The Vote No explained Youtube video Part 2: More Clarification

Discussion in 'UPS Union Issues' started by Moneythehardway, Aug 15, 2018.

  1. Moneythehardway

    Moneythehardway Active Member



    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.
     
    • Winner Winner x 7
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  2. BrownMonk

    BrownMonk Old fart Package Car Driver

    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.
     
  3. BrownMonk

    BrownMonk Old fart Package Car Driver

    Here's the real deal assessment. If you are a p/t time employee(newer), you got a win with benefits/rate/new jobs so it is probably yes. If an older p/t, you didn't get anything to vote no because it is the same since you are staying p/t for whatever your reason is(other job/just need benefits, etc). If you are a feeder driver, there is nothing real bad in it for you. If you are package driver, there are some issues and you need to decide if they are bad enough to vote no.
     
  4. 542thruNthru

    542thruNthru Well-Known Member

    The guys sure does make some good points.
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • List
  5. BrownRecycler

    BrownRecycler Member

    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.
     
    • Creative Creative x 3
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
    • List
  6. Who talks like this lol.
    Certainly not hourly employees.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  7. BrownRecycler

    BrownRecycler Member

    Yeah, he is an hourly employee.
     
  8. You're not.
    Good day sir.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  9. Old Man Jingles

    Old Man Jingles Rat out of a cage

    Just because he sounds intelligent doesn't mean he's not a driver.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
    • List
  10. Just A UPS Guy

    Just A UPS Guy Active Member

    We know we can get on the list, we're pissed that 22.4 drivers can't get on the list.
     
  11. BrownRecycler

    BrownRecycler Member

    I am not an employee? Then, what? A driver's boot licker?
     
  12. BrownRecycler

    BrownRecycler Member

    Am getting tired of this 22.4 mental gymnasium. Bullcrap.
     
  13. Just A UPS Guy

    Just A UPS Guy Active Member

    Huh?
     
  14. tenor (10).gif
     
  15. BrownRecycler

    BrownRecycler Member

    22.4 interpretation and discussing are tiring. And, this is a big red flag for my decision.
     
  16. BrownRecycler

    BrownRecycler Member

    Good day to you.
     
  17. 40 and out

    40 and out Active Member

    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.
     
  18. Just A UPS Guy

    Just A UPS Guy Active Member

    There is no interpreting that 9.5 and 8-hour request language does not apply to 22.4. It's written plain as day.
     
  19. BrownRecycler

    BrownRecycler Member

    I am talking about in general. It seems like if Teamster contract was an Olympic and new sport have been added in the game that everybody trying to figure out except this sport is complicated.
     
  20. Just A UPS Guy

    Just A UPS Guy Active Member

    tumblr_o72lclwcTc1s5jfo4o1_500.gif