Driver fired for falsifying timecard...

[The Other Side]

Much like the driver here I posted about

Maybe its because its very late after a 30 hour day, but I dont see the driver being able to be charged with stealing time as this statement suggests. A driver working off the clock is only stealing time from themselves.

As to the rest of the post, dead on!

Danny,

The reason it is considered stealing time is because under the state law, any movement of that vehicle while clocked out on a lunch period is considered PAID LUNCH. Prior to UPS losing its ash in the California case, we drivers were allowed to either skip lunch (even though clocked out) and continue delivering to shorten our days.

Unfortunately for UPS, even though they allowed the practice, it violated state law and had to go back and compensate all the drivers in california during a three year period and pay them for the time they worked during a clocked out lunch. In most cases, this was a voluntary act on the drivers part, yet, the practice still violated state laws and the company had to pay.

Today, drivers cannot place UPS into the same "liability" position by clocking out for lunch and working. If a driver does this for a year, and its his own choice to do so, the state could enforce the law on the company and make them pay the driver for that hours time x (times) all the days in the year that he worked. This would be stealing time.

In addition, any driver who pre-records packages, then clocks out for lunch, continues to deliver the pre-records during the unpaid time, then at the end of the day, sits in one position and closes each stop out with 1 minute separation between them is FALSIFYING records and is in violation of a cardinal rule of dishonesty.

The company has spent millions of dollars on technology to provide the customer with accurate delivery information. Any circumventing of accurate information by a driver (volunatarily) for self serving reasons is a dishonest act and subject to an immediate term.

There is no justification for any driver to do this action. In some areas across the country, rules are lax until the law catches up. This being the case, it does not make it ok for areas subject to strict guidelines to do things improperly.

You have to remember, this is a matter of "liability" for the company and they will protect themselves by disciplining us for lunch violations.

Peace.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

...and if you only take 10 minutes, show ten minutes, not an hour.

This is not an option where I work. We get 45 minutes and have to show all 45 in the board. The only way we can show less is if we request and are approved for a Code 5. If mgt ever sat down and compared lunch times with delivery records we would have a couple of drivers who would be having a sit-down with the center manager.

 

[dilligaf]

Danny,

The reason it is considered stealing time is because under the state law, any movement of that vehicle while clocked out on a lunch period is considered PAID LUNCH. Prior to UPS losing its ash in the California case, we drivers were allowed to either skip lunch (even though clocked out) and continue delivering to shorten our days.

Unfortunately for UPS, even though they allowed the practice, it violated state law and had to go back and compensate all the drivers in california during a three year period and pay them for the time they worked during a clocked out lunch. In most cases, this was a voluntary act on the drivers part, yet, the practice still violated state laws and the company had to pay.

Today, drivers cannot place UPS into the same "liability" position by clocking out for lunch and working. If a driver does this for a year, and its his own choice to do so, the state could enforce the law on the company and make them pay the driver for that hours time x (times) all the days in the year that he worked. This would be stealing time.

In addition, any driver who pre-records packages, then clocks out for lunch, continues to deliver the pre-records during the unpaid time, then at the end of the day, sits in one position and closes each stop out with 1 minute separation between them is FALSIFYING records and is in violation of a cardinal rule of dishonesty.

The company has spent millions of dollars on technology to provide the customer with accurate delivery information. Any circumventing of accurate information by a driver (volunatarily) for self serving reasons is a dishonest act and subject to an immediate term.

There is no justification for any driver to do this action. In some areas across the country, rules are lax until the law catches up. This being the case, it does not make it ok for areas subject to strict guidelines to do things improperly.

You have to remember, this is a matter of "liability" for the company and they will protect themselves by disciplining us for lunch violations.

Peace.

I don't read what TOS has to say very often but this post caught my eye. TOS is dead on with this. Any driver that has been around for any length of time knows what the cardinal sins are, knows what the rules are. You can 'spin' the reason for stop completing while at lunch any way you want to but the fact remains, this is a dishonest act. Proven dishonesty deserves fair discipline according to procedures. Repeated proven dishonesty and you will never get your job back.

Everyone here (BC) knows that there is no standardization of rules across the country. We talk about it everyday. It is what it is. You do what your center requires if you want to keep your job. Here, I can take my lunch when ever. If I was somewhere else I would follow the rules in accordance to that center. You do what is required of you, where ever you are. That is the basic fact.

 

[NHDRVR]

I don't read what TOS has to say very often but this post caught my eye. TOS is dead on with this. Any driver that has been around for any length of time knows what the cardinal sins are, knows what the rules are. You can 'spin' the reason for stop completing while at lunch any way you want to but the fact remains, this is a dishonest act. Proven dishonesty deserves fair discipline according to procedures. Repeated proven dishonesty and you will never get your job back.

Everyone here (BC) knows that there is no standardization of rules across the country. We talk about it everyday. It is what it is. You do what your center requires if you want to keep your job. Here, I can take my lunch when ever. If I was somewhere else I would follow the rules in accordance to that center. You do what is required of you, where ever you are. That is the basic fact.

Correct. When you apply for a job, any job, you must expect to work within the rules they set. Or else why did you apply?? Let me give a bit more info on the driver in question here... He made over 90 grand last year and was very vocal about it ( hence me knowing ) and was just as vocal about what UPS could do with 'their' rules. I feel sorry for his family in this situation but he clearly brought all of this upon himself. He was always a nice guy in general but he loved to thumb his nose at management. You have to walk a line sometimes whether you like or not. He didn't...

 

[browniehound]

I guess I will never understand the whole lunch problem.

There are very few reasons for not being able to take your lunch in the middle of the day. The most valid one I can think of is being in the middle of nowhere all day without a restaurant in sight. That would be an extreme case and unlikely for 98% of drivers.

As I've said in the past...lunch was the highlight of my day. My biggest problem was keeping within the time allowed. I understand that not everybody has a place they can go where they can make friends and become one of the townsfolk, but the break from work and just getting out of the PC for a while is priceless.

Take my lunch in the building at the end of the day?.........not an option(personally)!

Whatever you decide.....just put it in the diad correctly......anything else is falsification........a position you put yourself into and shouldn't require a bailout from the union. JMO

I have a new twist on this subject. We are required to take an hour lunch and 2 -10 minute paid breaks. I've been on record saying this is too much personal time to be forced to take. It becomes FAR too much time when you work in the northeast, in winter and have telematics.

One function of telematics is to measure idle time (the time the vehicle is running without moving, and yes its at the top of the list of things they look at). Its so important because reducing idling time will save UPS money right away. I have no problem with that.

I work in a reasonable sized town with many industrial buildings. However, the entire route is lacking retail stores, restuarants or coffee shops. Once I'm out of the industrial park, I'm basically delivering in the woods. I have no warm place to take my lunch and breaks.

The temperatures can get as low as -25 degrees friend here with the wind chill. I am not permitted to idle the truck during lunch or breaks. How can they treat an employee like this? And for the many drivers that have resturants and coffee shops, how can the company expect us to be vagrants at these places everyday. I can't afford to eat out everyday and shouldn't be expected to spend $3 a day on coffee just so I can sit in their shop to stay warm and meet the hour lunch requirement. Its just not fair.

How about this for a fair solution? I won't idle if I don't have to take the full hour? I will sit there in the cold just long enough to eat and recharge myself. Makes sense and its fair, isn't it? Why won't this be allowed?

I'll go out on a limb and take a wild guess. The driver is freezing his butt off. He has to take an hour lunch to be fairly compensated. He can't idle the truck to keep warm, so most likely he's going to give up that hour to the company just for the simple fact that -25 degrees friend is very, very uncomfortable. UPS emerges from this situation with an hour of free labor.

Its the only company I know that practices and gets away with this. The company cries that it has to pay a union wage yet gets away with thousands of hours of free union labor everyday!

I've requested to work through the lunch hour and get paid in these extreme weather situation (cold, wind, blizzards) only to be denied. How can these desicion makers live with themselves? How can this be justified?

Can someone from management please post a rebuttal to my opinion??

 

[browniehound]

You may be in central states health and welfare, but are you under the central region supplement? If you are, you only get 30 minutes unpaid lunch,to be taken between the 3rd and 5th hour of work, no time is taken from your paycheck unless you enter it as lunch, and 1 ten minute paid break.

This I find reasonable if not a perfect amount personal time. For a little perspective, here in New England we are forced to take TWICE that amount. Its the same job, so why the 100% difference in personal time?

I'm sorry, nobody needs 1 hour and twenty minutes of breaks everyday. Think about it. For an 8-hour day, your personal time is 1/6 of your work day. 1/6! Can you believe this? Your 8-hour day now becomes a 9.33 hour day. Who wants this? I surely don't....

 

[over9five]

If you're cold during your hour lunch, run your truck! It's really that simple. It's not like you'll run it for the whole hour anyhow. Every 15 minutes, start it and warm the cab up for five minutes. They'll just have to eat that time, we are human and we need heat.

They will push this only as long as you let them get away with it.

 

[NHDRVR]

UPDATE

The driver in question is coming back to work on Monday. The details are a bit hazy as to how everything transpired and, quite frankly, are all irrelevant to the driver involved since he is probably thrilled to now have a paycheck/benefits again. I spoke to a few people who are a closer to this driver than I am and I guess this decision had more to do with UPS higher-ups, beyond the center management team, and less to do with the union pursuing the case. Either way, I made the comment that it is impossible to get fired from UPS.....at least up here any ways. I am curious as to the toe-stepping that was involved with this entire proceeding though. On one hand I am happy he is getting his job back since he has a family and no one wants to see the fallout from no job or insurance. On the other hand, it is curious to me that UPS has no consistency with their disciplinary actions. I mean across the board and not just in this situation.

Any thoughts???

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

It is a good feeling when you are not on a first name basis with the district and/or division manager.

 

[over9five]

Do you think he'll now do what he's told? Put in his lunch when he's supposed to?

 

[grgrcr88]

UPDATE

The driver in question is coming back to work on Monday. The details are a bit hazy as to how everything transpired and, quite frankly, are all irrelevant to the driver involved since he is probably thrilled to now have a paycheck/benefits again. I spoke to a few people who are a closer to this driver than I am and I guess this decision had more to do with UPS higher-ups, beyond the center management team, and less to do with the union pursuing the case. Either way, I made the comment that it is impossible to get fired from UPS.....at least up here any ways. I am curious as to the toe-stepping that was involved with this entire proceeding though. On one hand I am happy he is getting his job back since he has a family and no one wants to see the fallout from no job or insurance. On the other hand, it is curious to me that UPS has no consistency with their disciplinary actions. I mean across the board and not just in this situation.

Any thoughts???

What I am seeing here is a concerted effort by UPS to become more consistent with regards to discipline, to me it is an unfortunate situation. Every case has its own set of circumstances and should be judged based on those. Not simply a standard punishment for every time someone has a similar infraction. Example, 2 drivers have crashes that cause over $4400 in damage. The company policy now is immediate termination and case must go in front of panel. Does not matter the situations of each crash. I have had a pretty fair relationship with the center team in my building and hate to see the decision making process stripped from them because the company wants to show a more consistent front.

 

[NHDRVR]

What I am seeing here is a concerted effort by UPS to become more consistent with regards to discipline, to me it is an unfortunate situation. Every case has its own set of circumstances and should be judged based on those. Not simply a standard punishment for every time someone has a similar infraction. Example, 2 drivers have crashes that cause over $4400 in damage. The company policy now is immediate termination and case must go in front of panel. Does not matter the situations of each crash. I have had a pretty fair relationship with the center team in my building and hate to see the decision making process stripped from them because the company wants to show a more consistent front.

I agree that each situation is unique. And, thankfully, they are handled in the office as such. My comment about managements consistency is what bothers me because I believe there should be some cut and dried parameters that mean, A, if you break them you're fired, and B, going to the panel isn't an option. Our Business Agent in our Local is very good at what he does and he surely played a part in this drivers return but my reaction has more to do with a different set of rules for each person which is never a good thing. My problem here isn't personal in nature because I like the driver in question. This is all about UPS creating, or holding onto, an environment that lacks credibility.

 

[NHDRVR]

Do you think he'll now do what he's told? Put in his lunch when he's supposed to?

I was talking to one of the stewards last night about this and he said something that was hysterical but it won't come across as funny unless you know the driver in question. We have a guy who is on a 'working termination' for the 3rd time, I think, and UPS just can't seem to get rid of. If I told you the things he has said to customers and done you would shake your head, Trust me... Any ways, this guy is going to be able to look at the driver coming back on Monday and say, "WOW, you better keep your ****** in check...". And that's not right...

 

[SWORDFISH]

It is a good feeling when you are not on a first name basis with the district and/or division manager.

I have been w/ our last 3 . Im about to meet our new one on monday. He doesnt know me yet.

 

[SWORDFISH]

UPDATE

The driver in question is coming back to work on Monday. The details are a bit hazy as to how everything transpired and, quite frankly, are all irrelevant to the driver involved since he is probably thrilled to now have a paycheck/benefits again. I spoke to a few people who are a closer to this driver than I am and I guess this decision had more to do with UPS higher-ups, beyond the center management team, and less to do with the union pursuing the case. Either way, I made the comment that it is impossible to get fired from UPS.....at least up here any ways. I am curious as to the toe-stepping that was involved with this entire proceeding though. On one hand I am happy he is getting his job back since he has a family and no one wants to see the fallout from no job or insurance. On the other hand, it is curious to me that UPS has no consistency with their disciplinary actions. I mean across the board and not just in this situation.

Any thoughts???

We just lost our 2nd person to termination over my UPS lifetime(13th year). We have had about 20 firings but only lost 2. Both of them deserved to go IMO. The rest that got fired deserved to come back. Sometimes people speak of these situations w/ out knowing the details. They think people should get fired w/ out knowing the whole story. The last 2 sentences are just in general by the way.

 

[NHDRVR]

We just lost our 2nd person to termination over my UPS lifetime(13th year). We have had about 20 firings but only lost 2. Both of them deserved to go IMO. The rest that got fired deserved to come back. Sometimes people speak of these situations w/ out knowing the details. They think people should get fired w/ out knowing the whole story. The last 2 sentences are just in general by the way.

I agree. I don't pretend to know everything about the situation here either. My initial gripe has to do with UPS and their rule bending to fit their needs. A classic example of this is during the year when they press lunch between the 4th and 5th hour ( to certain individuals at least ), but when peak arrives then they say, "well, we have to do what we have to do"... They want it both ways when all the drivers want is consistency...

 

[NHDRVR]

Correction.. MOST of the drivers want consistency...

 

[Omega man]

UpstateNY, Why don't you just take your lunch when your contract says you are supposed to take it? You are also violating Article 6 of the Master by entering into your own agreement with management.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

UpstateNY, Why don't you just take your lunch when your contract says you are supposed to take it? You are also violating Article 6 of the Master by entering into your own agreement with management.

I have a better idea--why don't you do what works for you and I will do what works for me? Does it really make a damn bit of difference when lunch is taken as long as one is taken? I prefer to take my lunch and break together, usually at home, during a break in my pickups. I don't falsify anything. I record the actual times that I start and end my lunch and breaks. There is no work done during those 55 minutes. This simply works best for me.

BTW, very few drivers in my center take their lunch during the contractually mandated times; in fact, there is a group of 5-6 that take their "lunch" daily at the gas station/convenience store, usually from 6-6:45 pm. One of my other co-workers, who lives 2 streets away from me, also takes his lunch at home before heading back to the bldg.

The point is that, although you are technically correct, we are following the intent, if not the letter, of the contract in that we are all taking our 45 minute unpaid lunch and 10 minute paid break.

 

[Omega man]

I have a better idea--why don't you do what works for you and I will do what works for me? Does it really make a damn bit of difference when lunch is taken as long as one is taken? I prefer to take my lunch and break together, usually at home, during a break in my pickups. I don't falsify anything. I record the actual times that I start and end my lunch and breaks. There is no work done during those 55 minutes. This simply works best for me.

BTW, very few drivers in my center take their lunch during the contractually mandated times; in fact, there is a group of 5-6 that take their "lunch" daily at the gas station/convenience store, usually from 6-6:45 pm. One of my other co-workers, who lives 2 streets away from me, also takes his lunch at home before heading back to the bldg.

The point is that, although you are technically correct, we are following the intent, if not the letter, of the contract in that we are all taking our 45 minute unpaid lunch and 10 minute paid break.

The problem is that when you accommodate yourself you are also accommodating UPS. You are artificially more productive on your route. We all work under certain constraints, one is our contract. We are not supposed to be the most productive that we can possibly be. We are only supposed to be as productive as our contract will allow. You think that you are helping yourself but you really are not. You are doing more work in a given amount of time than what you would do if you simply followed your contract. You are also helping to keep additional routes from being added to your center. A midday lunch makes you less productive but is required for safety reasons. UPS and our Union have an agreement in place that will help you if you follow it. Instead, you have chosen to victimize yourself.