Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="100%ORIONComplianceGuy" data-source="post: 6068994" data-attributes="member: 109837">They botched it in regard to writing language that’s less susceptible to UPS exploitation. And UPS fully exploited that weakness. No surprise there. Letting the language go out for a vote to be perceived by corporate as straight retaliation language instead of a simple version where two days worked over 9.5 triggers penalty pay was embarrassingly stupid. And I don&#039;t think those grievances (I have a stack pending) will go our way.Why should we have to prove retaliation in the form of ill will vs loading us down because there wasn’t enough drivers? Or simply because they can? The language (for better or worse) says we’re not to be assigned excessive (over 9.5) the other two days. The “retaliation“ is obvious if they’ve already kept us under 9.5 the other three days and then shove it down our throats the remaining two.This controversy is nonsense. And, sadly, there are many stewards and BAs that ACTUALLY agree with UPS. And I don’t mean they acknowledge the language not being as strong as it should be. They actually think it’s supposed to be based on childish retaliation and that no one knows what excessive OT is even though the entire focus of that section concerns any hours over 9.5 hours. <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" alt="🤦‍♂️" title="Man facepalming&nbsp; &nbsp; :man_facepalming:" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/6.6/png/unicode/64/1f926-2642.png" data-shortname=":man_facepalming:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="100%ORIONComplianceGuy, post: 6068994, member: 109837"] They botched it in regard to writing language that’s less susceptible to UPS exploitation. And UPS fully exploited that weakness. No surprise there. Letting the language go out for a vote to be perceived by corporate as straight retaliation language instead of a simple version where two days worked over 9.5 triggers penalty pay was embarrassingly stupid. And I don't think those grievances (I have a stack pending) will go our way. Why should we have to prove retaliation in the form of ill will vs loading us down because there wasn’t enough drivers? Or simply because they can? The language (for better or worse) says we’re not to be assigned excessive (over 9.5) the other two days. The “retaliation“ is obvious if they’ve already kept us under 9.5 the other three days and then shove it down our throats the remaining two. This controversy is nonsense. And, sadly, there are many stewards and BAs that ACTUALLY agree with UPS. And I don’t mean they acknowledge the language not being as strong as it should be. They actually think it’s supposed to be based on childish retaliation and that no one knows what excessive OT is even though the entire focus of that section concerns any hours over 9.5 hours. 🤦‍♂️ [/QUOTE]

Verification