Seems like people are overlooking a graver danger in the tentative

Discussion in 'UPS Discussions' started by PeasAndCarrots, Sep 6, 2018.

  1. With all the spotlights revolving around 22.4 and it’s current language, I think a lot of people are overlooking the large potential of being disciplined over telematics. In section 6, it basically states that after being verbally talked with sbout an infraction, you can be disciplined if it happens at a 2nd time.

    Am I reading this wrong or looking at it incorrectly? They harp on telematics as it is but everyone knows there’s nothing that can come of it. What if this is their way of weeding out the grievance-filing drivers that they don’t like?
  2. 542thruNthru

    542thruNthru Well-Known Member

    This has actually been talked about. Don't take this the wrong way but you're mistaken my friend. The language right now only protects you against discharge also.


    What was happening was (and this is different all over the country) people were being disciplined solely on technology on the first offense. Also in some areas discharged for dishonesty. The language in my opinion has gotten a little better (of course this is debatable) here is the new language to compare.
  3. 542thruNthru

    542thruNthru Well-Known Member

    Sorry I also should say I agree the language should be better. We shouldn't be disciplined solely on technology!
  4. zubenelgenubi

    zubenelgenubi Well-Known Member

    Burden of proof should always be on the accuser. Prove the technology didn't glitch, or there wasn't a mechanical failure, or some sort of electrical interference. Oh, you can't? Stop wasting my time.

    There are a couple of places I deliver to where something interferes with the fob starter. I have to pull the spare key out and start it with that, like it's the stone age or something. Once I get away from the location, fob starts working again. It happens every time. If that can fail, so can telematics. Even having the clock get out of synch by a few seconds can cause a bulk head door or record while travel incident.
  5. eats packages

    eats packages I have depth perception issues

    The section was never good to begin with and it really has not improved now.
    There are so many random changes to this section it makes my head spin... and it shows how much our negotiating team has been playing a game of chicken.
    Look at how they added telematics to the list, but then immediately got cornered into cutting all employees except drivers from this article's protections.
    If they kept it at employees, I would claim this section would be a net positive, since it could then protect part timers from telematics like "scanner exceptions" which is just a BS meter that ticks up every time you scan a package that is not yours or get the misload beep.
  6. Thegameisrigged

    Thegameisrigged Active Member

    I swear that key fob glitch happens to me quite often. It’s weird. I also was written up for a stop complete while traveling and I know good and well that I didn’t do so.
  7. opie

    opie Active Member

    They changed it to driver from employee. The fear is that they will exploit this, and discipline inside workers. Terminate an employee for misloads, a car washer for parking a package car in the wrong bay, etc...
  8. wornoutupser

    wornoutupser Well-Known Member

    I have to weigh in on this one.

    Telematics is a computer program and all programs can be altered. Period.

    I was taken into the office a while back to have a discussion about backing. Huh?

    I was accused of doing over 100 mph in REVERSE on a major highway and the idiots actually wanted to discipline me!

    Any maroon knows that no UPS vehicle will go that speed.

    Faulty equipment and altered data/ programming is NOT my problem.
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • List