Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Socks and Trucks!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mugarolla" data-source="post: 2174960" data-attributes="member: 8481"><p>I agree about safety, but I am on the fence on this one.</p><p></p><p>Should a company, like UPS, have to retro-fit their entire fleet every time a new safety feature comes out?</p><p></p><p>The government does not mandate older vehicles having to be retro-fit, they just mandate new vehicles be equipped with the new features.</p><p></p><p>The seatbelts would not be that big a cost, but retro-fitting anti-lock brakes, collision avoidance, air bags, etc could bankrupt a company.</p><p></p><p>We did get by without all these new safety features for over 100 years.</p><p></p><p>If the union wants to negotiate these into the contract, fine. But for a company to retro-fit all these into their fleet on their own for the sake of safety could be cost prohibitive. What good would a safer vehicle be if the company is no longer in business?</p><p></p><p>Again, I am not saying no to all these, but where does it stop? At one point, I believe, delivery drivers were not even required to wear seatbelts by the government. They were exempt.</p><p></p><p>Indiana Law From 2007</p><p></p><p><em>Subsection 9-19-10-1 (3) exempts occupants who are "traveling in a commercial or a United States Postal Service vehicle that makes frequent stops for the purpose of pickup or delivery of goods or services" from wearing a seatbelt.</em></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mugarolla, post: 2174960, member: 8481"] I agree about safety, but I am on the fence on this one. Should a company, like UPS, have to retro-fit their entire fleet every time a new safety feature comes out? The government does not mandate older vehicles having to be retro-fit, they just mandate new vehicles be equipped with the new features. The seatbelts would not be that big a cost, but retro-fitting anti-lock brakes, collision avoidance, air bags, etc could bankrupt a company. We did get by without all these new safety features for over 100 years. If the union wants to negotiate these into the contract, fine. But for a company to retro-fit all these into their fleet on their own for the sake of safety could be cost prohibitive. What good would a safer vehicle be if the company is no longer in business? Again, I am not saying no to all these, but where does it stop? At one point, I believe, delivery drivers were not even required to wear seatbelts by the government. They were exempt. Indiana Law From 2007 [I]Subsection 9-19-10-1 (3) exempts occupants who are "traveling in a commercial or a United States Postal Service vehicle that makes frequent stops for the purpose of pickup or delivery of goods or services" from wearing a seatbelt.[/I] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Socks and Trucks!
Top