Youtuber Tyler just posted this updated video this morning Aug 15th, 2018 after first video gets a lot of attention and questions. He clarifies the contract language that should get a No vote.
Have at it.
People can get on the 9.5 list with the contract.
The Union shall circulate and collect the names of package drivers who wish to be covered by the provisions of this Section twice each year. These lists shall be provided to the Company by January 5th and June 5th of each year. The Employer shall make a reasonable effort to reduce package car drivers’ workdays below nine and one half (9.5) hours per day for those on the list where requested. If a review indicates that progress is not being made in the reduction of assigned hours of work, (i.e. the package driver has worked more than 9.5 hours on three (3) days in a workweek), the following language shall apply, except for the period from November 15th through January 15th of the following year:
Looks, Tyler isn't wrong about the "if works available" argument .... except if workers "not" work and get paid based upon availability, shouldn't package handler should to? It seems to me more like a contract language/division class discrimination like to me. Because where am at, if there is no more volume and the guaranteed hours fulfill, provided that if the worker show up on time, they are dismiss or ask for more works. It is clear as he pointed out in the Wisconsin area that his job sites are problematic. He is having problem with his logistic area.
22.4 is obviously an experimental classification and adapting is very difficult which means it makes saying no easier. Adapting is hard. Period. It is tempting to say No.
There may be a lot of RPCD's only working 4 days a week due to "if work is available". How much will UPS try to deliver on the weekend? I think it is a bad idea.He didn't clarify anything. 22.4 drivers will get paid more than casual package guys that almost every Local has now with full time benefits and pension so I don't mind that as much. I only have a problem with them not being 9.5 eligible. The package drivers work before them so no issue there. That "if work is available" has always been around. Which Local is not having routes cut and then a long line forming to go home? The math is whacked too. The p/t timers getting the $13 is a huge amount for anyone. I heard that about 40% of p/t are under $1100 an hour so a large jump for most. The problem I have is the Art 6 stuff and the 70 hour rule. I understand the thinking with getting double time but my supplement already addressed it so I didn't have to worry before the National put it in. I'm sure the art 6 stuff will be used by managers that are trying to push for production. I understand that there was another problem that they tried to fix but it opened a wide door with the fix.
There is no interpreting that 9.5 and 8-hour request language does not apply to 22.4. It's written plain as day.