Driver facing cameras in the cab

[Thebrownblob]

Not a strike. Just unhook the camera and we're good to go. Off load the truck, we'll wait.

Point is, you go ballistic from the get go. How long has it been now?

Sure I guess you could do that, but how could union protect your job?

 

[BrownStains]

They care about your safety?

 

[PASinterference]

Maybe they should put cameras in the offices. Could save alot of money when corporate finds out most of full time management only works part time hours. Hope Carol is reading this.

 

[Wally]

It's cameras. Not camera's. 4th grade English lesson.

Everyone gets the picture, no lesson needed.

 

[Whither]

We can't do that. It would be a illegal strike.

We have to follow article 8 of the NMA.

If we just walked out we would lose and UPS would come after the teamsters for any lost revenue.

But not if they refused to bargain, right?

 

[Whither]

Most don’t understand wildcat strikes willl bankrupt the union. As well as give us little protection.

While we're talking about it, that's another "agreement" that needs to be changed.

 

[542thruNthru]

But not if they refused to bargain, right?

If they refuse to bargain we'd go out on a ULP strike. Which would be the best case for us. Though at this moment they are not refusing to bargain they are arguing that the unions interpretation of the contract is incorrect and that they do have the right to put cameras in their vehicles. That why it's now going to arbitration.

 

[542thruNthru]

While we're talking about it, that's another "agreement" that needs to be changed.

I could be wrong but I think it's not only in our contract but it's a NLRA thing as well.

I can't imagine any company would allow under any circumstances a union to be able to strike at will.

 

[Whither]

I could be wrong but I think it's not only in our contract but it's a NLRA thing as well.

I can't imagine any company would allow under any circumstances a union to be able to strike at will.

No, I think you're correct that it's also national labor law, which has done plenty to hamstring the working class. It might be in Taft-Hartley.

Yes, companies would never allow that -- their hands would have to be forced by us hourlies.

 

[Thebrownblob]

No, I think you're correct that it's also national labor law, which has done plenty to hamstring the working class. It might be in Taft-Hartley.

Yes, companies would never allow that -- their hands would have to be forced by us hourlies.

The government is always managed to tilt the balance of power back to the companies. Doesn’t matter who’s in charge they just want the money.

 

[Whither]

The government is always managed to tilt the balance of power back to the companies. Doesn’t matter who’s in charge they just want the money.

Exactly! National politics are also great at getting us distracted and divided, squandering our time and energy in online debates, and building up resentment against imaginary enemies ... then people forget all the common ground and potential power they have at the workplace.

 

[Trucker Clock]

First, why the attitude?

No attitude. I just think you're naive if you didn't think it was a camera. And I may have snickered a little when you said you got your manager to admit that they can record, like you did something that no one else could do, and were bragging. Sorry.

Second, you don't think the company is clever enough to use the cam & mic against drivers wo admitting it or even making it obvious?

Nope. Not until the contract allows them to, if it ever does.

Third, no camera w those capabilities should ever be in our vehicles.

I agree. The front facing camera is a different story, but the driver facing camera should never have the option enabled to record or show a live view. And if UPS agrees not to record, then even if they did it cannot be used against you.

The Lytx unit needs a camera to "detect" distracted driving. We will be extremely lucky to keep the recording feature from being activated.

Why would the union be surprised and not act more proactive? Shut er' down the first moment any camera is installed.

They can't, contractually.

Shut what down?

Exactly.

Cameras

They can't, contractually.

Cameras! Better a quick strike than the mess we have now.

That would be illegal.

Absolutely. We should have walked on day one.

If you did, you would be unemployed right now. An illegal Wildcat strike.

We can't do that. It would be a illegal strike.

We have to follow article 8 of the NMA.

If we just walked out we would lose and UPS would come after the teamsters for any lost revenue.

Someone who actually knows the contract.

Another option would be refusing to use any trucks with the camera's installed until negotiations are reached. Easy to do while there is only a few. You are not striking, you just need the camera's removed.

Refuse to do your job and drive a truck? Grounds for discharge.

Ok, good luck getting any camera's removed. Maybe the camera's are illegal?

The cameras are not illegal, even the ones recording in cab video.

The courts have all ruled so far that they are legal and are not an invasion of privacy. It does not mean that it could change in the future, but I won't hold my breath.

If arbitration doesn't side with us we can still bargain to have them removed next year and if it's a big sticking point with members then we can strike at that point.

Yep. And our best shot is to keep them the way they are now. No recording or live view. Just the distracted driving feature.

Most don’t understand wildcat strikes willl bankrupt the union. As well as give us little protection.

Yep.

Maspeth 250

An illegal Wildcat strike.

Even that could’ve been worse.

They were lucky to get their jobs back. Legally and contractually, UPS did not have to.

I understand the anger. I want them gone too. I understand wanting to strike also because it feels like the only real weapon we have but most don't know that it's in the national and supplemental agreements that we can't strike with out exhausting the grievance procedure first.

Yep.

Not a strike. Just unhook the camera and we're good to go. Off load the truck, we'll wait.

Unhooking the camera will get you terminated, as will refusing to drive your truck.

Sure I guess you could do that, but how could union protect your job?

They couldn't.

But not if they refused to bargain, right?

That issue has not come about yet. We will see after the arbitration ruling and possibly during the next contract negotiations.

While we're talking about it, that's another "agreement" that needs to be changed.

That will never happen.

If they refuse to bargain we'd go out on a ULP strike. Which would be the best case for us. Though at this moment they are not refusing to bargain they are arguing that the unions interpretation of the contract is incorrect and that they do have the right to put cameras in their vehicles. That why it's now going to arbitration.

Yep.

I could be wrong but I think it's not only in our contract but it's a NLRA thing as well.

I can't imagine any company would allow under any circumstances a union to be able to strike at will.

You're not wrong.

No, I think you're correct that it's also national labor law, which has done plenty to hamstring the working class. It might be in Taft-Hartley.

Yes, companies would never allow that -- their hands would have to be forced by us hourlies.

You are also correct.

 

[UnionStrong]

No attitude. I just think you're naive if you didn't think it was a camera. And I may have snickered a little when you said you got your manager to admit that they can record, like you did something that no one else could do, and were bragging. Sorry.



Nope. Not until the contract allows them to, if it ever does.



I agree. The front facing camera is a different story, but the driver facing camera should never have the option enabled to record or show a live view. And if UPS agrees not to record, then even if they did it cannot be used against you.

The Lytx unit needs a camera to "detect" distracted driving. We will be extremely lucky to keep the recording feature from being activated.



They can't, contractually.



Exactly.



They can't, contractually.



That would be illegal.



If you did, you would be unemployed right now. An illegal Wildcat strike.



Someone who actually knows the contract.



Refuse to do your job and drive a truck? Grounds for discharge.



The cameras are not illegal, even the ones recording in cab video.

The courts have all ruled so far that they are legal and are not an invasion of privacy. It does not mean that it could change in the future, but I won't hold my breath.



Yep. And our best shot is to keep them the way they are now. No recording or live view. Just the distracted driving feature.



Yep.



An illegal Wildcat strike.



They were lucky to get their jobs back. Legally and contractually, UPS did not have to.



Yep.



Unhooking the camera will get you terminated, as will refusing to drive your truck.



They couldn't.



That issue has not come about yet. We will see after the arbitration ruling and possibly during the next contract negotiations.



That will never happen.



Yep.



You're not wrong.



You are also correct.

Quad? By George I think he’s back!

 

[Thebrownblob]

Quad? By George I think he’s back!

Haven’t seen quad for a while.

 

[...]

Could be leverage to leave the 22.4 language untouched.

 

[UnionStrong]

Haven’t seen quad for a while.

In the Q…

 

[Thebrownblob]

Could be leverage to leave the 22.4 language untouched.

Anything is possible

 

[...]

In the Q…

Too bad he can't be lying in a ditch...

 

[UnionStrong]

Too bad he can't be lying in a ditch...

Any plane crashes?

 

[...]

Any plane crashes?

Wouldn't be him if there were. He's the greatest pilot ever.

@quad decade pilot