Integrity issues?

[hubrat]

I'm honestly not trying to be combative here, but I do not understand...

Here is what I think I heard (and yes, I may be biased).

Every day your supervisor shows you all the packages not delivered?

It seems like you are not disciplined for them? You say he doesn't even talk to you about it. Doesn't ask you to change behavior.

The harassment is just telling you about it? Making you sign that he told you?

If there are warning letters, suspensions, etc. I would understand.

Again, even though I am admittedly biased, I just don't understand why telling you about packages that didn't get delivered is harassment.

You already trained me. Get off my back. If you have an issue with an employee not following proceedure take it up with the individual. It is harassment.

You got SSPVE on your walls yet?

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

You already trained me. Get off my back. If you have an issue with an employee not following proceedure take it up with the individual. It is harassment. You got SSPVE on your walls yet?

I'm confused--you brought this up and have been evasive about it since.

 

[hubrat]

I'm confused--you brought this up and have been evasive about it since.

I haven't been evasive. No one has asked. This is where I brought it up before:

Post #92 in the Overmanagement thread

I wish someone would explain it to me better. All I know is that my mugshot is in the wall and I am/am not a member of "clubs" I never asked to join. Example: until Monday I was a member of the "Injury Club" but since I got injured my pic will be removed and my name put on the "Drivers Whose Help I Need List". Still have figured out who the I is. In addition we had to sign some sort of commitment, the contents of which I don't remember and was not allowed to copy. We get written up for everything whether it is actually an error or not. Every day I sign a piece of paper with the previous day's performance on it, in addition page(s) containing whatever "errors" they perceive to be mine, ie every service failure, including send agains, is now the drivers' fault.
We now receive warning letters for late air, and loaders get warning letters for misloads.
Sups signed an SSPVE commitment. In this order it's Safety, Service, Profitability, Volume, Employee. They are graded on 13 components representing these, so that if they have 100% on 6/13, they are 46% effective. This, as well as their mugshot and those of their driver group are displayed in the sups' office. Everything that they are graded on is based on drivers' performance rather than on their own. They and the managers and some higher
ups are constantly being threatened with termination.
There is a lot more to it I'm sure. Whatever, most of it looks like harassment from my vantage point.
Oh, and according to the latest rumor they are going to lock each driver into a set SPORH, and we all have to be running scratch by next September.
It's supposed to be moving up the East Coast now and then sweep throughout the country, so you'll see it soon enough.

 

[tieguy]

I haven't been evasive. No one has asked. This is where I brought it up before:

Post #92 in the Overmanagement thread

Here is the problem as I see it.

you are having some type of daily review with your supervisor that you are asked to sign. It appears to be a summary of some type of service disconnects. You have decided to dismiss it as harrassment and therefore you cant even tell us what report it is you are viewing.

at some point its possible you have some actual service failures that you caused . at that point all those reports you ignored may come back to haunt you.

at the very least I think you should ask what report it is and ask why they are reviewing it with you.

hopefully its simply an awareness tool to remind you of the previous days send agains that you want to make sure you deliver today.

but you need to ask questions. right now your disinterest is possibly setting you up for trouble down the road.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

I haven't been evasive. No one has asked. This is where I brought it up before:

Post #92 in the Overmanagement thread

Why would you sign anything, to start with? If you are being harrassed I agree with Tie, ask why you're getting this extra attention and what you can do to change that. However you should never be signing any type of performance reviews.

 

[hubrat]

All drivers are receiving the same "reviews".

If you don't get it, fuggedaboutit. I ain't here for you.

 

[over9five]

All drivers are receiving the same "reviews".

If you don't get it, fuggedaboutit. I ain't here for you.

But I'm sure all the drivers aren't signing it. I sign legitimate stuff, but I often RTS.

 

[hubrat]

But I'm sure all the drivers aren't signing it. I sign legitimate stuff, but I often RTS.

Sorry, it does appear that everyone is signing it. We were told refusal is not working as instructed, steward said to sign under protest. As I stated before, I have filed article 37 grievance, as have others. We will hopefully be heard in January. Chances are we won't get any results that fast, but getting it in the record counts for something.

Clearly the only way you guys are gonna believe this is when you see it in person.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Sorry, it does appear that everyone is signing it. We were told refusal is not working as instructed, steward said to sign under protest. As I stated before, I have filed article 37 grievance, as have others. We will hopefully be heard in January. Chances are we won't get any results that fast, but getting it in the record counts for something.

Clearly the only way you guys are gonna believe this is when you see it in person.

...or until you give us concrete examples of the service disconnects that you are being asked to review and sign. You mentioned you were asked to sign because you had made two attempts on a NDA. That sounds more like good customer service as opposed to a service failure.

What specific service failures have you been asked to review and sign?

 

[Bubblehead]

Sorry, it does appear that everyone is signing it. We were told refusal is not working as instructed, steward said to sign under protest. As I stated before, I have filed article 37 grievance, as have others. We will hopefully be heard in January. Chances are we won't get any results that fast, but getting it in the record counts for something.

Clearly the only way you guys are gonna believe this is when you see it in person.

"They" say a lot of things that aren't true.
Call their bluff and watch nothing happen aside from empty rhetoric.
Make that part of your harrassment case.
Forcing employees to sign under the geise of incurring progressive discipline is definitely harrassment.
Follow it up with some labor charges and watch the issue evaporate.

 

[Bubblehead]

It's always easiest to follow the path of least resistance.
Problem being, when you do you end up at the lowest point.
Fight to protect what's rightfully yours.
Generations of good people did just that to afford us what we enjoy at the present.
Don't be scared to do what's right people.
Sounds to me like Hubrat is doing just that.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Bubbles, it sounds to me as though they are simply reviewing service failures from the previous day with the driver(s) in question. If it were me I would go through each one and I would write down an explanation for each one and, yes, I would then sign the piece of paper. For example, if I had a NI1 for a case of wine, I would indicate that no one was home and that indirecting an A8 is not an option.

I really wish he would be more specific as to what types of service failures he is being asked to review and sign.

 

[hubrat]

...What specific service failures have you been asked to review and sign?

...You mentioned you were asked to sign because you had made two attempts on a NDA.

Exactly. Told to sign in spite of the fact I made 2 attempts.
EVERY PREMIUM SEND AGAIN IS NOW CONSIDERED A SERVICE FAILURE.

That sounds more like good customer service as opposed to a service failure.

Which is why I consider it harassment.

Have a safe day.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

But I'm sure all the drivers aren't signing it. I sign legitimate stuff, but I often RTS.

Please give some examples

 

[soberups]

.

Clearly the only way you guys are gonna believe this is when you see it in person.

Bring it on!

I can always use a good laugh in the morning.

 

[tieguy]

All drivers are receiving the same "reviews".

If you don't get it, fuggedaboutit. I ain't here for you.

not sure why you bring it up if you want to fuggedaboutit.

 

[Catatonic]

Exactly. Told to sign in spite of the fact I made 2 attempts.
EVERY PREMIUM SEND AGAIN IS NOW CONSIDERED A SERVICE FAILURE.



Which is why I consider it harassment.

Have a safe day.

I'm getting the feeling that saying "Good morning" to you on some days would be considered harassment to you!

 

[Nimnim]

Without any real details to substantiate things I'm regrettably finding myself agreeing with both tieguy and Upstate. While it might be an annoyance a daily review of service failures or whatnot doesn't really account for harassment.

Edit: Afterthought, if this wasn't something all the drivers are being approached with daily, but just a few, I'd certainly lean more towards harassment.

 

[Bubblehead]

Look, my point is this.
Review everything and anything.
It's their dime.
The problem as I see it is the requirement of a signature and the assertion by management that refusal will result in progressive discipline as failure to work as directed.
That plain and simple is harrassment.
Ask yourself this, if its just a review why require a signature?
Secondly why is a chart/wall of shame necessary for all eyes?
It stinks and Hubrat is doing the right thing grieving it as harassment.

 

[hubrat]

Look, my point is this.
Review everything and anything.
It's their dime.
The problem as I see it is the requirement of a signature and the assertion by management that refusal will result in progressive discipline as failure to work as directed.
That plain and simple is harrassment.
Ask yourself this, if its just a review why require a signature?
Secondly why is a chart/wall of shame necessary for all eyes?
It stinks and Hubrat is doing the right thing grieving it as harassment.

The cms and ocs have a wall too! As I've also said multiple times management is being harassed too.

I appreciate your support Bubblehead.

These other guys are clearly too thick to understand a very simple concept that has been explained a few times.

Or maybe they are being paid to put out fires.