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 Vote No explained Youtube video Part 2: More Clarification
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="BrownRecycler" data-source="post: 3680852" data-attributes="member: 73454"><p>People can get on the 9.5 list with the contract. </p><p></p><p><em>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:</em></p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BrownRecycler, post: 3680852, member: 73454"] People can get on the 9.5 list with the contract. [I]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:[/I] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
The Vote No explained Youtube video Part 2: More Clarification
Top