Vote NO Explained

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

First off we already have that language so it already exists! Pension contributions at $129,000 for the life contract is the highest it has ever been for a full timer. How is that bad

And Article 22.4 drivers will probably list that much in wages compared to a RPCD...

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

ARticle 37 NMA

Employees within the full-time driver classification shall be eligible for the protection of this Section provided: (1) the employee covers a route for a full week; (2) the employee bids or is assigned to cover a route for a full week but is prevented from completing that bid or assignment due to reassignment by the Employer; or (3) an employee with four (4) years of seniority as a full-time package driver.

Read number one and two dip .

 

[LagunaBrown]

ARticle 37 NMA

Employees within the full-time driver classification shall be eligible for the protection of this Section provided: (1) the employee covers a route for a full week; (2) the employee bids or is assigned to cover a route for a full week but is prevented from completing that bid or assignment due to reassignment by the Employer; or (3) an employee with four (4) years of seniority as a full-time package driver.

here it is

 

[panther]

First off we already have that language so it already exists! Pension contributions at $129,000 for the life contract is the highest it has ever been for a full timer. How is that bad

I didnt say it was bad. Do you think a seperate class of full time drivers will cause conflict within?

 

[LagunaBrown]

And Article 22.4 drivers will probably list that much in wages compared to a RPCD...

Right now they would go full time in our Local before they topped out progression in the 22.4 class.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

here it is

Yes, that is the language that proves you are wrong.
Drivers with a bid route or covering a route for a week have 9.5 protection regardless of seniority.

Thank you for admitting you are wrong.

 

[LagunaBrown]

I didnt say it was bad. Do you think a seperate class of full time drivers will cause conflict within?

Good point! I do know some areas do not have daily guarantee so yes. We have a 8 hour 5 day guaranteed workweek so our work is safe. Even the extra work. I think it depends on your supplements and riders for that

 

[LagunaBrown]

Yes, that is the language that proves you are wrong.
Drivers with a bid route or covering a route for a week have 9.5 protection regardless of seniority.

Thank you for admitting you are wrong.

I didn’t delete any sections you did.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

I didn’t delete any sections you did.

No, you just ignored the word "or" that shows drivers with less than 4 years seniority do in fact have 9.5 protections.

Thank you for admitting you are wrong.

 

[panther]

Good point! I do know some areas do not have daily guarantee so yes. We have a 8 hour 5 day guaranteed workweek so our work is safe. Even the extra work. I think it depends on your supplements and riders for that

I personally see a storm brewing in about year 3 of this contract. Too much unknown and too much seeing language manipulated.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

ARticle 37 NMA

Employees within the full-time driver classification shall be eligible for the protection of this Section provided: (1) the employee covers a route for a full week; (2) the employee bids or is assigned to cover a route for a full week but is prevented from completing that bid or assignment due to reassignment by the Employer; or (3) an employee with four (4) years of seniority as a full-time package driver.

Would 22.4 be considered full-time package drivers, though? That's part of the poor language issue. Yes they would be full-time, yes the would drive packages, but they would not necessarily drive packages full-time.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Would 22.4 be considered full-time package drivers, though? That's part of the poor language issue. Yes they would be full-time, yes the would drive packages, but they would not necessarily drive packages full-time.

No they won't have 9.5 protection if this passes. They will be the new whipping boy.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

No they won't have 9.5 protection if this passes. They will be the new whipping boy.

I agree, @LagunaBrown seems to think they will based on the article 37 language. Full-time package driver seems like it refers to what article 22.4 refers to as RPCD, so I don't think article 37 would apply to combo drivers. But we don't have the same kind of combo drivers (22.3) some areas do. The only 22.3 positions we have are full time air drivers. Do the Combo drivers in areas where they work basically like the 22.4 language have protection under article 37? If not, then it seems pretty clear 22.4 would not as well.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

I agree, @LagunaBrown seems to think they will based on the article 37 language. Full-time package driver seems like it refers to what article 22.4 refers to as RPCD, so I don't think article 37 would apply to combo drivers. But we don't have the same kind of combo drivers (22.3) some areas do. The only 22.3 positions we have are full time air drivers. Do the Combo drivers in areas where they work basically like the 22.4 language have protection under article 37? If not, then it seems pretty clear 22.4 would not as well.

Our air/inside combos don't.
22.4 won't have 9.5 that's been confirmed.

TonyLaguna is trying to say new drivers already don't have 9.5 protection. Which is a lie and he knows it.

 

[Grey]

No they won't have 9.5 protection if this passes. They will be the new whipping boy.

So basically the new contract is amazing for current FT Drivers and terrible for 22.4’s?

Current full timers get a lighter load due to 22.4’s taking some of the work and make up to 60/hr of OT. But 22.4’s will get boned and probably flame out due to overwork.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

So basically the new contract is amazing for current FT Drivers and terrible for 22.4’s?

Current full timers get a lighter load due to 22.4’s taking some of the work and make up to 60/hr of OT. But 22.4’s will get boned and probably flame out due to overwork.

If your supplement guarantees 5 days and 8 hours of work for full time drivers, then you could look at it that way. You might want to check on that.

There are many other problems with this contract though.

 

[LagunaBrown]

If your supplement guarantees 5 days and 8 hours of work for full time drivers, then you could look at it that way. You might want to check on that.

There are many other problems with this contract though.

No the 22.4 will not be covered under 9.5 and I am saying we already have driver language like this since 1997 and people still apply for the job. I am saying the ALL RPCD will be covered and that is better than last contract.

 

[LagunaBrown]

If your supplement guarantees 5 days and 8 hours of work for full time drivers, then you could look at it that way. You might want to check on that.

There are many other problems with this contract though.

Ok. That is what I’m saying. It’s really up to the supplements and riders. It may be a yes here and a no there if you don’t have a guarantee.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

No the 22.4 will not be covered under 9.5 and I am saying we already have driver language like this since 1997 and people still apply for the job. I am saying the ALL RPCD will be covered and that is better than last contract.

You are saying we should double up on bad language, and implement a lower paid second class driver.

It's complete stupidity. You're just playing Union politics here because you hate TDU.

 

[LagunaBrown]

Our air/inside combos don't.
22.4 won't have 9.5 that's been confirmed.

TonyLaguna is trying to say new drivers already don't have 9.5 protection. Which is a lie and he knows it.

Have air guys ever had 9.5 rights?