ups labor relations.

[Bloodybrown]

I'm guessing that your Sundays are reserved for drinking and posting?
Your as ignorant as Red !
I admit I'm curious to hear your definition of communist and how it fits me based on one post about a pot and a kettle....

I have viewed past posts of your support of socialism and how a good union and socialism go hand in hand, and you seem to support that correct? I see you as someone that would like to gut the company and redistribute wealth, you also would like the union to actually run the company so more can go to the teamsters union and the employees, you like red would like to get as much as possible out of the company for the short term while watching it deteriorate and go under in the long run. You would than like the government to bailout the union and or company when both have failed ! .........sound right??

 

[Bloodybrown]

I don't follow all the arguments but calling folks crybaby, whining baby and communist doesn't offer one much merit.

Don't know about anyone else here but being called a communist is about as bad as it gets. I'd be p*ssed.

You have not been following our threads over the past month or two or you would know why!

 

[Bloodybrown]

He, I think is a she. Red mentioned in his post:
One of Reds false posts ! !


You know, the more I think about it, Tie also has a hard-on for Red as well so I'm on record that Bloodybrown is really Tie in drag. At least that's the rumor I'm spreading.
I have viewed you as a level headed induvidual. I hope I'm not wrong

Be careful Red!

 

[705red]

I have no time to go back in time about your inaccurate statements, but I will call you out on anymore that you post. You falsely accuse me of being a female.......you knowingly posted this, did you not??


Another nice cop out! Typical management rhetoric by accusing someone of being dishonest when in fact they cannot prove anything dishonest.

I was just guessing since its hard to determine what ones sex is just by chating online with no face to face interaction. I guess it was a process of elimination seeing that i had not seen any manly features from your keyboard. If i was wrong i can admit it and if you are a male i do apoligize.

Ther other half truth that I can think of is the fact that part timers DQed while driving have to wait the life of the contract to get another shot, you may have been able to get the company to occasionally give someone another shot after a year, but the company does NOT HAVE TO COMPLY!!
,you make it sound like its past practice so UPS has to comply...NOT TRUE !

If contract language was not changed during the talks it would remain in tact under its current understanding! Im i right on this point?

While we were able to change alot of language in one contract year we were not able to address/change the entire contract. The rest will be addressed in 2013.

while this is negotiated under other locals supplements, you and your local did nothing to help part timers did you? I don't have to look far for half truths that you post.

Maybe you can show me how we failed the ptimers more than the national?
the national failed the ptimer more than 705 did! We have protected all of our current 22.3 jobs and at the same time at least 500 ptimers will be offered ftime positions during the life of this contract at minimum.

Once again all i ask is that you add substance to a conversation before i put you on ignore!

 

[705red]

I have viewed past posts of your support of socialism and how a good union and socialism go hand in hand, and you seem to support that correct? I see you as someone that would like to gut the company and redistribute wealth, you also would like the union to actually run the company so more can go to the teamsters union and the employees, you like red would like to get as much as possible out of the company for the short term while watching it deteriorate and go under in the long run. You would than like the government to bailout the union and or company when both have failed ! .........sound right??

The only thing i want from the compant besides my paycheck is for them to agree to honor the contract! You call that milking the company, i call it being treated like a man/woman as an employee of the company.

 

[Bloodybrown]

The only thing i want from the compant besides my paycheck is for them to agree to honor the contract! You call that milking the company, i call it being treated like a man/woman as an employee of the company.

You know this is where the rubber meets the road with us. I always believe in doing the right thing. I view the contract as a giude (it really is)
There is vague language in the contract that needs to be worked out. You interpert something one way and I another way, there are some panel decisions that guide us, but most of the time its negotiated and there is give and take on both sides. You and your local interpet one way, your way, and than you say the company does not abide by the contract.....you mean your interpetation don't you??.......there is no give and take with you guys!!....Thats why I have been giving you so much grief!!...learn to negotiate....things get done without 16,000 grievence filed over the past few years.......the problem is you really don't see my point, do you?? We would get along alot better if you see things through eveyones eyes, not just yours!

 

[705red]

I would have to disagree, if the contract says sups will not work it means they will not work!

If the 9.5 language says you work 3 days of 9.5 you get double/triple time it means you get it.

Alot of language is clear like the above mentioned, so why dont you as the ups managemr just pay the employee for violating clear language without them having to file a grievance.

After all is that not what a grievance is? A dispute between the employee and the company? If its brought to ups's attention why must we put it in a grievance?

Now you have vague language, article 54 disciple " dishonesty" what exactly is dishonesty? Now this gets abused by management for a number of things, does it not? If you want to teach someone a lesson just fire them for dishonesty, and this way ups has plenty of time to pin point something dishonest.

 

[Bloodybrown]

I would have to disagree, if the contract says sups will not work it means they will not work!
I don't disagree but if you have ten vacations, normally you have 5 call ins and or optionals the double shift log and your still short ten you call in drivers early.......The preload needs to get down....you still file multiple grievences.......don't you.??....why don't I use the language concerning a work stoppage to fire the employees that did not come in to work???.......That would be dumb!!.....but thats what you would do if you were me , using your thought process??

If the 9.5 language says you work 3 days of 9.5 you get double/triple time it means you get it.
I agree as long as its the dispatch and not poor methods....or the dreaded, extending personal time.

Alot of language is clear like the above mentioned, so why dont you as the ups managemr just pay the employee for violating clear language without them having to file a grievance.
The language goes both ways.....do I kill every union employee for not following every method or rule??....again that would be dumb!!

After all is that not what a grievance is? A dispute between the employee and the company? If its brought to ups's attention why must we put it in a grievance?
Follow the grievence procedure and talk before anything goes to paper (labor 101.....your ocal needs to take notes!!)
Now you have vague language, article 54 disciple " dishonesty" what exactly is dishonesty? Now this gets abused by management for a number of things, does it not? If you want to teach someone a lesson just fire them for dishonesty, and this way ups has plenty of time to pin point something dishonest.

If your guilty, you know it, if not, no worries!!


You know, you just made my case about you and your local. You know with the technology at my disposal, I can terroize my employee's, but I don't, unless they will not listen to repeated instructions, I do care about people and UPS. You don't !!....You do not do the right thing, its all black and white to you. You don't care if a customer needs a package that was misloaded by a union preloader in the wrong car!....I have no one in the area and to make the delivery before the customer closes and I have no choice but to have a mangement person p/u the package and shuttle it to another driver for the final delivery. You feel even though another teamster did not do there job, UPS should call in another driver at incredible cost to p.u and deliver that package. If I have another driver or another am air driver in the area, I have no problem moving it with a union member but its not always possible. You also believe that if there is a snow storm we have no right to help make service to our customers, that is insane for you to think that way, you would have us go out of business with no flexibility. Should we fire every employee for every misload or out of sync??....of course not!!.....but you don't get it. Do you really think all the members on this board agree with you??....If they do, UPS and the Union is in deep trouble!!

 

[dillweed]

You have not been following our threads over the past month or two or you would know why!

You're correct, I have not followed them closely and should not have opened my mouth. Honest - no sarcasm

Communism is so radical, so crooked and so stifling that it makes my skin crawl and I spouted off in reaction.

 

[Jones]

I see you as someone that would like to gut the company and redistribute wealth, you also would like the union to actually run the company so more can go to the teamsters union and the employees, you like red would like to get as much as possible out of the company for the short term while watching it deteriorate and go under in the long run. You would than like the government to bailout the union and or company when both have failed ! .........sound right??

Can you quote a single post of mine where I've said anything that even vaguely resembles the above?

And I'd still like to hear your definition of communist and how it applies to me.

 

[Bloodybrown]

[iquote=dillweed;392414]You're correct, I have not followed them closely and should not have opened my mouth. Honest - no sarcasm

Communism is so radical, so crooked and so stifling that it makes my skin crawl and I spouted off in reaction.[/quote]
I understand and agree, I know people in eastern europe that have been oppressed for years and are now living in freedom and love capatalism!!

 

[Bloodybrown]

Can you quote a single post of mine where I've said anything that even vaguely resembles the above?
I believe you made a few references to socialism which is where communism is derived from.....something like socialism is a actually the term that best describes any labor union doing a good job for its membership. correct??...It leads me to believe that you support it. Have I misjudged you?....If yes tell me what you do belive in.

And I'd still like to hear your definition of communist and how it applies to me.

Communism ideology is based in Marxism which promotes equality in all, a classless state based on common ownership, no personal property, everything is owned by the goverment. its based on socialism. I can go on and on about its ideology but I won't. Your comment I quoted has led me to believe that you follow this thought process.....again if I'm wrong say so. If I'm right than you would not want UPS to prosper, you would have all profits go to its employees. If that the case why should the company exist??...........Communism and socialism are unproductive state's in my mind. Capitalism is productive and sparks creativity and inovation which is not what communists and socialist want. They want people to be robots and act like a herd of sheep.

 

[Bloodybrown]

I would have to disagree, if the contract says sups will not work it means they will not work!

If the 9.5 language says you work 3 days of 9.5 you get double/triple time it means you get it.

Alot of language is clear like the above mentioned, so why dont you as the ups managemr just pay the employee for violating clear language without them having to file a grievance.

After all is that not what a grievance is? A dispute between the employee and the company? If its brought to ups's attention why must we put it in a grievance?

Now you have vague language, article 54 disciple " dishonesty" what exactly is dishonesty? Now this gets abused by management for a number of things, does it not? If you want to teach someone a lesson just fire them for dishonesty, and this way ups has plenty of time to pin point something dishonest.

I did not repond to this as much as I could have.....so you ask me what is dishonesty??.........If you have to ask, than there's a problem. You say the company uses this to teach someone a lesson and try's to pin point something dishonest on the person???........Lets see I will give you 3 dishonest acts that you would probably diagree with al three.....first, a driver brings back several packages and buries them with his pickups. They are found on a check in audit....the driver does not sheet them, does not put a service cross on them, does not call them in.....they were in his EDD. Is that dishonest in you mind, pobably not.......but it is. example number 2, a driver goes off his area 5 miles to go home, takes his lunch and breaks oncehe gets home, drives back 5 miles to his area. It takes him tem ninutes to get home and ten to get back to his area. Dishonest? If he has been told not to do that, its dishonest. example number three, an employee takes his full lunch and breaks, than on his return to the building stops for a soda and is on his cell phone for ten to fifteen minutes, he does not code this time out. dishonest??....Why don't you give me some of the examples of management abusing dishonesty and I will give you my point of view. We may find that we disagree or agree more than we think.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

...a driver brings back several packages and buries them with his pickups. They are found on a check in audit....the driver does not sheet them, does not put a service cross on them, does not call them in.....they were in his EDD. Is that dishonest in you mind, pobably not.......but it is. /quote]

This actually happened to me, in an indirect way, last week. I was dispatched light and asked to "go find" an adjacent driver during the day who had been dispatched heavy and to help him, which was fine and happens all the time. I found him on his area and he gave me 15-20 stops to deliver, which was fine. As it turns out, he had forgotten to give me a pkg for that delivery area and, rather than delivering it on his way back in, he decided to bury it in his pickups. His pkg car was audited and the pkg was found, no service cross or delivery attempt, deleted from EDD. What pissed me off about it more than anything was the message I got from my center manager while on road the following day in which he asked me why didn't I sheet the pkg for 101 Prospect Ave, rather than ask me if I had a pkg for 101 Prospect. As it turns out, he did that for a reason (he wanted to guage my reaction, which was exactly what he thought it would be as I was able to tell him who lived there and was not so polite in doing so) as he was already certain that the driver in question had blown off the stop and buried it in his P/U pkgs. (Of course, had he thrown it in a forever bag they never would have found it--did I say that out load?) Well, Eddie now has to call the center when he is within 5 minutes so that they can do a check in audit of his pkg car every day. The center manager even confided that he came within inches of losing his job, not so much for the act but for the dishonesty as he repeatedly insisted that he had given me the pkg.

 

[Bloodybrown]

...a driver brings back several packages and buries them with his pickups. They are found on a check in audit....the driver does not sheet them, does not put a service cross on them, does not call them in.....they were in his EDD. Is that dishonest in you mind, pobably not.......but it is. /quote]

This actually happened to me, in an indirect way, last week. I was dispatched light and asked to "go find" an adjacent driver during the day who had been dispatched heavy and to help him, which was fine and happens all the time. I found him on his area and he gave me 15-20 stops to deliver, which was fine. As it turns out, he had forgotten to give me a pkg for that delivery area and, rather than delivering it on his way back in, he decided to bury it in his pickups. His pkg car was audited and the pkg was found, no service cross or delivery attempt, deleted from EDD. What pissed me off about it more than anything was the message I got from my center manager while on road the following day in which he asked me why didn't I sheet the pkg for 101 Prospect Ave, rather than ask me if I had a pkg for 101 Prospect. As it turns out, he did that for a reason (he wanted to guage my reaction, which was exactly what he thought it would be as I was able to tell him who lived there and was not so polite in doing so) as he was already certain that the driver in question had blown off the stop and buried it in his P/U pkgs. (Of course, had he thrown it in a forever bag they never would have found it--did I say that out load?) Well, Eddie now has to call the center when he is within 5 minutes so that they can do a check in audit of his pkg car every day. The center manager even confided that he came within inches of losing his job, not so much for the act but for the dishonesty as he repeatedly insisted that he had given me the pkg.

That is dishonesty and your center manager gave him a break, but if he does it again I'm sure he won't be so kind. Your manager should have simply asked you about the package, not question why you didn't sheet it.
I don't blame you one bit for your reaction to your manager.

 

[Dark_Team_135]

I did not repond to this as much as I could have.....so you ask me what is dishonesty??.........If you have to ask, than there's a problem. You say the company uses this to teach someone a lesson and try's to pin point something dishonest on the person???........

The problem I see is that management many times knows that the person they get for "dishonesty" has been doing whatever the act is for long periods of time and they say nothing (tacit approval). Then one day they get upset with the employee about something unrelated and use the dishonesty card to terminate him many times knowing that it won't stick just to teach him a monetary lesson... In some cases MANY employees are all doing the same thing and the company knows it.

An example is cell phone use. So many people use them (management more than anyone else and NOT for business reasons - you can many times hear their conversations) but amazingly only a certain few (almost always the "troublemakers - i.e. people that speak up when they are being treated unfairly - Stewards, etc.) get talked to about it.

I have many times watched as a supervisor passes a number of employees standing around doing nothing, to confront another employee that is doing the same thing because the supervisor has it out for him.

Attendance is another classic when it comes to selective discipline.

 

[Bloodybrown]

The problem I see is that management many times knows that the person they get for "dishonesty" has been doing whatever the act is for long periods of time and they say nothing (tacit approval). Then one day they get upset with the employee about something unrelated and use the dishonesty card to terminate him many times knowing that it won't stick just to teach him a monetary lesson... In some cases MANY employees are all doing the same thing and the company knows it.

An example is cell phone use. So many people use them (management more than anyone else and NOT for business reasons - you can many times hear their conversations) but amazingly only a certain few (almost always the "troublemakers - i.e. people that speak up when they are being treated unfairly - Stewards, etc.) get talked to about it.

I have many times watched as a supervisor passes a number of employees standing around doing nothing, to confront another employee that is doing the same thing because the supervisor has it out for him.

Attendance is another classic when it comes to selective discipline.

If what your saying is accurate , that's just not right. It sounds like you are reffering to a hub or preload operation??. I was talking about a package center primarily drivers.

 

[Dark_Team_135]

If what your saying is accurate , that's just not right. It sounds like you are reffering to a hub or preload operation??. I was talking about a package center primarily drivers.

Yeah it is a hub operation. Are things different in smaller centers? I have heard it is more laid back and a more family like atmosphere. I have always worked in a hub so I have no idea...

 

[Bloodybrown]

Yeah it is a hub operation. Are things different in smaller centers? I have heard it is more laid back and a more family like atmosphere. I have always worked in a hub so I have no idea...

I have worked in both, I would say that yes, outlying smaller centers have a better overall atmoshere, everyone know each other and people tend to help each other moreso than in a big hub/package center.

 

[wkmac]

Bloodybrown said:
I have viewed you as a level headed induvidual. I hope I'm not wrong

Well so much for batting a 1000!



There are some people around here who would have you committed for thinking that of me.