Omega man
Well-Known Member
This is what I don't get about the lunch debate... if I have ten hours of work to do what difference does it make if I do that work from 0900 to 1900 with no lunch as opposed to 0900 to 2000 with a one hour unpaid lunch? In both scenarios I am getting the same production done and I am getting paid the same amount. The only difference is I get home an hour earlier.
In my local we get two paid 15 breaks and a one hour unpaid lunch with further language that we may take just a half hour unpaid lunch with approval. In practice there is blanket approval for taking just the thirty and really nobody has said anything for years if we don't use the unpaid time.
I should have the right to take a lunch break of course. Dispatch me with all biz stops and pickups where I would have to skip lunch to make it all happen by closing time and I will toss the bs flag and call for help.
And don't get me started on working off the clock. Can't see why anyone would do that. We make a billion in profit after taxes a quarter, we are a cash machine. I'll take my share for every minute thank you very much and sleep well at night.
But why force me to take unpaid time during the day when I really would rather have that time in the evening? I don't see the benefit in that to anybody.
Simply, safety.
Working all day without a break, DOT studies have shown, increases the probability of you getting in an accident. Because of this, they will force you to take a break by law beginning this July. This is to guard against driver fatigue.
Working all day without stopping for lunch also enables UPS to put more work on drivers and eliminate routes because you are showing UPS that the work is getting done.