Socks and Trucks!

[Coldworld]

I'm sure it is. Has there been fatalities or injuries that are documented. We had a guy get hit head on by some tool that blacked out because of huffing paint. The guy was going 60 miles an hour. No injuries to us as the truck was like a tank. Other guy was pretty jacked up.

and let me guess...ups deemed the accident avoidable??????

 

[Coldworld]

Yet they will retrofit these old jalopes with keyless ignition?

yep....put keyless in to a vehicle that will get smashed in 6 months....and the keyless equipment goes to the scrapyard also..

 

[Coldworld]

You are a sky is falling guy. The IBT organized over 50 thousand last year alone. You don't get it.

You cant blame him, just been around this joint too long having to hear ups suits whine on how the company is going under all at the same time making record profits....the sky is falling talk, ups style...it just rubs off on people

 

[Irishman Collins]

Sure do.

Been involved with many negotiations.

Wrote an entire contract Rider, for one group my Local organized.





Thanks for clarifying what you meant. I didn't read it that way.

My previous point being, both sides need to be in agreement on whats open for negotiation.

Before.... one side (the company) thinks it's some sort of "free for all".

Seen it happen.



-Bug-

Both sides need to be in agreement with what is proposed? Are you kidding me? It is simple, a real Union proposes things that benefit their members. Not things that are just agreeable for both sides. With that kind of logic, it is no wonder we are where we are. Omg.......

 

[Mugarolla]

Both sides need to be in agreement with what is proposed? Are you kidding me? It is simple, a real Union proposes things that benefit their members. Not things that are just agreeable for both sides. With that kind of logic, it is no wonder we are where we are. Omg.......

You are correct.

Tne union submits it's contract proposal to the company. It may include new language, current language deleted or current language modified.

The company submits their proposal to the union.

Then negotiations start. The company has to respond to the modifications submitted by the union and vice versa.

Each side can reject them, accept them or counter them.

Bottom line, both sides do not have to agree on modifying a particular article. As long as one side proposes a modification, it is up for negotiation.

 

[Mugarolla]

I'll go one step further.

The entire contract IS up for negotiation at it's expiration.

The company or union could write up an entire new contract and submit it.

The way it is done, is that the union goes through the existing contract line for line making any changes.

Article 1. No changes.

Article 2. No changes.

Article 3 Section 1 line 1, we want this word changed to this.

Article 3 Section 2, we want this sentence changed to this.

Article 3 Section 4, we want eliminated.

Article 3, We want Section 6 added with this wording.

And it continues.

Anything not requesting modification by either side remains. Any changes or additions by either side are negotiated.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

Both sides need to be in agreement with what is proposed? Are you kidding me?

Reading comprehension.... seems to elude you.

That's not what I said.

The entire contract IS up for negotiation at it's expiration.

Not necessarily.

Especially, with Local agreements or "white paper" contracts.


Notification.... can preclude any (further) discussions on certain issues. Period.



-Bug-

 

[Irishman Collins]

Reading comprehension.... seems to elude you.

That's not what I said.





Not necessarily.

Especially, with Local agreements or "white paper" contracts.


Notification.... can preclude any (further) discussions on certain issues. Period.



-Bug-

No, I think you are having a tough time comprehending your own ridiculous post.

 

[Mugarolla]

Reading comprehension.... seems to elude you.

That's not what I said.





Not necessarily.

Especially, with Local agreements or "white paper" contracts.


Notification.... can preclude any (further) discussions on certain issues. Period.



-Bug-

Maybe so. But it does not mean that the company, or union, has to agree to it to those certain issues.

The company, or union, can reject those certain issues and not agree on a contract.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

Maybe so. But it does not mean that the company, or union, has to agree to it to those certain issues.

The company, or union, can reject those certain issues and not agree on a contract.

Mug,


In all fairness, I should retroactively preface my comments by saying....

"This is my experience, in dealing with these situations, in my Local."

And not all situations.... will apply in this manner.


I thought the rest of your post, was spot on.



-Bug-

 

[Mugarolla]

Mug,


In all fairness, I should retroactively preface my comments by saying....

"This is my experience, in dealing with these situations, in my Local."

And not all situations.... will apply in this manner.


I thought the rest of your post, was spot on.



-Bug-

Thanks bug. I should do the same.

It is amazing how different areas have different rules.

I deal with the NMUPSA, CRSA and the Ohio Rider.

Most Supplements and Riders have similar language, others do not.

But when the contracts expire, for the most part, everything is up for re-negotiation if either side wants something changed, including asking UPS to pay for socks.

Even if H did not negotiate them in the first place, he can, and could have, tried to include the socks in the language that UPS supplies the drivers uniform.

And yes, there are bigger issues than a $10 pair of socks, but they are required when wearing shorts and are not a generic item that one might wear away from work, like a white undershirt or a pair of gloves.

 

[Irishman Collins]

Contract negotiations are basically the same. Some have addendum s, riders, etc. Basic contract negotiations are simple. Each side presents the other with their proposals, rather it be in writing or committee to committee. To suggest that approval is necessary to propose language changes or new language is completely ridiculous.

 

[upschuck]

Contract negotiations are basically the same. Some have addendum s, riders, etc. Basic contract negotiations are simple. Each side presents the other with their proposals, rather it be in writing or committee to committee. To suggest that approval is necessary to propose language changes or new language is completely ridiculous.

Both sides have to approve of proposed changes for it to be included in new contract. Nobody is saying the approval has to be made to propose changes, for that doesn't even make sense, chicken and egg thing.

 

[10 point]

Thanks bug. I should do the same.

It is amazing how different areas have different rules.

I deal with the NMUPSA, CRSA and the Ohio Rider.

Most Supplements and Riders have similar language, others do not.

But when the contracts expire, for the most part, everything is up for re-negotiation if either side wants something changed, including asking UPS to pay for socks.

Even if H did not negotiate them in the first place, he can, and could have, tried to include the socks in the language that UPS supplies the drivers uniform.

And yes, there are bigger issues than a $10 pair of socks, but they are required when wearing shorts and are not a generic item that one might wear away from work, like a white undershirt or a pair of gloves.

We have never been required to wear socks with the UPS logo on them while wearing shorts. Whether that's an oversight of local management I do not know but we have never in my recollection of the last 21 years been required to wear UPS logoed socks while wearing shorts.

With that being said I would have to say that if they're going to require it then they should pay for it because the UPS logo is a protected issue and you can't just go out to stores and buy them off the shelf.

 

[Irishman Collins]

Both sides have to approve of proposed changes for it to be included in new contract. Nobody is saying the approval has to be made to propose changes, for that doesn't even make sense, chicken and egg thing.

Reread Bugs prior post

 

[upschuck]

My previous point being, both sides need to be in agreement on whats open for negotiation.

Reread Bugs prior post

...before for it's in contract, not talked about. You really think he meant before talked about?

 

[Mugarolla]

We have never been required to wear socks with the UPS logo on them while wearing shorts. Whether that's an oversight of local management I do not know but we have never in my recollection of the last 21 years been required to wear UPS logoed socks while wearing shorts.

With that being said I would have to say that if they're going to require it then they should pay for it because the UPS logo is a protected issue and you can't just go out to stores and buy them off the shelf.

They cared when the shorts first came out. Then they didn't care for the last 20 years. It was a hot issue again last summer. Either wear the UPS socks or don't wear shorts.

Your local management team must have missed the corporate memo, or just didn't csre.

 

[10 point]

They cared when the shorts first came out. Then they didn't care for the last 20 years. It was a hot issue again last summer. Either wear the UPS socks or don't wear shorts.

Your local management team must have missed the corporate memo, or just didn't csre.

Maybe add: "has difficulty reading and comprehending" to the resume of a couple of the former CMs.

They were more active in policing overallowed. A few special drivers wore flat out multicolored tennis shoes with anklets.
Never heard a word about it.

 

[Irishman Collins]

Yes

 

[Mugarolla]

Maybe add: "has difficulty reading and comprehending" to the resume of a couple of the former CMs.

They were more active in policing overallowed. A few special drivers wore flat out multicolored tennis shoes with anklets.
Never heard a word about it.

Where I am, and a lot of other areas, they were threatening warning letters last summer. We will see if it still an issue this summer. Maybe it is no longer the flavor of the month.

And I guess I typed "care" wrong. Dam cell phones.