This thought pattern, is even worse than your "theories" of failure of DFR.
Software upgrades to the DIAD, constitute a "change in working conditions" ?
Let alone.... you think it violates the Master language on Technological Change ?
Wow.
-Bug-
The DFR claim is solid.
Hoffa/Taylor/Hall did not fulfill their DFR. Local 243's ULP case against UPS bolsters that case. Local 243's ULP against UPS will not shield 243 from failure to fulfill their own DFR.
Unlike all the garbage UPS/Teamster Panel decisions (that only help 1 member); NLRB action will set precedent. It will be on the record. And It will not be a case like the vast majority of UPS/Teamster Panel decisions BS "in this instant case".
If Hoffa/Taylor/Hall and their cronies would have performed their duties and followed the Teamster Constitution; they would have been much better off.
( As an officer of this great Union, I will, at all times, act solely in the interests of our members, devote the resources of our Union to furthering their needs and goals, work to maintain a Union that is free of corruption, to preserve and strengthen democratic principles in our Union, and to protect the members’ interests in all dealings with employers. I will never forget that it is the members who put me here, and it is the members whom I will serve. I further promise that I will faithfully comply with and enforce the Constitution and laws of the International Union...)
Some Local "leaders" are learning; UPS Teamsters will continue to teach the Local leaders who wish to improve their behavior; and hope these "leaders" will correct their behavior. We will expel the Teamster "leaders" who continue to refuse to correct their behavior and do not learn from their mistakes.
BUG; Dust off your red vest; and come back to "work".
If the software and/or hardware upgrades can result in discipline; it most definitely was required to be discussed with not only the National Teamster/UPS CTC but also the Locals.
3. The Employer will advise the affected Local Unions and the National Teamster/UPS Committee for Technological Change of any proposed technological changes at least six (6) months prior to the implementation of such change except where the change was later determined in which case the Employer shall provide as much notice as possible
4. The Employer shall be required to provide the National Teamster/UPS Committee for Technological Change, any relevant information to the extent available regarding the technological changes.
5. The Employer will meet with the Local Union, or, if requested, the National Teamster/UPS Committee for Technological Change, promptly after notification to negotiate regarding the effects of the proposed technological changes.
UPS has obviously had a major change in technology regarding the DIAD in the works for some time. Reminiscent of the Over 70lb. change that was implemented in the 1994. UPS knew the "change" was coming but this information was not disclosed to the employees until well after the 1993 contract was ratified. The over 70lb may have been discussed with the locals and the national before the contract vote; if so; why wasn't this major change in working conditions disclosed to the members?
Hopefully Hoffa/Taylor/Hall and the individual Locals will file NLRB charges against UPS if the Teamsters CTC or Locals were not notified of this major change in working conditions.
Package Car Drivers deserve to know what UPS means by
will integrate artificial intelligence and other technology enhancements to enable drivers to make better decisions
This DIAD issue has absolutely nothing to do with the DFR currently filed with the NLRB.
It was in the UPS business plan before negotiations and the Teamster Leaders (if they knew of this imminent technological change) should have disclosed it to the members before the vote on the Master.
The DFR is unrelated to this DIAD issue. It is not going away. It will be addressed.
