Management found a new loophole..

[Bubblehead]

There's two rooms. Two co-chairs.
When someone's case gets put into the right room with the right people life is good.
When other cases are continuously put into the room where his LM and the chair are buddies things are not so great.
You figure it out.

Many folks understand what he's talking about.

Not just "buddies", rather where the Union Co-chair is also the BA for a Local that has the very same Labor Manager as we do.

I think the term is a "conflict of interests".

It's a real head scratcher why the Panel would expose themselves to this unnecessary position of liability, where improprieties can be alleged?

In a real court of law, any judge or magistrate would most certainly recuse themselves when such an obvious conflict of interest exists.

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

What @IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U said.

What you are describing has nothing to do with dishonesty, article 12, or gps. It just makes it easier to have another driver do a bunch of your route.
Your WOR will show the stops you delivered and the miles you drove, it won't care what was delivered by someone else, so it won't effect your numbers.
As soon as they sent a driver with your route downloaded to his board to take work off you management abandoned any chance to hold you accountable for any of those packages as they cannot substantiate who wound up with them. Score for you from an accountability standpoint.
Likewise, telematics and ORION will most likely be confused by the situation and provide unreliable results for the day. Again, score for you.

Now, everything I just said is based on this other driver signed into his own board just with your route downloaded into it. If he was signed into a board under your employee ID, well that's a whole different thing...

Check your DDR in the morning and see if the numbers match up.

 

[brownIEman]

Check your DDR in the morning and see if the numbers match up.

A car thrown out with a driver to help without it's own route would not be on the DDR.
Not sure what you're suggesting?
If your talking about accountability, I could see what packages were we redelivered by each driver, but say one package went out and got burned, never got a scan of any kind. There's no way to show which car it was on, wether it was handed off or stayed on the original car.

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

A car thrown out with a driver to help without it's own route would not be on the DDR.
Not sure what you're suggesting?
If your talking about accountability, I could see what packages were we redelivered by each driver, but say one package went out and got burned, never got a scan of any kind. There's no way to show which car it was on, wether it was handed off or stayed on the original car.

What I'm trying to say is. If my DIAD summary showed 300 packages and 150 stops, the DDR should match what's in my DIAD.

 

[brownIEman]

Not just "buddies", rather where the Union Co-chair is also the BA for a Local that has the very same Labor Manager as we do.

I think the term is a "conflict of interests".

It's a real head scratcher why the Panel would expose themselves to this unnecessary position of liability, where improprieties can be alleged?

In a real court of law, any judge or magistrate would most certainly recuse themselves when such an obvious conflict of interest exists.

Say 2 attorneys represent 2 different clients. One client sued the other over some matter and the attorneys do their jobs. Later, another law suit comes up over something else in another court. You're saying a judge should prevent the attorneys from representing their original clients in the new case because they represented them in the first case and it's somehow a conflict if interest?

That makes no sense and is not a conflict if interest.

 

[brownIEman]

When did that happen?

Maybe my perspective is skewed by the local practice of recording stops on a "Center DIAD", with an employee # 0000000 listed?

....or when the shuttle driver's DIAD records were merged into the routes of choice?

Perhaps when the shuttle driver calls the driver to manually enter the misloaded package, while they are miles away?

Need I go on???

Just fyi, logging in a center DIAD with a bogus employee ID is standard operating procedure for customer counters to get signatures and record the delivery for packages picked up at the counter.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

I think the term is a "conflict of interests".

It's a real head scratcher why the Panel would expose themselves to this unnecessary position of liability, where improprieties can be alleged ?

Isn't the term "alleged".... the operative term ?


I'm not trying to discount a possibility, but the other Union panel members would

have to be involved. Including.... the Union "Sergeant at Arms".

 

[Frankie's Friend]

Say 2 attorneys represent 2 different clients. One client sued the other over some matter and the attorneys do their jobs. Later, another law suit comes up over something else in another court. You're saying a judge should prevent the attorneys from representing their original clients in the new case because they represented them in the first case and it's somehow a conflict if interest?

That makes no sense and is not a conflict if interest.

Uh, prospective jurors in a case are scrutinized to see if they can be removed for any reason.
There's more going on behind the scenes than you know but some folks know.
It points to personal integrity issues.

 

[Frankie's Friend]

Just fyi, logging in a center DIAD with a bogus employee ID is standard operating procedure for customer counters to get signatures and record the delivery for packages picked up at the counter.

Not here.

 

[dudebro]

Isn't the term "alleged".... the operative term ?


I'm not trying to discount a possibility, but the other Union panel members would

have to be involved. Including.... the Union "Sergeant at Arms".

The usual standard in any organization though, union or otherwise, is that the "appearance" of impropriety must be avoided. That means there doesn't need to be a charge, proof, and a conviction, just the appearance of conflict to a "reasonable" person.

 

[UPSER1987]

Long story short, I needed help finishing off my route here recently, Sup sends me a guy with a already loaded EDD of my full route. Instead of me transferring my EDD to his, he just delivers from from the already loaded EDD. I called said sup and asked why, was told it gives dispatch a raise, so it looks like nobody had to help anybody, and appears on paper that work is evened out. Also looks as if it was delivered from the original

Non story. Been done for years. Nothing to see here.

 

[Bubblehead]

Say 2 attorneys represent 2 different clients. One client sued the other over some matter and the attorneys do their jobs. Later, another law suit comes up over something else in another court. You're saying a judge should prevent the attorneys from representing their original clients in the new case because they represented them in the first case and it's somehow a conflict if interest?

That makes no sense and is not a conflict if interest.

You almost understand, but not really...

We can stay with your hypothetical scenario, but instead consider that one of the attorneys is a lawyer one day, then the judge the next?

.....passing judgement on cases involving the very same attorney that he will again be litigating against tomorrow.

How can that not be considered a conflict interests?

 

[Frankie's Friend]

You almost understand, but not really...

We can stay with your hypothetical scenario, but instead consider that one of the attorneys is a lawyer one day, then the judge the next?

.....passing judgement on cases involving the very same attorney that he will again be litigating against tomorrow.

How can that not be considered a conflict interests?

How can they collude together to sandbag grievances from one member on the same issue for 3 years and then the labor manager not take a point of order at the panel because it's too late to hear them?
There's a smoking gun.
The labor manager thought he had it in the bag when the one grievance went to the panel. There were 8 more grievance resolutions waiting that were attached to that one grievance from the same member.

The only thing that got the business agent to docket that grievance to the panel was that the NLRB sent him a charge of illegal activity.

 

[Frankie's Friend]

Isn't the term "alleged".... the operative term ?


I'm not trying to discount a possibility, but the other Union panel members would

have to be involved. Including.... the Union "Sergeant at Arms".

Maybe you dont know this but there is a certain small group of BAs that are like minded and follow the lead of another BA.
Fact.

Not all bas are involved by any means, and some really dont care for this situation but they have to coexist with the cards (players) they've been dealt, for now.

There are many who know what I'm talking about and some of the people you may hold in high esteem have gravitated the wrong direction to support their friends, even though they talk trash about them when they're not around. I've got plenty of personal messages from "some" folk that are telling and very damaging for certain people.

I could tell you things that have gone down that would make you (hopefully) shake your head in disbelief.

This is the cancer that's rotting out the membership's trust and diluting the faith in the union leadership to the point that they don't want to even hear explanations about why their cba is negotiated a certain way.

There are great people in this union leadership for sure.

We just need more of them.

 

[brownIEman]

You almost understand, but not really...

We can stay with your hypothetical scenario, but instead consider that one of the attorneys is a lawyer one day, then the judge the next?

.....passing judgement on cases involving the very same attorney that he will again be litigating against tomorrow.

How can that not be considered a conflict interests?

Well that would definitely be a conflict if interest. But I think panel is still closer to opposing attorneys negotiating from opposing positions. The judge analogy doesn't really fit till you get to arbitration and the arbitrator fills that role.

I admit I don't know your situation so I'll conceed the point

 

[Brown Biscuit]

My first year driving I was regularly sent out with 2-4 DIADs going around “putting out fires” as my Sup would say. I still see it going on every week.

 

[ACmoses]

Maybe you dont know this but there is a certain small group of BAs that are like minded and follow the lead of another BA.
Fact.

Not all bas are involved by any means, and some really dont care for this situation but they have to coexist with the cards (players) they've been dealt, for now.

There are many who know what I'm talking about and some of the people you may hold in high esteem have gravitated the wrong direction to support their friends, even though they talk trash about them when they're not around. I've got plenty of personal messages from "some" folk that are telling and very damaging for certain people.

I could tell you things that have gone down that would make you (hopefully) shake your head in disbelief.

This is the cancer that's rotting out the membership's trust and diluting the faith in the union leadership to the point that they don't want to even hear explanations about why their cba is negotiated a certain way.

There are great people in this union leadership for sure.

We just need more of them.

Save your energy for your jobs!

 

[Bubblehead]

Well that would definitely be a conflict if interest. But I think panel is still closer to opposing attorneys negotiating from opposing positions. The judge analogy doesn't really fit till you get to arbitration and the arbitrator fills that role.

I admit I don't know your situation so I'll conceed the point

We are getting closer!!!....bear with me.

A Panel is the equivalent of an "arbitration", where the Co-chairs (co-judges or arbitrators) for each side of the Panel, Company and Union, are ultimately tasked to decide what the remedy will be in the Labor dispute before them.

So if the Union Co-chair (judge/arbitrator) in my case, was the BA yesterday against the same Labor Manager he is now in charge of ruling on today

....then back at the table with that very Labor Manager again as a BA tommorow

....that is a textbook "conflict of interests".

 

[3 done 3 to go]

Guys? There is a code. Big M in other work. Driver assist. The one meeting to take work from another should be putting this in his beard any ways. I do it every Time I leave my area for another. After I finish the last stop. I then put end time in that function.

 

[Frankie's Friend]

Guys? There is a code. Big M in other work. Driver assist. The one meeting to take work from another should be putting this in his beard any ways. I do it every Time I leave my area for another. After I finish the last stop. I then put end time in that function.

It's always good to snap a pic of "Other Work" at the end of the day becuz they can delete Driver Assist any time they want to after you punch out.