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
22.3 Questions
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="tieguy" data-source="post: 209641" data-attributes="member: 1912"><p><span style="color: royalblue">You are right in that 22.3 does seem to indicate that part timers will fill new openings. </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: blue">Where I believe the language gets vague is where it says part timers shall be selected in accordance with the procedures of the applicable supplement , rider or addendum. (paraphrased) This language in my opinion seems to allow the local supplements , riders and addendums the authority to superceed national language. Some of the posts here seem to indicate that is happening around the country. </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #0000ff">In either case if a 22.3 job is filled by a full timer then the part timer will probably end up getting a full time job that is vacated. The problem with this scenario is a full timer fills the new job. The company eliminates the old job and the original intent of converting 10,000 part timers to full time never takes place. If part timers fill first then the 10,000 part timers are clearly converted to full time status which I believe to be the intent. The original contract pages containing the intent are not generally out for viewing and usually referenced during panel hearings as needed. </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #0000ff">I'm definitely no labor guy and this is just my humble opinion for what its worth.</span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tieguy, post: 209641, member: 1912"] [COLOR=royalblue]You are right in that 22.3 does seem to indicate that part timers will fill new openings. [/COLOR] [COLOR=blue]Where I believe the language gets vague is where it says part timers shall be selected in accordance with the procedures of the applicable supplement , rider or addendum. (paraphrased) This language in my opinion seems to allow the local supplements , riders and addendums the authority to superceed national language. Some of the posts here seem to indicate that is happening around the country. [/COLOR] [COLOR=#0000ff]In either case if a 22.3 job is filled by a full timer then the part timer will probably end up getting a full time job that is vacated. The problem with this scenario is a full timer fills the new job. The company eliminates the old job and the original intent of converting 10,000 part timers to full time never takes place. If part timers fill first then the 10,000 part timers are clearly converted to full time status which I believe to be the intent. The original contract pages containing the intent are not generally out for viewing and usually referenced during panel hearings as needed. [/COLOR] [COLOR=#0000ff]I'm definitely no labor guy and this is just my humble opinion for what its worth.[/COLOR] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
22.3 Questions
Top