A lawyer might love this one

[upsmule]

Whatever happend to this thread! Does it get S-canned if nobody responds to it after a few days? Or maybe it was just a lost cause to begin with? It was the whole thing about docking drivers for lunch even though it's clearly documented in the diad "stop clock" that you weren't idol for the hour they say you HAVE TO take. This I could understand before diad...why take the hour from me if it's PROVABLE that it wasn't taken? And IF we HAVE TO take our lunch...were does it say so in the contract, and then I'll shut up.

 

[cheryl]

http://www.browncafe.com/community/search/

If you want to keep a thread active just keep posting in it.

 

[upsmule]

thanks...

 

[whatsthetune]

Mole,

You have stumbled on the truth. No one cares about what a lawyer might like. Take your lunch. Contract specifies, at least in Southern Conf, not only how much but when you must take it. Follow instructions and save yourself grief.

 

[upsmule]

"no one cares what a lawyer might think" Hey, I'd care if it could get the co. to stop taking an hour a day from me, when it's documented on my records that I didn't take it....ya think?

 

[proups]

Mule....read your contract book(s). I don't remember the article, but my contract states "one hour to be taken between the third and fifth hour." If you work through lunch, which many people do in order to get finished quicker, then you are working for free. I would be surprised if that is not in your contract.

 

[upsdude]

Between the 4th and 6th hour in my area. The management in my building has threatened disciplinary action if a driver fails to enter the lunch hour in his/her diad. On the flip side, the center manager said he didnt care when we take the hour, just take it on road.

 

[deliver_man]

why take the hour from me if it's PROVABLE that it wasn't taken?

Well, the problem with that is that the company is contractually required to allow you that meal period. The thing with making the lunch hour optional is that it opens the door to drivers being pressured to skip their lunch in order to compensate for being overdispatched, and that in turn would lead to more lawsuits like the one that the company lost out in California. For a driver like you, who skips his lunch anyway, it wouldn't be a problem. But we all know how much pressure that the delivery supervisors are under to make their numbers, and if the lunch was optional, you damn can well bet that that a lot of them would be pressuring drivers to skip their lunch hours whether the driver wanted to or not. And of course that would just lead to a lot more grievances and lawsuits, with drivers claiming that the company was denying them their contractual lunch period. The easiest way for both the company and the union to eliminate that scenario is to just make the lunch hour mandatory, which is what they have done. But as long as you make at least an hour bonus for skipping your lunch, then the the company is not "stealing" from you anyway, in fact you are getting paid time-and-a half to work through lunch, which ain't a bad deal IMO. And I know that an hour bonus is easy enough to make on those fat Reston housecall routes

.

 

[teamstermember]

"why take the hour from me if it's PROVABLE that it wasn't taken?"
----
Our supplemental agreement says: The employee shall be entitled to and required to take a lunch period of one hour. Failure to take and properly record the required meal period may be cause of disciplinary action.
----

So, if you skip your lunch hour, who is falsifying the document (time card)? You, or the supervisor who adds the lunch hour to your timecard after you punch out?


"The thing with making the lunch hour optional is that it opens the door to drivers being pressured to skip their lunch in order to compensate for being overdispatched, and that in turn would lead to more lawsuits like the one that the company lost out in California."

---
Please tell me about this lawsuit in California. What are the circumstances?
---

"The easiest way for both the company and the union to eliminate that scenario is to just make the lunch hour mandatory, which is what they have done."

---
unless my reading comprehension is now a (0) zero, isn't that what this article means:
The employee shall be entitled to and required to take a lunch period of one hour. (what does 'required' mean to you?)
---

 

[deliver_man]

unless my reading comprehension is now a (0) zero, isn't that what this article means:
The employee shall be entitled to and required to take a lunch period of one hour. (what does 'required' mean to you?)
Well yeah, thats pretty much what I said, though I didn't quote the contract verbatim as you did. They made the lunch hour mandatory by putting it in writing in the contract. How's that?
As far as the Lawsuit in Cali, I don't know all the details, but iirc it was a group of drivers who filed a class action suit against the company claiming that they were forced to work through their (unpaid) lunch hours. The company lost, and paid out some serious cash. I remember it mainly because up until that point noone in management seemed to care whether you actually took your lunch hour or not (you didnt get paid for it either way), but subsequent to losing that lawsuit they started actually checking records and disciplining drivers who didnt take put in their lunches. They even went so far as to check whether you had deivered any packages during the hour that you claimed to be taking your lunch. They have calmed down about it now, but they made their point. They don't want any more lawsuits.
So, if you skip your lunch hour, who is falsifying the document (time card)? You, or the supervisor who adds the lunch hour to your timecard after you punch out?
Noone. No change has to be made to your time card, the system just automatically subtracts 1 hour from your total time worked.

 

[upsmule]

Well dekiver man, and teamsterman...Thank you both for answering my question. I wasn't aware that the lunch hour was mandatory! 15 years now and I just find this out.....go figure. I was always told that they doc you weather you take it OR NOT, and just thought that the OR NOT meant you had the option to take it OR NOT! And they pretty much had to dock you because it was un provable weather you did or did not take it. I still think it's kinda strange that they can tell you "YOU HAVE TO TAKE A LUNCH". And even stranger that they could actually fire you for failing to follow instructions if you choose not to! OBSURD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[archibald]

IN MY CENTER WE HAD SOME DRIVERS SKIPPING LUNCH TO GET IN AROUND 5, IF THE SUPS KNOW THIS YOU CAN BET YOU ARE GOING TO GET A SPLIT OR HAVE TO GO HELP SOMEONE! NO ONE DOES IT ANYMORE AND I TELL THE ROOKIES TO TAKE AN HOUR EVERYDAY BECAUSE IF YOU DO NEED TO GET OFF AT A DECENT TIME FOR SOMETHING HAVING THAT HOUR IS YOUR ONLY SHOT. WE DID HAVE SOME QUESTION HERE ABOUT IF YOU SKIP YOUR LUNCH FOR WHATEVER REASON THEY NEEDED YOU TO SHOW A LUNCH IN DIAD, WOULDN'T THAT BE FALSIFYING RECORDS? I STILL DON'T THINK THAT HAS BEEN CLEARED UP YET.

 

[upsmule]

Hey...bring on the split, I love the bonus! But no damn way will I bust my butt, to go help joe blow who, so chooses, to be taking his time all day. And my sup's know this, I simply let them know, I'M NOT THE ANSWER TO YOUR INABILITY TO PROPERLY DISPATCH! So, if I'm asked to go "help someone" It don't happen, and then I take my lunch and I to will be out over nine five. So the asking me to go and clean up there lack of proper dispatching, ended a long time ago, thank God!

 

[thedrooler]

mule

Let me understand this. Your supervisor gives you an assignment. You don't like it. You tell him/her that you won't do it. This supervisor accepts this behavior. This supervisor is in serious need of some coaching and counseling from the person he/she reports to.

Drooler

 

[deliver_man]

Your supervisor gives you an assignment. You don't like it. You tell him/her that you won't do it.
I sincerely doubt the conversation is quite that blunt, being that "refusing to work as directed" is a fireable offense. However, if they ask you to go help someone, and you reply that you will already be out past cut-off with the work you already have, the end result will be the same. Anyway I think Mule's point was that dispatch is supposed to be done prior to trucks leaving the building in the morning, not at 3 in the afternoon. If a guy needs help at 3pm, then he needed help at 830am, and thats when the situation should have been adressed. "Afternoon dispatch" just penalizes the guys who busted ass and skipped their lunch in order to get done early, in addition to being an admission of failure on the part of management to do their job in the morning. Continually relying on your bonus drivers to fix your failed dispatch is the fastest way to turn a bonus center into a bunch of guys who run over 9.5 every day.

 

[tieguy]

I'm sorry but after reading the dialogue here on this subject I can't help but wonder if this type of thought process is why CF is out of business. There are various reasons why the dispatch may be screwed up including your teamster brother on the am not counting properly. Some adjustment to the plan will always be required on the route. I've seen centers where the drivers will meet at a predetermined point of the day and finish balancing the work. But your answer to basically refuse to do the work is a service destroyer. Read through your words again and ask yourself if this is union labor at its best.

 

[over9five]

"Some adjustment to the plan will always be required on the route"

I agree 100%....But I think what deliverman and mule are talking about is when we have the SAME over-dispatch every day. There are routes that go out every morning over-dispatched, and every afternoon we have to find a way to distribute the excess work. And believe me, nobody wants it, especially as a late afternoon surprise.

 

[proups]

I agree with ALL of you!

The dispatch should be right before drivers leave the building, BUT

There are Preloaders who get stop counts wrong, SO

Management has to give drivers help to make service, pick-up times, etc....AND

If you communicate that you need an 8 hour day, that langauge is in the contract. You won't, can't, and should not expect to get it every day, AND

Management will ride the strongest horse because the union makes it so difficult to send a weak horse to the glue factory!

 

[workinman]

RIGHT ON deliver_man! And drooler, the mule said nothing about not doing ANY assignment...he's simply letting his supervisor know that he too can walk and take the breaks that are allowed him! The work hourses should not be expected to pick up EVERYBODY'S slack on a daily basis. Period. Yes, there should be some give and take ON BOTH sides, OCCATIONALLY, not every ding dong day?!?!?!?!? Ya think?