Discussion in 'UPS Discussions' started by Integrity, Nov 3, 2018.
Worker's Comp often limits correct compensation even when injury is permanent.
The way packages go through the system my opinion is that UPS should pay all claims of damages that occur while in their care.
UPS should not accept packages not suitable their system.
I've seen this for years. Similar to "blame the worker " behavior based safety, this is "blame the shipper" behavior based claims reduction.
Deny all claims, improper packaging.
You seem to have been indoctrinated.
50lbs was the stated weight.
Are you saying management (UPS) doesn't want you to follow all safe work methods and training?
That's what lawyers are for
Better be a good one.
If UPS didn't accept packages packed in accordance with our guidelines, our volume would decrease drastically. Have you ever processed a damage claim? Do you even know that cardboard boxes have seals printed on them that indicate weight capacity and burst strength? Do you know how many damaged packages were too heavy for the box they were packed into? Did you know UPS requires 2" of packaging material between the contents and the box? How many packages actually meet those requirements? How are drivers supposed to know if a package was packed properly or not in order to reject it?
Did you know that loading packages over 40lbs at or above shoulder height is unsafe and not methods?
I won't speak to what "management wants", I know that I accept responsibility for my own safety, and sometimes methods developed as a one-size-fits-all solution to safety are not, in fact, safe for everyone.
I think you need to really define who the company is for when you talk about assigning blame. Guess what, I am UPS, managers are UPS, PT Sups are UPS, corporate is UPS. By definition, when it comes to damage claims, there are only two parties who can take responsibility, the shipper and UPS. I will give you an assignment, design a system for rejecting all improperly packaged volume from ever being picked up, then I will agree that UPS would be responsible for all damaged packages within their system.
As for the original question, there are two parties involved in the case as you described, the employee and the employer. The employer is almost always culpable for any injury occurring on their property. If another employee caused the injury, that employee represents the company, and the company is culpable. Even if the injured employee caused the injury, the company can still be culpable.
Train and inform all employees on the packaging requirements. Pay them by the hour.
Dude, it's @Integrity
In the context of this particular injury, the company because that's the way they taught him to do it.
In my building, they teach you to use load stands and unload from the top down...none of this intentional collapsing nonsense. If the same thing happened here, I would say it was the employee's fault.
Less packages more personal attention. That would be good.
Training methods not applicable to all employees?
UPS is a corporation.
Look at packaging, make assessment, accept or reject. System designed.
Workers comp is a “no fault” insurance. Nobody’s “fault”. Ups pays the comp claim, unless the employee is lying.
Not sure of point you are trying to make.
"Safety begins and ends with YOU" by UPS
Does every unloader use a load stand and unload from the top down middle out in your building?
Does every unloader properly utilize the VHE for safe unloading in your building?
Ever see anyone do the dig out the middle collapse the wall method?
Cannot blame the employee.
At some point , I thought the above was going to be Integrity’s secret origin story, sort of like he fell into a vat of Integrity and learned that with great power came great responsibility.
Alas, I was wrong.
That may be but here is the truth:
Unfortunately employees often get disciplined as a result of reporting a workplace injury?
Warning letter anyone?
They collapse it anywhere they want. But they were trained not to do it that way. It's on them now.
I'm pretty sure that's illegal in my state. I hope to never be injured in this place again, but if I am they better not try that on me.
But I suppose it does depend on context, so I'll put it another way:
If the company provided load stands and trained people to use them, and employees don't, it's the employee's fault.
If the company did not provide load stands, even though it did train people to use them, it's the company's fault.
If the company neither provided nor trained employees to use load stands, it's the company's fault.
Separate names with a comma.