Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="IzzyTheNose" data-source="post: 3576864" data-attributes="member: 15470">We&#039;ve heard all this nonsense about additional full-time jobs opening up. I like the idea of hybrid drivers, because it gives part-timers another possible avenue to go full-time (not every combo is going to want to drive, even if it&#039;s to &#039;finish&#039; a route), but I don&#039;t like that they would be getting paid less.On the other hand, if they&#039;re merely covering the back-end of a full-time driver&#039;s route once he&#039;s reached his 9.5, the cleanup finishing a route, would be far easier than starting one. So maybe&nbsp; there&#039;s some give and take? A lot of the complaining I&#039;m hearing about hybrid drivers, is coming from current drivers who don&#039;t want to lose all that OT. But these are the same drivers that moan about how long they&#039;re on the road, and how they&#039;re treated as &#039;slaves&#039;, but when you ask why they don&#039;t file for 9.5 violations, they backpedal. So...?If the additional feeder positions that open mean more current drivers moving into those spots, and the need for new drivers to replace those lost to feeder, in addition to the hybrid drivers openings, can&#039;t say I&#039;m too salty on this one. That&#039;s obviously only the case if we don&#039;t lose anything. Better start pay for new hires, no changes to healthcare, pension increase, more full-time positions (possibly) opening across the board. $0.83 a year for the length of the contract (no split raises). Back to a 3 year progression for top pay for full-time positions. I mean, unless I&#039;ve missed something, this isn&#039;t terrible. I wasn&#039;t expecting perfect, but this was a lot better than I thought we might get.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="IzzyTheNose, post: 3576864, member: 15470"] We've heard all this nonsense about additional full-time jobs opening up. I like the idea of hybrid drivers, because it gives part-timers another possible avenue to go full-time (not every combo is going to want to drive, even if it's to 'finish' a route), but I don't like that they would be getting paid less. On the other hand, if they're merely covering the back-end of a full-time driver's route once he's reached his 9.5, the cleanup finishing a route, would be far easier than starting one. So maybe there's some give and take? A lot of the complaining I'm hearing about hybrid drivers, is coming from current drivers who don't want to lose all that OT. But these are the same drivers that moan about how long they're on the road, and how they're treated as 'slaves', but when you ask why they don't file for 9.5 violations, they backpedal. So...? If the additional feeder positions that open mean more current drivers moving into those spots, and the need for new drivers to replace those lost to feeder, in addition to the hybrid drivers openings, can't say I'm too salty on this one. That's obviously only the case if we don't lose anything. Better start pay for new hires, no changes to healthcare, pension increase, more full-time positions (possibly) opening across the board. $0.83 a year for the length of the contract (no split raises). Back to a 3 year progression for top pay for full-time positions. I mean, unless I've missed something, this isn't terrible. I wasn't expecting perfect, but this was a lot better than I thought we might get. [/QUOTE]

Verification