Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
The Semantics and Deception of Contract Language vs. IBT Highlights..
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="twoweeled" data-source="post: 1135249" data-attributes="member: 27108"><p>Deception? I have been harping on this for the longest time. How about this one:</p><p>Company must confirm by direct observation or other corroborating evidence any other violations warranting discharge. The degree of discipline dealing with off-area offenses shall not be changed because of the use of GPS.</p><p></p><p>Where is the KING SIZE LOOP HOLE here? "Company must confirm by direct observation or other corroborating evidence". what do we consider valid "corroborating evidence"?? I have been saying for the longest time. UPS needs to be able to discipline off the electronics. they cannot cut down on management with it! They will have a sup just staring at a screen all day long, doing the job of 5, ONLY IF THEY CAN DISCIPLINE OFF THAT SCREEN. If they have to send out sups to observe you, then that defeats the purpose!!! The "corroborating evidence" can be anything. They might just stick a camera in your package car. Who knows the capabilities of the IVIS? (and for you smart guys. They will make a point of disciplining for covering cameras). I brought this up in the lunch room, and the response was "well our business agent told us we're safe from that". I just shook my head, "we're done"!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="twoweeled, post: 1135249, member: 27108"] Deception? I have been harping on this for the longest time. How about this one: Company must confirm by direct observation or other corroborating evidence any other violations warranting discharge. The degree of discipline dealing with off-area offenses shall not be changed because of the use of GPS. Where is the KING SIZE LOOP HOLE here? "Company must confirm by direct observation or other corroborating evidence". what do we consider valid "corroborating evidence"?? I have been saying for the longest time. UPS needs to be able to discipline off the electronics. they cannot cut down on management with it! They will have a sup just staring at a screen all day long, doing the job of 5, ONLY IF THEY CAN DISCIPLINE OFF THAT SCREEN. If they have to send out sups to observe you, then that defeats the purpose!!! The "corroborating evidence" can be anything. They might just stick a camera in your package car. Who knows the capabilities of the IVIS? (and for you smart guys. They will make a point of disciplining for covering cameras). I brought this up in the lunch room, and the response was "well our business agent told us we're safe from that". I just shook my head, "we're done"! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
The Semantics and Deception of Contract Language vs. IBT Highlights..
Top