not taking lunch and getting paid

[Overpaid Union Thug]

At my current pay rate I would lose about $6,000.00/year if I skipped lunched every day. That fact, along with the fact that we are required (per the contract) to take an hour lunch, is more than enough reasoning for me to take my full hour every day. People that skip their lunch make me laugh because they violate the contract by doing so then they just can't figure out why management thinks it's ok to violate it. That is hilarious.

 

[soberups]

People that skip their lunch make me laugh because they violate the contract by doing so then they just can't figure out why management thinks it's ok to violate it. That is hilarious.

Management thinks its OK to violate it because its money in their pocket. Management deliberately rigs the allowances and dispatches the routes to be impossible to complete without skipping lunch, then has the gall to want to go after the river for "violating the contract" to get the work done. It is more of an issue now because the DIAD forces a level of honesty on everybody in regards to time that was lacking when we were on paper.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Management thinks its OK to violate it because its money in their pocket. Management deliberately rigs the allowances and dispatches the routes to be impossible to complete without skipping lunch, then has the gall to want to go after the river for "violating the contract" to get the work done. It is more of an issue now because the DIAD forces a level of honesty on everybody in regards to time that was lacking when we were on paper.

The best way to fight this is for everyone to just do what they are supposed to do. As hourly employees how are we supposed to justify filing grievances on sups violating the contract if we have numerous drivers skipping their lunches? That is a bit hypocritical. Not to mention losing money like I mentioned before. Yes, the DIAD forces a level of honesty but the sad part is that anyone (management or hourly) would need it to force that honesty. As drivers all we should have to do is work safely and not worry about "the numbers." Skipping lunch isn't worth the numbers. Yes, it would be nice to work through lunch once in a while and get paid for it but right now we can't.

 

[New Englander]

The best way to fight this is for everyone to just do what they are supposed to do. As hourly employees how are we supposed to justify filing grievances on sups violating the contract if we have numerous drivers skipping their lunches? That is a bit hypocritical. Not to mention losing money like I mentioned before. Yes, the DIAD forces a level of honesty but the sad part is that anyone (management or hourly) would need it to force that honesty. As drivers all we should have to do is work safely and not worry about "the numbers." Skipping lunch isn't worth the numbers. Yes, it would be nice to work through lunch once in a while and get paid for it but right now we can't.

Isn't taking your lunch at the end of the shift. the same as skipping it for all real world purposes?

I'm talking about not putting any lunch in, running it and getting paid for time worked. Not putting an hour lunch and not taking it.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Isn't taking your lunch at the end of the shift. the same as skipping it for all real world purposes?

I'm talking about not putting any lunch in, running it and getting paid for time worked. Not putting an hour lunch and not taking it.

I think most of us are for that but currently the contract states that we are required to take lunch. End of story.

 

[brownmonster]

I don't think the Union fought for our right to take lunch. A lunch break is pretty standard at every company. I believe it's the law.

 

[Mike Hawk]

Yea lunch is pretty much standard, however the union did fight to make it hard to work through lunch. Our diads are locked for half an hour once you put lunch in, after the half you can keep going to an hour or just take half.

 

[Jones]

I don't think the Union fought for our right to take lunch. A lunch break is pretty standard at every company. I believe it's the law.

I believe you are wrong. click

 

[New Englander]

I think most of us are for that but currently the contract states that we are required to take lunch. End of story.

End of story? Thats my point. It is in the contract, I'm all for that. I'm not for having it enforced on me and not fellow drivers.

My point is that while it's in the contract it's also in the contract as to when we are supposed to take lunch. Can you enforce part of it but not all of it?

The company in our area enforces us to take our lunches now, but is perfectly happy when people take it at the end of the day. You know get back to the center then hang around for an hour before they go home.

To me....that's not a lunch, that is UPS turning their cheek to the problem of incorrectly written routes or dispatches. We all know what would happen if the lunch was taken in the middle of those days.

Those drivers don't seem to really care and have the mind set of "I don't like to stop working".

Me...I personally believe that if they are not going to fully enforce the lunch, they shouldn't enforce any of it.

 

[dilligaf]

Jones it is the law. Any job you work, not just union, the company is required to provide X amont of time for breaks and lunches depending on the hours you work.

 

[UPS Lifer]

Management thinks its OK to violate it because its money in their pocket. Management deliberately rigs the allowances and dispatches the routes to be impossible to complete without skipping lunch, then has the gall to want to go after the river for "violating the contract" to get the work done. It is more of an issue now because the DIAD forces a level of honesty on everybody in regards to time that was lacking when we were on paper.

Soberups....Pleeeeaase! I will call you out every time you deliberately post inaccurate and misleading information. Management does not rig the allowances. You continue to undermine your credibility when you make comments like this.

If a management team over-dispatches a driver to force them to not take lunch the driver is still in control..... TAKE A LUNCH! No labor board will stand for that type of underhanded tactic and it should be easily proved IF it is in fact what is happening. No UPS management team will get away with something like this especially because California paved the way already!

 

[Jones]

Jones it is the law. Any job you work, not just union, the company is required to provide X amont of time for breaks and lunches depending on the hours you work.

Can you dig that law up, I'd love to see it.

Once again, here are the 19 states that actually have rules about a meal period (what about the other 31?): click

Be sure to read who's actually covered in those states, as well as all the exceptions. Lotsa loopholes.

 

[UPS Lifer]

Can you dig that law up, I'd love to see it.

Once again, here are the 19 states that actually have rules about a meal period (what about the other 31?): click

Be sure to read who's actually covered in those states, as well as all the exceptions. Lotsa loopholes.

Not sure if it really matters (which states have laws) ... You work under a union contract. The contract specifies the lunch and rest periods. You can take that contract with you all the way to the Labor Board if you had too.

 

[UPS Lifer]

In the last 10 years, I became a big advocate of taking lunches and rest periods. I think there are a lot of people that don't realize that you actually become re-energized and over a period of hours you recoup the time that was spent on break or lunch through better performance overall.

There is an added benefit of less injuries and accidents because you are sharper and more alert. The same goes for management folks. Long hours does not make for more productivity. It usually is just the opposite. Each individual needs to find their optimum work output and utilize their breaks and lunch around that output.

ALSO - i never saw an operation decrease performance by making the employees take their lunch and breaks. My operation was one of the first to force PT supervisors to take lunch because of an extremely long Sunday. I staggered the PT and had one to two supvervisors that just covered for lunches. I had 35 supervisors.
In the beginning they were not happy but 2 folks at a time, would go to lunch and they enjoyed the time away from the operation. It actually made the day more bearable.

 

[Jones]

Not sure if it really matters (which states have laws) ... You work under a union contract. The contract specifies the lunch and rest periods. You can take that contract with you all the way to the Labor Board if you had too.

Well, that was sort of my point, Lifer. The post that started this particular exchange was this one:

I don't think the Union fought for our right to take lunch. A lunch break is pretty standard at every company. I believe it's the law.

 

[browniehound]

I don't think the Union fought for our right to take lunch. A lunch break is pretty standard at every company. I believe it's the law.

Problem with this logic is at 97% of companies you punch in and out at certain time. At UPS we punch in at the same time, but my finish time can vary up to 2 hours during one week.

I'm not suggesting anyone should run lunch every day, but what if you need to make a wake and you have a 10-hour dispatch? Are we to be fired for this?

 

[Hedley_Lamarr]

I spend a good portion of my lunch sorting the rest of my load. My on car tells me that I shouldn't do that.

 

[1989]

I spend a good portion of my lunch sorting the rest of my load. My on car tells me that I shouldn't do that.

No you shouldn't

 

[New Englander]

No one has answered my question or even given any thought to it.

I have been issued my warning letter to work as directed and take my lunch.

My point is this:

The contract states we are to take a lunch.
The contract states when we are to take the lunch.

How can the company issue warning letters for failing to take a lunch when they care less when it is taken? I feel like grieving my letter based upon that fact. They shouldn't be able to enforce just PART of the equation. The part that suits them and turn the blind eye to the routes improperly written that guys run it to the end on.

If drivers are allowed to take their lunches at the end of their shift either at the local gas station parking lot or building it is essentially not a lunch. It is only being done to oblige management.

 

[1989]

Just be thankful you wern't terminated and take your lunch when you are supposed to.