Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
New Contract
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Catatonic" data-source="post: 986777" data-attributes="member: 7966"><p>Option days are straight-forward.</p><p></p><p>More routes is a problematic goal. </p><p>The proposal can't say, add more routes but "more routes" has to be a result of a term that results in more routes.</p><p></p><p>The most common and logical proposal I have seen is to have a sliding scale condition that happens automatically.</p><p>This one that I seen on here:</p><p>0 - 8 hours - straight time</p><p>8 - 9 hours - time and 1/2</p><p>9 - 9.5 hours - double hourly pay</p><p>9.5 and above - triple pay</p><p></p><p>One thing that UPS (or any company) reacts to is cost.</p><p></p><p>Would these terms and conditions be acceptable to you.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Catatonic, post: 986777, member: 7966"] Option days are straight-forward. More routes is a problematic goal. The proposal can't say, add more routes but "more routes" has to be a result of a term that results in more routes. The most common and logical proposal I have seen is to have a sliding scale condition that happens automatically. This one that I seen on here: 0 - 8 hours - straight time 8 - 9 hours - time and 1/2 9 - 9.5 hours - double hourly pay 9.5 and above - triple pay One thing that UPS (or any company) reacts to is cost. Would these terms and conditions be acceptable to you. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
New Contract
Top