UPS Freight National Grievance Results

Submitted by admin on Thu, 06/14/2012 - 21:16

The minutes of the national grievance panel for UPS Freight held last week reveal that of 69 cases docketed, just one was won. A majority of cases, 37 in all, were referred back to the parties to encourage a settlement.

 
Other cases were withdrawn (11) or postponed (11), and six were heard and deadlocked. Most of the deadlocked cases originated from Chicago Local 710, including two over subcontracting out road work. The award in the winning case was for two hours pay.
 
Many grievances are settled at the local and regional levels of the grievance system, and these results only reflect the national panel. But the consistently poor performance here indicates the need for change, so that the grievance procedure works effectively to enforce the contract and protect Teamster jobs.
 
Click here to see the minutes, and be sure to have your say and leave a comment.

Comments

Submitted by terry28043 on Thu, 06/14/2012 - 22:59.

Well this is nothing new this is why in the right to work state the membership is down and the people what join us in the union .....everyone thats not in now want join because qe havent showed that it works.

Submitted by thesnapper on Fri, 06/15/2012 - 00:01.

The way things are going UPS Freight will be all O/O and subcontractors in about 5 years or less. The contract we have is a joke and Im sure the next one will be to, where are my dues going?

Submitted by keymaster on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 08:57.

But if we let it happen again it'll b our fault, we can't think negative

Submitted by wt509 on Sun, 06/17/2012 - 13:07.

I have learned a litlle over the past 4 years and one thing is that it looks worse on the Union to file stupid grievances and docket them so your members wont think your weak. How dumb is that. All I can say is keep on loosing ang wasting money. Learn how to investigate a grievance before you file it looks like your learning like me the hard way. And its taking you a lot longer...Truth hurts

Submitted by bigtutter47 on Tue, 06/19/2012 - 12:35.

You are right, the first "contract" was not very good.One area that was very good was the article on drugs and alcohol.This article affects a very small sector of the membership yet it was the wordiest,most specific article in the contract???The question is how did we get such a weak agreement from two organizations that have been negotiating contracts between themselves for just guessing 80 yrs.It almost seems that the contract language was intentionally designed to give those two organizations "wiggle room" for their benefit when they needed to fulfill their agendas and at our expense.We need to put individual attitudes,opinions and desires aside to make sure the next contract has corrections that include reasonable,thoughtful, solutions to current contract weaknesses.Those facts need to be discussed here one at a time so corrections can be made.If suggestions are made, what are the positive and negative results of that change.What do you see in the current contract language that has caused a specific problem?What language negatively affected the membership?Clear language is key to success! Attitudes of defeat won't cut it.Standing firm together is our only chance for a better contract. We need to question both sides and not assume that one party has our back.

Submitted by keymaster on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 08:59.

What ideas or solutions do u have?