UPS Targeting Teamsters' Rights on Social Media

Bagels

Family Leave Fridays!!!
Per TDU -- would also apply to BrownCafe:

http://hosted.verticalresponse.com/1198165/311d26d632/546138171/214574ca0e/

<snip>
UPS is claiming the right to discipline Teamsters based on company “Social Media Guidelines” that govern everything from online chat rooms and forums to blogs, and Facebook.

UPS says “Activities that violate the standards outlined in these guidelines can lead to disciplinary action, including job termination.” But will management’s attempts to control what you post on Facebook lead to a face-plant for Big Brown?
</snip>
 

UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)

Well-Known Member
There is a difference between posting on Brown Café and going on to facebook to disparage the company either by word or by showing pictures of the inside of one of our facilities.
 
If they talk to you or discipline you for something you said on a Facebook file a grievance for harassment. Keep filing and after it plays out file a lawsuit against them. As long as you exhaust the collective bargaining agreement this is open game.
 

UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)

Well-Known Member
If they talk to you or discipline you for something you said on a Facebook file a grievance for harassment. Keep filing and after it plays out file a lawsuit against them. As long as you exhaust the collective bargaining agreement this is open game.

....even if what you say is disparaging or otherwise paints the company in a less than positive manner?
 

Bubblehead

My Senior Picture
....even if what you say is disparaging or otherwise paints the company in a less than positive manner?

Yes Dave, without try to put words in his mouth, that's what he's saying.
What are the boundaries of this corporate mindset?
What's next, text messages and break room gossip?
Who can I share my thoughts and opinions with regarding the company without fear of reprisal?
With Facebook, I pick and chose who's posts I subscribe to and who reads mine to a certain degree.
That to me, makes it far more innocuous than even this site.
The difference is that it's far easier to put a face with a name on Facebook.

Could all this be a classic UPS knee jerk reaction to the negative publicity of this years Peak Season?
In light of the fact that we are still in the throughs of ratifying a new collective bargaining agreement, why wasn't this addressed in it?
 

oldngray

nowhere special
UPS has a history of waiting until after a contract is settled before pulling something like this and then claim it isn't a bargaining issue. Remember when they raised the weight limit to 150 pounds?
 

Catatonic

Nine Lives
If they talk to you or discipline you for something you said on a Facebook file a grievance for harassment. Keep filing and after it plays out file a lawsuit against them. As long as you exhaust the collective bargaining agreement this is open game.
Better hope the Union protects you because a lawsuit will get you nowhere.
It is a well-established legal precedent that a company can fire an employee for saying damaging statements against the company even of the whistle-blowing similar-type.

Notice: One's posts on Social Media sites are not protected under the 1st Amendment.
Do not do something stupid and post disparaging statements about UPS on Facebook or Twitter or other social media sites thinking you are protected by the 1st Amendment.
You are protected by provisions of the NLRB regulations and laws and whistle-blower laws but your statements must be carefully worded and with the intention as outlined under those laws.
 

BigUnionGuy

Got the T-Shirt
Better hope the Union protects you because a lawsuit will get you nowhere.
It is a well-established legal precedent that a company can fire an employee for saying damaging statements against the company even of the whistle-blowing type.


xbwosy.jpg
 
Better hope the Union protects you because a lawsuit will get you nowhere.
It is a well-established legal precedent that a company can fire an employee for saying damaging statements against the company even of the whistle-blowing type.

With the whistle-blowing type you have the protection of article 11c DOL act.
 

Catatonic

Nine Lives
With the whistle-blowing type you have the protection of article 11c DOL act.
That is why I said "type".
Whistle-blowers are protected when official or representatives of the company are breaking the law.
You have all kind of people on here blasting the company because they don't like what the company is doing although it is in no way illegal. Maybe I needed to come up with a better name.
 

oldngray

nowhere special
That is why I said "type".
Whistle-blowers are protected when official or representatives of the company are breaking the law.
You have all kind of people on here blasting the company because they don't like what the company is doing although it is in no way illegal. Maybe I needed to come up with a better name.

management types being critical of UPS with their posts on BC might watch over their shoulder.
 
That is why I said "type".
Whistle-blowers are protected when official or representatives of the company are breaking the law.
You have all kind of people on here blasting the company because they don't like what the company is doing although it is in no way illegal. Maybe I needed to come up with a better name.

There doesn't have to be a law broken first. Unsafe acts, allowed or directed, can be reported following the proper channels and if the company were to do anything to the person calling light to the problems then that falls under 11c.

Naturally the company wants you to keep it "in house" first. Hopefully to allow them to fix the situation without the involvement of outside ($$$) agencies. Or to sweep it under the rug. I've seen both. But it works in your favor to actually follow the progressive chain because if they do take action the DOL will see that you made good faith attempts to resolve the problem and the company retaliated.
 

Catatonic

Nine Lives
Yes Dave, without try to put words in his mouth, that's what he's saying.
What are the boundaries of this corporate mindset?
What's next, text messages and break room gossip?
Who can I share my thoughts and opinions with regarding the company without fear of reprisal?
With Facebook, I pick and chose who's posts I subscribe to and who reads mine to a certain degree.
That to me, makes it far more innocuous than even this site.
The difference is that it's far easier to put a face with a name on Facebook.

Could all this be a classic UPS knee jerk reaction to the negative publicity of this years Peak Season?
In light of the fact that we are still in the throughs of ratifying a new collective bargaining agreement, why wasn't this addressed in it?
Unless Corporate UPS has changed it's position, Brown Cafe is not considered a social media site.
Corporate UPS perceives Brown Cafe as a site that the public and it's customers do not come to.
Facebook and Twitter are the 2 major social media sites with which UPS concerns itself.

As for management individuals monitoring Brown Cafe, that is a different.
As STUG and even myself can testify, over-zealous paranoid types get all worked up on what is posted on Brown Cafe.
Corporate UPS actually discourages this type of monitoring and even more discourages taking any action based on what is posted on Brown Cafe.

Of course, UPS can change directions at will.
The key is keeping your personal identity from being known on a social media site if you are going to post disparaging or damaging claims.
 

Catatonic

Nine Lives
management types being critical of UPS with their posts on BC might watch over their shoulder.
Absolutely!!!
When I was still an employee of UPS, I was talked to by several Level 20's and a Level 22 (District Manager) about my postings on Brown Cafe.

Other than one post, in hindsight, which was a bit too much, my postings were harmless barbs or stirring the pot type posts.

Corporate UPS social media people told me what I was posting was funny and OK but individual managers thought otherwise.
 

Catatonic

Nine Lives
There doesn't have to be a law broken first. Unsafe acts, allowed or directed, can be reported following the proper channels and if the company were to do anything to the person calling light to the problems then that falls under 11c.

Naturally the company wants you to keep it "in house" first. Hopefully to allow them to fix the situation without the involvement of outside ($$$) agencies. Or to sweep it under the rug. I've seen both. But it works in your favor to actually follow the progressive chain because if they do take action the DOL will see that you made good faith attempts to resolve the problem and the company retaliated.
I can't disagree with this because in my mind, regulations have the effect of law.
OSHA regulations being disregarded or abused is in effect breaking the law.
Safety issues fall into that area.
 
Top