getting paid for supervisors working?

[Ptrunner]

I found a similar thread on this but the answers were not clear on this scenario that I have.

The last few weeks I have been holed up in a long trailer loading because I've been getting alot of free money because of supervisors working. I used to be at 3 trailers where I would be going in and out and could see across to the other belts. Now though when i see supervisors working, it might be for a minute or 2 but thats all i see because I cant stand and watch them to see how long theyre working so i just say pay me 1-2 mins or I have my union steward figure out whats going on.

On Monday, I saw a supe loading at the belt across from my area and I told my steward and he came back and said he worked for an hour but he was gonna pay the 4 part timers on his belt 15mins each. But these hourlies don't care and let the supervisor work. There is a lot of these kinds of people in our building. Anyways can they just do that. They can't just decide were gonna pay these people. Or should i just file? My union steward says they can but i looked through the contract and theres nothing about this instance.


Then tonight at the end of the sort, a supervisor was clearing a jackpot for a 1min and I was walking out I came up to her and asked her to be paid for it and she gave me a snobby answer but I got paid. She lied to me before about working so thats why Im going after the minute on principal because these supes lack ethics. Anyways heres what bothered me more; the supervisor from the other belt on monday heard this conversation and said just give it to someone on her belt and not me. She ended up paying me. But can they do this? This makes for some collusion I would think between union hourlies who dont care about supervisors working.

I have more seniority then all the part timers on all the belts i see supervisors work but then the rest are combo guys who get their 8 hours so they cant pay them because then it would be overtime. Any thoughts or suggestions. Im going to print/email these to my union steward because I really do think this is bull and they just dont want to pay me anymore because out of spite.

 

[grgrcr88]

If no one has filed a grievance then what appeard to be happening is they are being settled between the union and company verbally before it is reduced to writing. This is an acceptable means of settling cases however a random selection of who is to be paid is not!!

When a sup is working they basically are displacing an hourly employee, therefore the highest seniority displaced employee should be paid. This could be someone on layoff, or someone that was sent home prior to the work being done. If no displaced employee can be identified the pay should go to the grievant.

 

[City Driver]

I found a similar thread on this but the answers were not clear on this scenario that I have.

The last few weeks I have been holed up in a long trailer loading because I've been getting alot of free money because of supervisors working. I used to be at 3 trailers where I would be going in and out and could see across to the other belts. Now though when i see supervisors working, it might be for a minute or 2 but thats all i see because I cant stand and watch them to see how long theyre working so i just say pay me 1-2 mins or I have my union steward figure out whats going on.

On Monday, I saw a supe loading at the belt across from my area and I told my steward and he came back and said he worked for an hour but he was gonna pay the 4 part timers on his belt 15mins each. But these hourlies don't care and let the supervisor work. There is a lot of these kinds of people in our building. Anyways can they just do that. They can't just decide were gonna pay these people. Or should i just file? My union steward says they can but i looked through the contract and theres nothing about this instance.


Then tonight at the end of the sort, a supervisor was clearing a jackpot for a 1min and I was walking out I came up to her and asked her to be paid for it and she gave me a snobby answer but I got paid. She lied to me before about working so thats why Im going after the minute on principal because these supes lack ethics. Anyways heres what bothered me more; the supervisor from the other belt on monday heard this conversation and said just give it to someone on her belt and not me. She ended up paying me. But can they do this? This makes for some collusion I would think between union hourlies who dont care about supervisors working.

I have more seniority then all the part timers on all the belts i see supervisors work but then the rest are combo guys who get their 8 hours so they cant pay them because then it would be overtime. Any thoughts or suggestions. Im going to print/email these to my union steward because I really do think this is bull and they just dont want to pay me anymore because out of spite.

its people like you that give unions a bad name

im for the union, but it creates way too many crybabies

do your damn job and shut up

 

[Ptrunner]

its people like you that give unions a bad name

im for the union, but it creates way too many crybabies

do your damn job and shut up

But since you dont know the whole story. Let me tell you and well just see how cry baby and giving unions a bad name. This supervisor has lied countless times for when she is working. When there have been witnesses seeing her work. So because im trying to enforce the contract I get called the crybaby. Im holed up in a trailer. She could be working for an hour and I have no idea. Ive told the full time supes this. Im going to nickle and dime anyone that has lied to me about working or on any other matter because its a matter of ethics and morality. Its the only way i can go home and not take my problems of work with me. By the way UPS screwed me 2 times with my back. I took them to court the first time and won and the 2nd time threatned to add my testimony to the disability case thats going on now because they had me on taw for 3 months when i shouldve been off it after 6 weeks. And i was working very different hours compared to my shift. (this happen before the new part in the contract about taw work times)

So im a crybaby because im keeping the company honest. Its probably people like you who create people like me because there wouldnt be any ethics problems or a need for a union when were constantly being messed with.

 

[City Driver]

im not even going to read that

you saw a supervisor doing a union task for 1 minute and actually took the time to ask to get paid for that 1 minute

the time it took you to ask that should count for the grievance pay

your one of those guys who has whole pages of the contract memorized and will recite it word for word to management, like they give a sh** what the contract says

 

[christian c]

Your last post made you sound even more like a crybaby. Things are not going to go perfectly according to the contract. If you are that scared of being taken advantage of, you should not be an hourly employee of a huge corporation.

 

[Ptrunner]

im not even going to read that

you saw a supervisor doing a union task for 1 minute and actually took the time to ask to get paid for that 1 minute

the time it took you to ask that should count for the grievance pay

your one of those guys who has whole pages of the contract memorized and will recite it word for word to management, like they give a sh** what the contract says

actually since im an alternate i cant investigate a grievance on the clock when there is the official steward on the clock so i wait until i punch out and talk to them. thanks for implying im the one with ethical issues..

 

[Dis-organized Labor]

actually since im an alternate i cant investigate a grievance on the clock when there is the official steward on the clock so i wait until i punch out and talk to them. thanks for implying im the one with ethical issues..

I'd say you brought it on yourself.

 

[Dark_Team_135]

im not even going to read that

you saw a supervisor doing a union task for 1 minute and actually took the time to ask to get paid for that 1 minute

the time it took you to ask that should count for the grievance pay

your one of those guys who has whole pages of the contract memorized and will recite it word for word to management, like they give a sh** what the contract says

And you sound like a management "wannabe" that thinks it is OK for this stuff to be going on when there are many members on layoff, combo jobs being dissolved and overtime for members (that work inside) being cut to nothing... Why do you think the penalty for this violation keeps going up? Because it ISN'T a problem?

Like he said, these sups are working much more than the amount of time that he is seeing them. They likely put him in a trailer to keep him from being able to see what is going on, so he should call them out when he does see it. Why don't they just quit doing bargaining unit work?

As for them arbitrarily paying who they feel like, you need to call your Business Agent at the Union Hall and straighten that out. The highest seniority person that FILES a grievance should get paid for it unless there are people that are on layoff. The key is to actually file the grievance and if they pay someone else before it is settled, then they will be paying for the time they worked twice! By the way, the penalty is double time pay for the time they worked, so make sure that is what they are paying out and file the grievance even if they do pay it so you can ask for the practice to STOP!

 

[Ptrunner]

As for them arbitrarily paying who they feel like, you need to call your Business Agent at the Union Hall and straighten that out. The highest seniority person that FILES a grievance should get paid for it unless there are people that are on layoff. The key is to actually file the grievance and if they pay someone else before it is settled, then they will be paying for the time they worked twice! By the way, the penalty is double time pay for the time they worked, so make sure that is what they are paying out and file the grievance even if they do pay it so you can ask for the practice to STOP!

I dont totally understand what youre saying. The thing is Im suppose to talk to the part time supervisor before filing any grievances and most times it goes to verbal where they just say theyll pay me. I think ever since that monday incident and last night they are gonna say from now on were just gonna pay someone from our belt when i approach them. They can't just immediately say that right? I've been told they work all the time its just im holed up in a trailer and i cant see anything. The people that tell me dont care and dont want to get harassed my managment. They like getting their days off. I dont care really I just want them honest. So would it better if they say were gonna pay someone from our belt and I would just say well im gonna file my grievance and youll pay us both then?

 

[cachsux]

its people like you that give unions a bad name

im for the union, but it creates way too many crybabies

do your damn job and shut up

Dude,not cool.

I give him credit for having the balls to say something especially when so many others don`t or are naive to know better.
When I have to go into the hub to check trailers and I see sups working I`ll walk by and ask if they need a hand just to let them know they were seen. I` write it down when i get back to the tractor and pass it on to our stewards. If they were legitimately shorthanded,fine,but if not then PT`s deserve to get paid.

 

[brownIEman]

The supervisors should not be working.

But I tell you what, I really get tired sometimes of the holier than thou rightious indignation attitude I hear in the operation and on this board from union folks who seem to be on a zealot't crusade against the evil, lying, swindling, step on the little guy management in this company.

The contract says I as a management person should not be doing bargaining unit work. It lays out exceptions to this rule, and it lays out penalties for violating this rule. I am fine with all that.

So, ethically, I feel my goal is to organize the work and the workforce under my responsibility so that I can service our customers without ever forwarding the progress of a package myself. (BTW, a pet peeve of mine is the dimwits who think the contract says I am never allowed to EVER even TOUCH a package. Yes, we have some.) Now, there are two instances where I feel I am totally within ethical bounds to actually do barganing unit work. The first, is if I am directed to do so by my superiors. Like everyone else, I must work as directed. The second is if there is not a union hourly immediately available and failing to do the work right then, would result in failure of service to the customer. In either case, I have absolutely no problems with someone filing and getting paid for it when I do. That is the agreement. I do not understand the management people who take it as a personal affront when someone files for payment under these rules. Any more than I understand the crusaders who take it as some sort of personal affront when a memeber of managment does work. Lordy the drama people like to add into this job.

That said, nit picking and asking for something like a one minute grievance is taking the rightious indignation thing a tad far. You are not alone though, far from it. There are many who feel anytime a managment person forwards even a single package, it is not only their ethical right, it is their ethical duty to grieve it for all the poor souls on layoff.

OK, but look at the other side of the coin for a minute. Lets say I was the management equivalant of one of these holy crusaders. Then I too would be working to ease the reduced hours and layoff situation in the hubs. Like today, when I walked up to a pen between two cars and overheard two loaders talking about baseball. Just standing and chatting. Not for any obscene length of time, maybe a minute. Instead of allowing the conversation to lag for a second then intruding with a good natured jest that got them back to work, were I a crusader, I would have found the nearest steward, and the nearest security member, and had them both walked off the property for stealing time. Sure it was only a minute, but so what, the rules don't say stealing only a minute is not stealing.

 

[grgrcr88]

You are correct IE man a minute here and there is no big deal, but where does it stop. Do we let it go for 5 mins, 10 how long is too long. If you do a little math you will see that 1 minute for every sup every day would add up to several hundred teamster jobs a year. Altstewie, keep up the good work!!

In answer to your question about randomly picking someone to pay, read my original post.

 

[Ptrunner]

The supervisors should not be working.

But I tell you what, I really get tired sometimes of the holier than thou rightious indignation attitude I hear in the operation and on this board from union folks who seem to be on a zealot't crusade against the evil, lying, swindling, step on the little guy management in this company.

The contract says I as a management person should not be doing bargaining unit work. It lays out exceptions to this rule, and it lays out penalties for violating this rule. I am fine with all that.

So, ethically, I feel my goal is to organize the work and the workforce under my responsibility so that I can service our customers without ever forwarding the progress of a package myself. (BTW, a pet peeve of mine is the dimwits who think the contract says I am never allowed to EVER even TOUCH a package. Yes, we have some.) Now, there are two instances where I feel I am totally within ethical bounds to actually do barganing unit work. The first, is if I am directed to do so by my superiors. Like everyone else, I must work as directed. The second is if there is not a union hourly immediately available and failing to do the work right then, would result in failure of service to the customer. In either case, I have absolutely no problems with someone filing and getting paid for it when I do. That is the agreement. I do not understand the management people who take it as a personal affront when someone files for payment under these rules. Any more than I understand the crusaders who take it as some sort of personal affront when a memeber of managment does work. Lordy the drama people like to add into this job.

That said, nit picking and asking for something like a one minute grievance is taking the rightious indignation thing a tad far. You are not alone though, far from it. There are many who feel anytime a managment person forwards even a single package, it is not only their ethical right, it is their ethical duty to grieve it for all the poor souls on layoff.

OK, but look at the other side of the coin for a minute. Lets say I was the management equivalant of one of these holy crusaders. Then I too would be working to ease the reduced hours and layoff situation in the hubs. Like today, when I walked up to a pen between two cars and overheard two loaders talking about baseball. Just standing and chatting. Not for any obscene length of time, maybe a minute. Instead of allowing the conversation to lag for a second then intruding with a good natured jest that got them back to work, were I a crusader, I would have found the nearest steward, and the nearest security member, and had them both walked off the property for stealing time. Sure it was only a minute, but so what, the rules don't say stealing only a minute is not stealing.

I know at times supervisors must work especially during peak. Although i hate it and disapprove of it I will not file a grievance during peak unless they send people home and do work. But in the above situation that i described about the jackpot. It was the end of the night and most of the people were gone, theres no reason she has to go up there and clean that jackpot up, she should keep someone there or instruct me to clean it up, theres no reason for it, its just on principle and in addition she has lied a few times about working already to my face. For all i know she could be working every day and ive heard she has but these people that tell me dont want to push any issues because theyre afraid of management. Im not being overzealous, Im just trying to do the right thing. But what im really after is the fact are they allowed to pay whomever they want instead of myself even though im the only one verbally asking to get paid for their actions.

 

[brownIEman]

You are correct IE man a minute here and there is no big deal, but where does it stop. Do we let it go for 5 mins, 10 how long is too long. If you do a little math you will see that 1 minute for every sup every day would add up to several hundred teamster jobs a year. Altstewie, keep up the good work!!

In answer to your question about randomly picking someone to pay, read my original post.

but again, you are not looking at the other side of the coin. How long is too long just standing and having a quick chat, or taking a breather, and not doing any work while on the clock? 1 minute, 3 minutes, 5 minutes? 10?

If you do a little math you will see that if every hourly who took that extra even :30 seconds break a day, or took that extra LONNNNNG stroll to the bathroom three times a day, or had that 1 minute catch up conversation a day, stopped, it would dwarf the hours put in by those 1 minute supes a day and there would be no need for a single second of them. So sure, altstewie, go ahead and keep up the good work, just please keep working.

 

[UPSGUY72]

im not even going to read that

you saw a supervisor doing a union task for 1 minute and actually took the time to ask to get paid for that 1 minute

the time it took you to ask that should count for the grievance pay

your one of those guys who has whole pages of the contract memorized and will recite it word for word to management, like they give a sh** what the contract says

HELLO !!! Anyone home upstairs ???? We have a contract with the company they want us to play by the rules on the contract so they should too. I understabd we all must pick are battles and there has to be a little give and take. However if management is working then they need hire someone else so they don't have to.

BUT obviously according to you the company should be able to do anything they want as long as you have a job. You are a COMPANY man you probably would stab a Union brother in the back if it met you get favorable treatment.

 

[City Driver]

i dont know what planet you all live on but if i filed a grievance for a supervisor working for 1 minute, id be called into the office and disciplined for all sorts of things they will drag out

file grievance = put you on the radar

and the union does nothing for us.......our stewards are a joke

 

[UPSGUY72]

i dont know what planet you all live on but if i filed a grievance for a supervisor working for 1 minute, id be called into the office and disciplined for all sorts of things they will drag out

file grievance = put you on the radar

and the union does nothing for us.......our stewards are a joke

So in order to stay off the radar let management walk all over the union.

Well get new stewards you elected them.

 

[PobreCarlos]

UPSGuy72;

In the sense of two parties voluntarily coming together to reach an agreement, with mutual consideration on both sides, I'm not sure that many purists would consider the Teamsters "agreement" with UPS a true "contract"; rather, it's a form of coercion dictated by highly politicized law. If you think of it in those terms, perhaps you would realize why mgmt might not give quite the same consideration to it as you do; they don't see it as something they AGREED to at all; rather, it was something that was IMPOSED on them by outside forces....and there isn't quite the moral imperative to adhere to it that there might be with a true "contract".

That said, one can't help but think how attitudes like yours and "altstewie"'s here have helped the union movement - and the Teamsters specifically! - to "grow" in their base industry over these last few decades. No wonder that they're known as the most cost-effective, efficient labor option....and why company after company has been stumbling all over themselves RUSHING to employ them!

 

[UPSGUY72]

UPSGuy72;

In the sense of two parties voluntarily coming together to reach an agreement, with mutual consideration on both sides, I'm not sure that many purists would consider the Teamsters "agreement" with UPS a true "contract"; rather, it's a form of coercion dictated by highly politicized law. If you think of it in those terms, perhaps you would realize why mgmt might not give quite the same consideration to it as you do; they don't see it as something they AGREED to at all; rather, it was something that was IMPOSED on them by outside forces....and there isn't quite the moral imperative to adhere to it that there might be with a true "contract".

That said, one can't help but think how attitudes like yours and "altstewie"'s here have helped the union movement - and the Teamsters specifically! - to "grow" in their base industry over these last few decades. No wonder that they're known as the most cost-effective, efficient labor option....and why company after company has been stumbling all over themselves RUSHING to employ them!

If you don't like the union then why are you in it ? Oh I tell you the union is what brought you the weekend, good pay, great health benifits, a pension, guaranteed 8 hours, time and half over 8.

Go find a none union job with out a education that gives the pay rate your making and all the benifits basically for free.

Oh wait there is any.

People like you make me sick you want to be in the union because of the benifits you receive and as long as management leave you alone they can do what ever they want.

Just to make one thing clear I'm a graduate of Embry Riddle, a former Army helicopter pilot, and with my education and training I can make more money and better benifits working for UPS (in the union ) then in my degree field of work not in the union.