won by seniority employees abstaining from cover driving.

My center is to the point where they are taking the lowest seniority employees on as cover drivers, because they are the only ones willing. My point is, as long as there are any employees willing to do the job, it doesn't matter how many seniority guys pass up the opportunity, because the jobs will still be filled by new employees who have the time (and don't have other jobs that conflict with the occasional cover driving).

I think this sort of mentality isn't the way to fight the company's efforts to eliminate the need for more FT employees. Instead, I believe this battle can only be won through contract negotiations (tighter restraints on how many days a cover driver can drive before hiring another FT employee, the role of FT vs PT, etc...).

What do you think about the issue?

In my building they have hired at least 25 drivers so far this year any they'll probably hire another 25 if they can get them trained. Nobody want to be a single day vacation driver.

 

[PT Car Washer]

My building does not use PT package car drivers. Nobody would do it. We use air exception and Art 22.3 air drivers and pay them top driver rate. You are right when you point out that UPS has no reason to hire FT drivers when they can just use PT drivers.

 

[10 point]

The problem is that the language allows them to be used all year long even in "volume fluctuations". It's no longer vacation coverage.

Cover/casual drivers are an essential part of the operation.

That statement is without merit to what the OP was talking about. Lower seniority part time drivers are only thinking of themselves for their immediate pay/hours boost. That's a problem for the higher seniority workers next in line to drive.

The good thing is they're not locked into that position for X amount of weeks and when the <4 yr seniority drivers start to really get loaded up the part timers will get a piece of that too.....for a lot less $.

 

[Robert91]

Another thing that is an issue here in the Southern region is that cover drivers are paid quite well - back this peak season, when I was cover driving, I was getting paid $27.** an hour. For those young guys getting into life, that's a lot of money. I certainly won't blame them for taking the job - especially since no one else will take it. I'm glad I got to cover drive; it gave me a taste of what FT package is like. I don't cover drive now for that very reason.

 

[missb]

At our hub I am a part time air driver. If they need drivers to fill in I do not get a choice, because I am lower in seniority than most full timers I am forced to work, and although full time pay is nice, the choice would be nice too.

 

[PT Car Washer]

At our hub I am a part time air driver. If they need drivers to fill in I do not get a choice, because I am lower in seniority than most full timers I am forced to work, and although full time pay is nice, the choice would be nice too.

A lot of people would love to be in your shoes. How often are you forced to work?