TEAMSTERS NATIONAL UPS FREIGHT GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE

Transcription

1 06/9/15 TEAMSTERS NATIONAL UPS FREIGHT GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE MINUTE June 2 4, :00 P.M. HILTON MINNEAPOLIS 1001 S. MARQUETTE AVENUE MINNEAPOLIS, MN The meeting was called to order by Chair Schmidbauer The following cases were SETTLED AND/OR WITHDRAWN: NUPSF-11-13: Local 728 v. UPSF, Atlanta, GA NUPSF-11-34: Local 104 v. UPSF, Phoenix, AZ NUPSF-11-38: Local 104 v. UPSF, Phoenix, AZ NUPSF-14-36: Local 104 v. UPSF, Phoenix, AZ NUPSF-15-15: Local 431 v. UPSF, Fresno, CA NUPSF-15-19: Local 600 v. UPSF, St. Louis, MO The following cases were WITHDRAWN WITH RIGHTS: NUPSF : Local 519 v. UPSF, Knoxville, TN NUPSF-14-38: Local 600 v. UPSF, St. Louis, MO The following cases were POSTPONED: NUPSF : Local 104 v. UPSF, Phoenix, AZ NUPSF-13-12: Local 104 v. UPSF, Phoenix, AZ NUPSF-14-37: Local 710 v. UPSF, Bedford Park, IL NUPSF-14-60: Local 988 v. UPSF, Houston, TX

2 NUPSF-15-21: NUPSF-15-22: Local 745 v. UPSF, Irving, TX Local 745 v. UPSF, El Paso, TX The following cases were put on COMMITTEE HOLD: NUPSF : NUPSF : NUPSF-11-49: NUPSF-11-54: NUPSF-11-63: Local 512 v. UPSF, Jacksonville, FL Local 200 v. UPSF, Milwaukee, WI Local 200 v. UPSF, Milwaukee, WI Local 707 v. UPSF, Bayshore, NY Local 745 v. UPSF, Irving, TX Case NUPSF Local 533 v. UPSF, Reno, NV On behalf of Steve Hurley, the Union alleges a violation of Article 44, claiming that the Susanville work loaded by UPSF drivers and delivered by UPSF. The Union requests the Company quit asking the Local Cartage driver to take the day off and having Bowen load and deliver the Susanville work. DECISION: Based on the facts presented, the claim of the Union is denied. The parties are instructed to meet and discuss the possibility of the bargaining unit loading the freight. Case NUPSF Local 533 v. UPSF, Reno, NV On behalf of Don Anhold, et al., the Union alleges a violation of Article 5, Article 18, Section 2 and Article 20, Section 2. The company brought in junior driver Justin Larson at 5:00 a.m., he was on an 8:00 a.m. vacation hold down from Larry Bradfield; ahead of senior driver Alegria 5:30 a.m., Thompson 6:30 a.m., Gifford 7:00 a.m., and Martinez 8:00 a.m. The Union requests the grievants be made whole. DECISION: Case was settled in Executive Session

3 Case NUPSF Local 407 v. UPSF, Cleveland, OH On behalf of Local Union 407, Union Article 18, Section 2. The UPS Freight Cleveland Center is not compliant with Article 18, Section 2 of the NMA specifically 90% full-time drivers and 10% drivers. Further facts to follow, the Union would like UPS Freight to comply with the contract by having 90% of the seniority list have bid jobs with a 40- hour guarantee. DECISION: Based on the facts presented, the parties are instructed to abide by Article 18, Section 2. Case NUPSF Local 413 v. UPSF, Columbus, OH On behalf of Local Union 413, Union Article 5, Section 1A, claiming on September 17, 2014, the grievant was informed by Justin at UPS Freight city supervisor that the grievant was bumped off his downtown route and he needed the grievant to choose another city route. The grievant asked about the Dock-CDL spots and he said they were not available to the grievant per Chuck Greco. The grievant believed that he should be able to bid that spot if he choose and be able to bid the whole cartage board per his seniority. DECISION: Based on the facts presented in this instant case, the claim of the Union is allowed. No precedent set. This Committee reaffirms the decision in NUPSF Case NUPSF Local 90 v. UPSF, Des Moines, IA On behalf of Mike Beckett, Union Article 5, claiming on October 24,

4 at 8:35 pm grievant Mike Beckett, road driver with seniority was informed by the Company that his bid run DES004 was cut. Beckett chose to dovetail into extra board as stated in Article 5, Section 3 (c) and bump junior driver Robert (Andy) Miller seniority date The Company denied the grievant the right to bump junior driver Miller stating Miller is a fill-in driver that cannot by bumped by a senior road drivers. The Union requests to be paid $ DECISION: Based on the facts presented in this instant case, the claim for pay is allowed. This decision sets no precedent. Case NUPSF Local 17 v. UPSF, Denver, CO On behalf of James Montoya and Lorne Sansburn, Union alleges that the Company violated Articles 44 and 5, section 1. The Company use subcontractors on May 27, 28, 29, 30 and June 2, 3, 4, The grievant was not offered any driving work on those days. DECISION: Based on the facts presented in this instant case, the claim of the Union is denied. Case NUPSF Local 512 v. UPSF, Jacksonville, FL On behalf of Mike Williams, Union Article 44, claiming that the Company violated the CBA when they used subcontractors on a day in which road drivers were laid off. Heard with Case NUPSF Local 512 v. UPSF, Jacksonville, FL On behalf of Derrick Bing, Union Article 44, claiming that the Company - 4 -

5 violated the CBA when they used subcontractors on a day in which road drivers were laid off. DECISION: Based on the facts presented in this instant case, the grievants will be paid eight (8) hours. Non Precedent and Non Referenceable. Case NUPSF Local 512 v. UPSF, Jacksonville, FL On behalf of David Bernhardt, Union Article 44, claiming that the Company violated the CBA when they used subcontractors on a day in which road drivers were laid off. DECISION: Based on the facts presented, the grievance is denied. Case NUPSF Local 79 v. UPSF, Tampa, FL On behalf of Teamsters Local Union 79, Union alleges that the Company violated Article 18, Section 2, claiming there has never been Sunday bids in Tampa or Fort Myers. There is no side agreement to do so. The Memo of Understanding (pg. 104) is what the Local is basing its grievance on. If Company didn t have Sunday bids prior to Collective Bargaining Agreement in 2008 (they didn t), they can t have offered it. DECISION: Based on the facts presented, the grievance is denied. Case NUPSF Local 79 v. UPSF, Tampa, FL On behalf of Teamsters Local Union 79, Union alleges that the Company violated Articles 5 and 29, claiming that the Company is sending out overweight trailers daily and is not properly weighing trailers prior to letting the road drivers take them. The Union requests a - 5 -

6 yard scale, this has been an issue for about three (3) years. DECISION: Based on the facts presented in this instant case, the Company and the Union are instructed to form a subcommittee to address the issue regarding overweight citations. This Panel holds jurisdiction. Case NUPSF Local 79 v. UPSF, Tampa, FL On behalf of Corey L. Wysong, Union Article 44, Section A, claiming that the Company had outbound freight available for road driver to take, instead they used contractors and then cancelled the grievant s road bid. They then worked the grievant in the city. The Union requests for what the grievant run would have paid in total. DECISION: Based on the facts presented, the grievance is denied