As I understand things, one of the big issues in these current contract negotiations is excessive overtime, and that is something many drivers have had as a big complaint about for at least the past 23 years which have been my time at UPS. I like the slogan "work to live, not live to work." I don't sense the 9.5 list has been effective enough in reducing this unwanted overtime. People keep filing grievances and UPS keeps paying out, but I figure that getting some extra cash is really not what a person who is seeking a better work-life balance truly wants...
A solution that I am informally proposing here is to create a new 40.0 list which is something you would sign on to as a full time driver if you want to work right around 40 hours per week, but instead of being paid extra money the way one is when winning a 9.5 grievance, filing a grievance for over 40.0 would instead earn one an extra, unpaid day off once the amount of overtime you have worked adds up to over 8 hours. A certain reasonable amount of time would be given to the company to schedule the extra day off, so as to not mess up the operation for UPS. Just like the 9.5 list is suspended for peak season, it would be the same with this 40.0 list...and maybe a few additional times as well, such as the days leading up to Valentines Day and Mothers' Day where there is some spike in volume that we need "all hands on deck" and shouldn't blame UPS for the momentary worker shortage.
To address right away some objections people may have to my idea, I have heard it argued that it is less costly for UPS to pay overtime and even overtime grievances than it is to hire additional drivers because of the value of the benefits that are given over and above the wages. However, one reason this thinking never made much sense to me is because UPS has a huge number of part-timers who are receiving a benefits package beyond their wages that is not much less than that of full-timers. If a big goal should be keeping the number of people who are getting benefits as low as possible, then why isn't UPS trying to minimize the number of part-timers by encouraging people to voluntarily work 2 split shifts and reduce the overall head count and thereby benefits paid?
Additionally and more importantly, I strongly suspect that driver injury, which is also costly as well as dreadful for the injured, occurs at the level it does as a result of all the overtime full time package car drivers have typically had to put in all throughout the year. I believe that when people are fatigued and stretched beyond their healthy limits is when injuries are far more likely to occur despite all the best training on safety and proper work methods. As best I remember from recently looking at the package car driver rosters at the hub out of which I work, approximately 10% of the people on the lists are out longer term due to some injury. So even if hiring more drivers means there will be significant extra costs with the additional benefits that have to be paid, in addition to doing the right thing ethically, if I was a gambling man, I would wager that UPS management would be pleasantly surprised by a net financial savings that would come about through reduced employee injury and fewer disability payments as a result of getting full-timers working right around the standard 40-hour work week made possible through the hiring of the additional drivers, and giving everyone the off time to rest and recover properly in order to stay safe and in good health.
I recognize that in some cases there are significant advantages to having someone work more than 8 hours on the typical day. Perhaps the best solution in such cases might be having someone work four, ten hour, not necessarily all consecutive days or some other schedule where one still works right around a 40-hour week.
As a disclaimer, with what I have proposed above, I speak for no one other than myself, but I do hope to win other people over like I tried to do with another thread I started not too long ago. That thread generated what I thought was some good discussion. I hope the same happens here, and ideally reaches some people who are involved in making the big decisions...
A solution that I am informally proposing here is to create a new 40.0 list which is something you would sign on to as a full time driver if you want to work right around 40 hours per week, but instead of being paid extra money the way one is when winning a 9.5 grievance, filing a grievance for over 40.0 would instead earn one an extra, unpaid day off once the amount of overtime you have worked adds up to over 8 hours. A certain reasonable amount of time would be given to the company to schedule the extra day off, so as to not mess up the operation for UPS. Just like the 9.5 list is suspended for peak season, it would be the same with this 40.0 list...and maybe a few additional times as well, such as the days leading up to Valentines Day and Mothers' Day where there is some spike in volume that we need "all hands on deck" and shouldn't blame UPS for the momentary worker shortage.
To address right away some objections people may have to my idea, I have heard it argued that it is less costly for UPS to pay overtime and even overtime grievances than it is to hire additional drivers because of the value of the benefits that are given over and above the wages. However, one reason this thinking never made much sense to me is because UPS has a huge number of part-timers who are receiving a benefits package beyond their wages that is not much less than that of full-timers. If a big goal should be keeping the number of people who are getting benefits as low as possible, then why isn't UPS trying to minimize the number of part-timers by encouraging people to voluntarily work 2 split shifts and reduce the overall head count and thereby benefits paid?
Additionally and more importantly, I strongly suspect that driver injury, which is also costly as well as dreadful for the injured, occurs at the level it does as a result of all the overtime full time package car drivers have typically had to put in all throughout the year. I believe that when people are fatigued and stretched beyond their healthy limits is when injuries are far more likely to occur despite all the best training on safety and proper work methods. As best I remember from recently looking at the package car driver rosters at the hub out of which I work, approximately 10% of the people on the lists are out longer term due to some injury. So even if hiring more drivers means there will be significant extra costs with the additional benefits that have to be paid, in addition to doing the right thing ethically, if I was a gambling man, I would wager that UPS management would be pleasantly surprised by a net financial savings that would come about through reduced employee injury and fewer disability payments as a result of getting full-timers working right around the standard 40-hour work week made possible through the hiring of the additional drivers, and giving everyone the off time to rest and recover properly in order to stay safe and in good health.
I recognize that in some cases there are significant advantages to having someone work more than 8 hours on the typical day. Perhaps the best solution in such cases might be having someone work four, ten hour, not necessarily all consecutive days or some other schedule where one still works right around a 40-hour week.
As a disclaimer, with what I have proposed above, I speak for no one other than myself, but I do hope to win other people over like I tried to do with another thread I started not too long ago. That thread generated what I thought was some good discussion. I hope the same happens here, and ideally reaches some people who are involved in making the big decisions...
