Continually over 9.5

[RolloTony Brown Town]

I know a non favorable interpretation of this language just happened but I have been thinking about how the union should take advantage.

If the company no longer agrees that 3 out of 5 days in one work week meets this language why do we continue to agree that it’s a single work week? Why not go back to filing any time you’re over 3 out of 5 days.

The company could conceivably work someone over thurs,Friday,mon,tues and not violate but that sure sounds like continually over 9.5 to me.

Youre referring to the Watson 9.5 arbitration I’m assuming...

There were circumstances that affected that outcome:

The driver hadn’t been violated in over 4 months...

Then on the week in question he was told on a specific day where he was given a helper, he was told to not work over 9.5 hours but he did anyways.

Yes the decision focused on the word “continually” and it found in this particular case that this one week was not continual.

If you file every week that you’re over 9.5 3 times in a week then odds are the company will still pay.

The contract also says that the company will make a reasonable effort to reduce a driver’s day below 9.5 hours PER day.

So if you’re on 9.5 opt in and on monday you work 11 hours and Friday you work 10 hours but you work 9 hours on Tuesday-Thursday you could argue that the company didn’t make a reasonable effort to reduce your day below 9.5 per day.

It’s all about documentation. If you file every time then there’s a paper trail.

 

[Brownslave688]

Youre referring to the Watson 9.5 arbitration I’m assuming...

There were circumstances that affected that outcome:

The driver hadn’t been violated in over 4 months...

Then on the week in question he was told on a specific day where he was given a helper, he was told to not work over 9.5 hours but he did anyways.

Yes the decision focused on the word “continually” and it found in this particular case that this one week was not continual.

If you file every week that you’re over 9.5 3 times in a week then odds are the company will still pay.

The contract also says that the company will make a reasonable effort to reduce a driver’s day below 9.5 hours PER day.

So if you’re on 9.5 opt in and on monday you work 11 hours and Friday you work 10 hours but you work 9 hours on Tuesday-Thursday you could argue that the company didn’t make a reasonable effort to reduce your day below 9.5 per day.

It’s all about documentation. If you file every time then there’s a paper trail.

This is where I have the problem with continually. How many times was the driver over 9.5 in the previous 4-5 months. Just because they hadn’t been over 3 times in one week doesn’t mean they weren’t working over 1-2 days every week. To me that’s continually over 9.5

 

[RolloTony Brown Town]

This is where I have the problem with continually. How many times was the driver over 9.5 in the previous 4-5 months. Just because they hadn’t been over 3 times in one week doesn’t mean they weren’t working over 1-2 days every week. To me that’s continually over 9.5

Continually is in reference to being continually over 9.5 3 times in a week.

What I was trying to say is that, if the situation warranted it, there are other ways to argue non compliance with article 37.

 

[Brownslave688]

Continually is in reference to being continually over 9.5 3 times in a week.

Where exactly does it state that?

 

[RolloTony Brown Town]

Where exactly does it state that?

Drivers who choose to opt-in on the 9.5 list shall have the right to file a grievance if the Employer has continually worked a driver more than nine and one half (9.5) hours per day for any three (3) days in a workweek. The Company will not assign excessive over- time on the two (2) remaining days within the workweek in order to retaliate against a driver for opting onto the 9.5 List.

Straight from article 37... page 142

 

[PASinterference]

Drivers who choose to opt-in on the 9.5 list shall have the right to file a grievance if the Employer has continually worked a driver more than nine and one half (9.5) hours per day for any three (3) days in a workweek. The Company will not assign excessive over- time on the two (2) remaining days within the workweek in order to retaliate against a driver for opting onto the 9.5 List.

Straight from article 37... page 142

Another loophole. They could say they didn't assign extra work on the 2 remaining days to retaliate for being on the 9.5 list. They did it because they wanted to. The way it's worded, as long as they don't admit to retaliation, they are ok.

 

[Boywondr]

Another loophole. They could say they didn't assign extra work on the 2 remaining days to retaliate for being on the 9.5 list. They did it because they wanted to. The way it's worded, as long as they don't admit to retaliation, they are ok.

I believe a driver went to the national grievance panel asking for the penalty to be applied to the two days he was violated in that week because the company DID assign too much work to him and did not send him help to get him off the clock in less than 9.5 hours.
If I remember right the resolution was "the company will comply" or some milk toast answer to that end.
So....
why didnt the union fight for this issue in this round of negotiations? Getting the penalty pay assessed to being violated the remaining two days would pretty much protect the opted in driver for the week minus one day.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

I believe a driver went to the national grievance panel asking for the penalty to be applied to the two days he was violated in that week because the company DID assign too much work to him and did not send him help to get him off the clock in less than 9.5 hours.
If I remember right the resolution was "the company will comply" or some milk toast answer to that end.

It didn't say that at all.

To sum up:

Based on the language from the 2013 - 2018 contract, an arbitrator finds that the company did not violate Article 37 by working an employee on the 9.5 list over 9.5 more than 3 times in a single week. The decision was based on the use of the word "continually", and the arbitrator decided that the facts of the case at hand did not meet the definition. The decision disregarded the understanding reached between the negotiators about what the language meant, according to negotiation transcripts.

So there you have it folks. Clear language in a contract is paramount. The changes in the new contract did not address this particular word use. Be prepared for the company to start fighting 9.5 grievances based on this precedent. No clarification on what it would take to meet the definition of "continually" in 9.5 violation cases was given, but it is clear that it must happen more often than just a single week of over 3 days.

The transcript of the case can be found in this thread.

 

[RolloTony Brown Town]

Another loophole. They could say they didn't assign extra work on the 2 remaining days to retaliate for being on the 9.5 list. They did it because they wanted to. The way it's worded, as long as they don't admit to retaliation, they are ok.

I kind of touched on that in a previous post.

Let’s say you opt in to 9.5... the company committing to reduce your paid day to below 9.5 hours per day. If the average of all days worked is over 9.5 then you can argue that the company isn’t working in good faith of the agreement. No smart supervisor or manager is ever going to admit to retaliation.


At the end of the day the employee, stewards, and BA need to be diligent and thorough of the documentation.

 

[Boywondr]

It didn't say that at all.





The transcript of the case can be found in this thread.

Yeah what did it say bug?
Please tell me what it said that is so much different than what I posted.
It was a paraphrased summary. The grievance was not paid.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

Yeah what did it say bug?

Did you read it ?

 

[Boywondr]

Did you read it ?

I heard it from the member that grieved it. Should I not believe what he told me?

 

[Boywondr]

I suppose if I only worked one day a week I would have more time to read it.

 

[Bubblehead]

I suppose if I only worked one day a week I would have more time to read it.

I thought he was retired and mall walking most mornings

....are you saying he got a part time job?

 

[Boywondr]

I thought he was retired and mall walking most mornings

....are you saying he got a part time job?

Well there's a hypothesis in 4..
But it doesnt affect me either way.
I see more details now than ever.
And, it's a sad state of affairs. People dont think their actions will ever be called to account.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

I heard it from the member that grieved it. Should I not believe what he told me?

I suppose if I only worked one day a week I would have more time to read it.

Why do members bid 22.3 jobs....

And, continually want to "go home" after their shift .... with an less than 8 hrs ?

 

[Boywondr]

Why do members bid 22.3 jobs....

And, continually want to "go home" after their shift .... with an less than 8 hrs ?

Not my problem. But here's one for you...

Why do BAs blast other teamster leaders and turn around to support them later when its politically convenient for them?
Doesn't a person's word and resolve mean anything to some?

Btw, the 22.3 employees would probably go back to part time if they could. Hence the 05 issue. That's mostly due (in our area) to older drivers bidding inside to keep their bennies flowing until they can go to a zero hour request.
After so many years of progressively pounding your joints into mush the 8 hr (or less) gig looks tempting.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

But here's one for you...

Why do BAs blast other teamster leaders and turn around to support them later when its politically convenient for them?.

How about when you hate TDU.... then ask to be appointed to fill a vacated

position (on the IBT executive board) and are denied ?


Oh yeah.... that was Fred Suckerman.


You can still google his motorcycle license plate from the IBT convention.

 

[Boywondr]

How about when you hate TDU.... then ask to be appointed to fill a vacated

position (on the IBT executive board) and are denied ?


Oh yeah.... that was Fred Suckerman.


You can still google his motorcycle license plate from the IBT convention.

And yet...

Now some Hoffa guys are courting his slate.

Hmmm...

What does that say for that bunch of flip floppers?
Oh, that was Fred's nick name last time. They can flip flop together now since it's politically in their best interest to. Is that how it works?

 

[myback]

Are you the "poster child" for UPS Drivers ?

Union, yea, in other words go flock yourself