USERRA

Discussion in 'UPS Discussions' started by teamsterdan, Jul 20, 2007.

  1. teamsterdan

    teamsterdan Member

    this is an acronym pertaining to the re-employment of employees after they return from military service (http://www.dol.gov/elaws/userra.htm)
    I have some experience helping out a co-worker go from a p/t job he had prior to military service, & get him into a full-time driving job that had been posted/bid during his absence (he was USMC reserve) and was gone for boot camp......long story short he ended up injuring his back and left ups(not sure of details)......So now a guy I work w/ just finished his active duty obligation in the USMC, so he was gone for 4yrs.; according to "the act"

    "A person whose military service lasted 91 days or more, must be promptly reemployed in the following order of priority:
    In the job the person would have held had the person remained continuously employed or a position of equivalent seniority, status, and pay so long as the person is qualified for the job, or can become qualified after reasonable efforts by the employer to qualify the person;"

    the facts now are that there are @ least 5 f/t jobs obtained by people w/ less seniority than him.......question is does he have the "right" to one of the f/t jobs or not (THEY DO)........mgt. told them "they don't know abt that" .......or my interpretation of mgt's response which is "we loved you as a marine but f/u as a teamster" anyone else w/ info to share or know of other vets that may be dealing w/ this kind of BS please have them get in touch w/ me.........ALLONS
     
  2. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    So everything the company does is a F/U from them. Give this tired hate mongering a rest. Management may be wrong in this case. They may not know they are wrong. They may also be right in this case since they nationally deal with thousands of these cases. But don't be a richard cranium and make everything the company does a f/u to the employee.
     
  3. Overpaid Union Thug

    Overpaid Union Thug Well-Known Member


    The law states that any full-time job filled while an employee is gone for military duty shall be made available to the employee once he/she returns. The only requirement is that they are supposed to be qualified, or able to be trained to be qualified for the job. There is no gray area. When I started working with my reserve unit part of our "in processing" was to spend a day with a counselor that handles USERRA. The guy was a JAG guy in the reserves and was a lawyer as a civilian. He explained the laws to us inside and out and gave many examples. Many cases he used as examples were cases he had been directly involved in. It's scary how many employers out there try and break the law and stiff their employees that are in the military. My center knows better. I didn't have any trouble when I returned from active duty but I've heard horror stories about other guys in other hubs.
     
  4. scratch

    scratch Least Best Moderator Staff Member

    From what Ive seen, UPS has usually been very supportive of my co-workers who were called up or had to do their Reserve Duty. I have never heard of the situation of a part-timer coming back and going full-time though.
     
  5. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    Same here . they came back with their seniority and bid on the first job opening available.
     
  6. Overpaid Union Thug

    Overpaid Union Thug Well-Known Member

    What I've been wondering is what happens in a situation where someone returns from duty and is given a full-time driving job because three were added while they were gone...does the lowest senior guy that went full-time get bumped back to part-time or does the center end up with one more driver than they had planned for?
     
  7. teamsterdan

    teamsterdan Member

    please, I guess my own military service made me a no excuses kinda guy......first of all I don't recall mentioning EVERYTHING abt. ANYTHING.....
    "so everything the company does is a F/U from them" of course not...... but in my world friend, if your gonna claim to "support the troops" then it's impt. to follow through on those claims w/ action....... remember the UPS/US flags around a while back????? I guess as long as they say it's so, then that's how it is, and failure to see things that way makes one un-american... you go on to suggest that I should "Give this tired hate mongering a rest" ........I have zero room in my life for HATE, PERIOD.........if speaking the truth makes me that, then so be it.......further more, feeling like a guy that just sacrificed his very existence for 4yrs, is ENTITLED to a better answer than "We don't KNOW abt. that"..........it's their job to know........and like I mentioned earlier, IT HAPPENED TO ANOTHER PERSON A FEW YRS. PREVIOUS.... In fact the person who was ctr. mgr. @ that time is NOW LABOR RELATIONS MGR........IN THE SAME BUILDING NO LESS.........
    finally, the USERRA laws have been on the books since 1994 so I guess since this is "new" then by all means......... this must be the first time they have dealt w/ this right..........btw there's no reason to suggest I'm "richard crainium"..........name calling is so 20th century.............enjoy the weekend everyone..........
     
  8. av8torntn

    av8torntn Well-Known Member

    I believe that your management team is wrong here. If they are and you make them aware of it they should fix it. Allons
     
  9. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    If its the law and they are wrong fine. But the question is how does it work. Do you take the f/t seniority away from the last person to get it or does the law expect us to add extra drivers everytime someone returns from military duty?
    or does the person come back to his old job with the extra 4 years of seniority he would have had while serving his country.
     
  10. av8torntn

    av8torntn Well-Known Member


    The first guy in our center that went to OEF came back and could have been in feeders. After a few weeks back that trained him in a class where he was the only student and then they dovetailed his senority. No one was laid off because they needed more drivers anyhow. I do remember him saying that they did not want to give him his spot in senority because they said it would not be fair to the other drivers. In the end I do not think they had a choice. There are many protections provided under USSERA. He should not do like I did and just assume that UPS managers know all the ins and outs of that law. There are resources availabe to him and once they know what the law is they will have no problem taking care of him. The government will spend a lot of resources to make sure these large companies comply. There are also other provisions in there to make sure that UPS does not put him in the school and just DQ him or fire him without just cause. When we did our out processing we had to attend a two hour brief on this issue. I was very tired after a 20 flight and do not remember everything, but the basic principle was if there were a problem the entire burden was on the employer as long as you met some basic qualifications( things like honorable discharge, time in service limits, request in writing for reemployment).

    There may be some kind of exception that allows them to wait until they need another driver but I could not find it. For all the information they gave us this does not sound likely. Anyway I think your friend already know all of this.
     
  11. teamsterdan

    teamsterdan Member

    good morning, the bottom line here is this, both the teamsters and UPS should already KNOW/UNDERSTAND how this law works and should not need to depend on some dork (me) who gets off understanding how contracts and policies are implemented.......... to do the work for them..........the reality of the situation is this, what abt. the person who actually trusts that since the union and the co. are "in charge" and KNOW what their doing, (IE have the employees best interest in mind?) BTW I'm not a steward, and the reason I have no interest in being one is because I don't feel the teamsters or UPS truly have their members/employees best interests in mind, which is BS......I'd go even further and say this board does more than both of them, and for that I am grateful.......
     
  12. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    edited my initial response.
    I don't disagree with your last post. I think its noble that you are fighting for the vets. I'm also one and have nothing but love for those who have served. I do think the use of the phrase f/u was way too strong in this case. Large corporations and organizations like your union have problems effectively communicating changes in law to the grass roots. I realistically think that the problem here and agree you can definitely help educate the masses here.
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2007
  13. av8torntn

    av8torntn Well-Known Member

    I really do not think the company or the union are trying to do the wrong thing to your friend. I think they are not familiar with the law. Our BA did not know anything about it when I got back and asked him. This also goes for my manager. My manager did call some labor guy to find out exactly what they needed from me. I as your friend probably does had all the information that I needed. I just wanted to cover all my bases to avoid any excess drama. The bottom line is if everything you posted was true your friend should be protected under this law.
     
  14. teamsterdan

    teamsterdan Member

    no time in my life for pissing matches either, I will post regarding the results, and will only ad that taking my words out of context is very 21st century good work.....you missed the part where I said "my interpretation of mgt's response" NEVER said they said f/u.........it's known as OPINION or if a writer EDITORIAL freedom..........I did however QUOTE their EXACT response.....which was/is "we don't know abt. that" not WE'll look into it, or even, come back in a few weeks and I'll have a better answer, MGT. was MORE THAN HAPPY to leave it @ that.....which is how I became involved, BTW this a co-worker not a "friend" meaning other than knowing I was there both before and after he served we don't really talk much....so unless somebody else here talks to him before mon. I won't be posting abt. this matter until something else develops........
     
  15. av8torntn

    av8torntn Well-Known Member

    did you serve in 11th ACR I was in D 2-11
     
  16. Joopster

    Joopster Boxline Sorter

    I also believe USERRA states that the employer may terminate employment after reaching 5 years or more cumulative active duty service....i'll have to look.
     
  17. Overpaid Union Thug

    Overpaid Union Thug Well-Known Member

    That is correct.
     
  18. Joopster

    Joopster Boxline Sorter

    The keyword here is may, which is why I don't see that happening is larger hubs/centers.

    I have over 3 years and throwing another couple months on starting in august, but they have never given me problems.
     
  19. teamsterdan

    teamsterdan Member

    so now that it's been 3 months or so this guy is finally in drivers school....I'm betting they try to pull all that "free period" nonsense on him after he gets back from school, then try to make him fulfill the longer proposed progression in the "new" contract........blah blah blah.......you can call me bitter or whatever but when the same "ignorance" is repeatedly demonstrated in the workplace it becomes the norm......funny how this whole time mgt. just plead ignorance, to my co-workers credit (or not in my opinion) he waited till nearly the "deadline" for filing papers w/either the dept. of labor or filing a grievance......he was trying to be a gentleman abt. the matter......regardless LITERALLY the DAY AFTER his official grievance was filed he got the call from HR telling him he was going to school...........see how both sides win????? the teamsters got him his job back and will take credit for getting a vet his job back, and UPS gets off the hook.......BTW "skully" tells me that the BS contract being offered will be "narrowly" ratified.......anyone else wants a RECOUNT.............
     
  20. Overpaid Union Thug

    Overpaid Union Thug Well-Known Member

    The guy should have been hired into a full-time position (one of the ones that were filled by less senior employees while he was gone) promptly according to the law. He needs to go get a lawyer instead of letting UPS drag their feet on the issue. He could have been full-time already! But now that the free period is here he'll just have to wait it out. Once peak is over he'll have until August 1rst to qualify on one of the jobs in question and once that's done he won't have to worry about the new progression time. The only person that can screw this up his him and that's by allowing UPS to string him along. Sure...UPS will stall the process but he'll only have himself to blame for letting them. He needs to talk to a lawyer.