Bubblehead
My Senior Picture
For who???
Don't get @BigUnionGuy and @Inthegame mixed up?
They aren't one in the same, I promise you....
Local 243
- Thread starter Brownpants80
- Start date
They aren't one in the same, I promise you....
browned out
Well-Known Member
Yeah I have been posting a little hastily today. Thanks. I won't get them confused.
BUG continues to dodge all the questions on this topic as he did in the bed Rose Fischer topic
browned out
Well-Known Member
Our local 243 workweeks go from Monday through Saturday.
And it appears the work week will go Monday through Sunday when the 22 fours are implemented on Sundays.
We have about 12 Tuesday thru Saturday drivers.
There are already layoffs on Mondays.
What do you think will happen to the number of laid off drivers on Mondays when these 12 drivers working Tuesday through Saturdays are forced back to working Monday through Friday?
I will tell you what will happen. About 12 more package car drivers will be laid off on Mondays. As it stands now these drivers will have no right to get 5 days or 40 hours.
Yet a 22-4 is guaranteed 5 days and 40 hours.
The absence of any language guaranteeing existing package car drivers in 243 and the Central Region the right to 40 hours is glaring.
The NorCal negotiating team had the wherewithal to include the necessary proactive language their supplement. Language that is in the best interest of all Teamster upsers.
And it appears the work week will go Monday through Sunday when the 22 fours are implemented on Sundays.
We have about 12 Tuesday thru Saturday drivers.
There are already layoffs on Mondays.
What do you think will happen to the number of laid off drivers on Mondays when these 12 drivers working Tuesday through Saturdays are forced back to working Monday through Friday?
I will tell you what will happen. About 12 more package car drivers will be laid off on Mondays. As it stands now these drivers will have no right to get 5 days or 40 hours.
Yet a 22-4 is guaranteed 5 days and 40 hours.
The absence of any language guaranteeing existing package car drivers in 243 and the Central Region the right to 40 hours is glaring.
The NorCal negotiating team had the wherewithal to include the necessary proactive language their supplement. Language that is in the best interest of all Teamster upsers.
Last edited:
UnconTROLLed
perfection
How do your locals bids work?
My guess is that existing FT RPCD's will be shuffled around when the 22.4 jobs are implemented. Basically, the lowest seniority RPCD's will be bumped into either newly created 22.4 jobs or other areas.
I'm not sure exactly how your new supplement reads, but it would seem like there would be a seniority "slide" in this case, but again don't know your exact bidding or implementation processes.
eats packages
Deranged lunatic
FT drivers will stay FT driver.
Only the young and desperate, I suppose, would dare bid to 22.4. PT really don't get a choice in the matter.
Slinging Packages
Active Member
Your forgetting NOT a single 22.4 person can be put to work UNLESS all RPCD are all working!
22.4's can only be max of 25% for the amount of RPCD that each building have.
Slinging Packages
Active Member
All RPCD'S will remain RPCD'S and the company can't move RPCD'S to 22.4's.
22.4's will consist of part time and new hires
browned out
Well-Known Member
22.4s will not be scheduled to work any Mondays so technically the entire RPCD force could be laid off on Mondays.
For Wednesday-Friday; your statement is correct. All RPCD's must work before a 22.4.
Tuesdays are subject to change. If UPS goes to a Wednesday thru Sunday 22.4 week; which they have every right to do; then an unlimited number of RPCDs could and will be laid off on Monday and Tuesday since No 22.4 would be working on a Monday or Tuesday.
The low seniority drivers will not be bumped to 22.4s. But; I think UPS's methodology leads them to believe that many RPCDs will be starved out from only working 24-32 hours per week. UPS hopes these shafted RPCDs will bid into 22.4 just to reach a guaranteed 40 hours.
Many of the laid off RPCDs will not reach the required hours for a full years' pension credit. This is another reason a low seniority driver may bid to 22.4.
It is all bad. The Union did not fulfill their duty of fair representation during contract negotiations. If they had; these issues would have been addressed as they were in the NorCal and other supplements.
Slinging Packages
Active Member
RPCD's won't be laid off on Mondays who will work?? 22.4's are off on Monday.
In order for 22.4's to work on Tuesday every RPCD will have to work and if there is one RPCD laid off on Tuesday then no 22.4 can work.
The Local has represented us during the Ryder negotiations but it's the company who won't budge on the 22.4's. It's not a one way street where we can demand we get what we want. That's why they are called negotiations. I have been at every meeting including the demands meeting when WE AS MEMBERS wanted the 22.4 protection so 243 proposed that to the company.
How is that not representing us?
The fact that the company won't agree doesn't mean 243 has not represented us.
burrheadd
KING Of GIFS
Did the company counter offer?
Slinging Packages
Active Member
No they said no one around the country has that and they refused to negotiate on the 22.4's
burrheadd
KING Of GIFS
Doesn’t sound like much of a negotiation to me
UnconTROLLed
perfection
Here we have job bids bi-annually, but with the implementation of FT 22.4s, the entire list will probably be rebid.
My point is that when the bids are re-aligned, there may be less RPCD jobs and more 22.4s (still in accordance with the NTL master and supplements), therefore RPCDs at the bottom of the cutoff will be bumped into something else.
Maybe I'm not making this point clearly but it's hard to explain it any better.
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
542thruNthru
Well-Known Member
Well this should be interesting
browned out
Well-Known Member
Does anyone have a clue why the supplement would be sent out for a vote before the conclusion of 243 Unfair Labor Practice action?
It makes no sense. I would think if the NLRB had ruled already; 243 would let us know? What happens if the NLRB rules in 243s favor after this is voted on?
We will vote it down again.
It will be forced thru.
Damn Shame.
It most likely would have passed the 1st time if the 243 did their due diligence in crafting language that was in the best interest of all 243 UPSers. Or even answering our questions regarding losing up to 40% of our income. Or get the friend'n answers from the company.
Incompetent and Negligent at best. Collusion at worst. Pieces of absolute garbage....at best. Pieces of S*#t is more accurate.
It makes no sense. I would think if the NLRB had ruled already; 243 would let us know? What happens if the NLRB rules in 243s favor after this is voted on?
We will vote it down again.
It will be forced thru.
Damn Shame.
It most likely would have passed the 1st time if the 243 did their due diligence in crafting language that was in the best interest of all 243 UPSers. Or even answering our questions regarding losing up to 40% of our income. Or get the friend'n answers from the company.
Incompetent and Negligent at best. Collusion at worst. Pieces of absolute garbage....at best. Pieces of S*#t is more accurate.
Last edited:
Seems like you are asking the rest of the country to stall because of your in fighting. If they are pieces of crap "incompetent", you are the ones that put them in so it is a Local issue. If it has been ongoing for 18 years, it sounds like the members are incompetent for leaving them there. If it really bad representation, run against them and win. Then, you can negotiate.
Your opinion of some of the needs being a requirement of negotiations is only an opinion. It is also not required that the Company give in to all demands. Negotiations are done by 2 sides that have differing opinions. Although I don't like the language for 22.4, it has passed and part of the national language.
What'dyabringmetoday???
Banned
It would appear that it is required for the union to give in to all demands. Lol.
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
Yes.... I do.
It's just the same, as it was in 2013.
A small group of dissidents, thought that continually voting down their
supplement/rider would result in a re-negotiation of the ratified Master language.
I would like to see some proof.
Did @browned out even attended a Local meeting, or submit proposals ?
And now;
It's his chance.... to make good on all his threats of NLRB charges.
Because he has financial backing.
-Bug-
Similar threads
