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 Discussions
Employee Survey.
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="soberups" data-source="post: 877178" data-attributes="member: 14668"><p>Perhaps you should actually <strong>read</strong> the contract before you create ignorant stereotypes about those who wish to uphold it.</p><p></p><p>The two scenarios you refer to would clearly be considered "acts of God" under Article 3 section 7 of the Master Agreement, and as long as the company <em>first</em> made every effort to employ as many hourly employees as possible, it would then be entitled to have supervisors perform the work as needed in order to avoid service failures <em>without</em> being in violation of the contract.</p><p></p><p>I believe the problem here lies in your <em>personal</em> definition of what constitutes an "Act of God". Misloads caused by managements incompetence or willfull refusal to adequately plan and staff the operation are<em> not </em>"Acts of God". Christmas (at least in the context of the labor agreement) is <em>not</em> an "Act of God". Climactic conditions that are typical for the area in question are <em>not</em> "Acts of God".</p><p></p><p>Contrary to what you may choose to believe, the language was <em>not</em> intended to screw over the customers or cause sweet little old ladies to be denied their medication because some "Joe Union" threatened to file a grievance. The <em>intent</em> of the language is to protect our work and minimize the number of employees who are laid off and not making hourly contributions to the pension fund that <em>you</em> will benefit from when <em>you</em> retire.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="soberups, post: 877178, member: 14668"] Perhaps you should actually [B]read[/B] the contract before you create ignorant stereotypes about those who wish to uphold it. The two scenarios you refer to would clearly be considered "acts of God" under Article 3 section 7 of the Master Agreement, and as long as the company [I]first[/I] made every effort to employ as many hourly employees as possible, it would then be entitled to have supervisors perform the work as needed in order to avoid service failures [I]without[/I] being in violation of the contract. I believe the problem here lies in your [I]personal[/I] definition of what constitutes an "Act of God". Misloads caused by managements incompetence or willfull refusal to adequately plan and staff the operation are[I] not [/I]"Acts of God". Christmas (at least in the context of the labor agreement) is [I]not[/I] an "Act of God". Climactic conditions that are typical for the area in question are [I]not[/I] "Acts of God". Contrary to what you may choose to believe, the language was [I]not[/I] intended to screw over the customers or cause sweet little old ladies to be denied their medication because some "Joe Union" threatened to file a grievance. The [I]intent[/I] of the language is to protect our work and minimize the number of employees who are laid off and not making hourly contributions to the pension fund that [I]you[/I] will benefit from when [I]you[/I] retire. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Employee Survey.
Top