By George Kieffer, adapted from the www.denverbrown.com website.

October 18, 2006. UPS continues to get good press concerning its PAS system.

Everyone from technology journals to the main stream press have sung the praises of Package Flow Technology and the Preload Assist System.

Let’s look at a few of the stories about PAS to see how they compare to reality.

Optimize Magazine: “It helps managers ensure that drivers are not overdispatched and that last-minute load changes to a driver’s car are minimized.”

Well...UPS uses PAS to justify putting more work on each car. Drivers are consistently over-dispatched, but now it’s not your supervisor’s fault anymore. It’s “the computer.” Last minute changes are only minimized if your dispatcher keeps his fingers off the buttons. And last minute changes cause havoc to the load.

HighBeam Research: “The automated system...is designed to reduce the number of misloaded packages as well as headaches for drivers.”

Well...I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but misloads and headaches are as abundant with PAS as they were with the old system. Misloads may be worse than ever. And certainly more spectacular.

USA Today: “It lets them do what they do best, and that is to service our customers, build relationships with them.”

Well...One of the goals of PAS is increased productivity. That means more stops per hour. That means less, not more, time to spend with the customer.

Optimize Magazine: “This approach provides the customer with a consistent, reliable service provider.”

Well...With PAS, area boundaries are a thing of the past and routes fluctuate every day. There is no consistency to the stops and many customers see two or three different drivers a week. Of course, what’s a morning stop on one driver’s area may be an afternoon stop in the next route, so customers actually have less consistency with PAS.

Information Week: “This cuts down on the need for loaders to memorize different delivery routes, a skill that normally requires three months of training. With the new labels, training takes just a few hours.”

Well...The company may only be training it’s loaders for a few hours and the loads show it. What’s more surprising is when your loader calls in sick and a supervisor loads your car, the load is almost unrecognizable. I guess the supes must not be trained at all.

USA Today: “The technology also will cut millions of miles in travel for UPS drivers, reducing fuel costs.”

Well...That’s a nice thought, but the system gets bogged down by poor looping and lack of area knowledge. The routes were looped from maps and the wealth of driver knowledge was ignored. Consequently, the shortest and most of efficient way to run each area and save miles is seldom the PAS-looped way.

Material Handling Management: “The end-result of the program has been that it’s taken a lot of stress out of the job for the pre-loader and driver, and put more accuracy into the delivery process.”

Well...My God, are they talking about UPS?

October 18, 2006. This summer in California, UPS tried to enlist Teamsters in their effort to undermine litigation over the company’s practice of forcing employees to work off the clock.

Faced with a major lawsuit involving violations of California wage and hours laws, UPS got the legislature to pass a bill giving unionized transportation companies an exemption from laws requiring lunch breaks during specified times in work shifts. A law designed for UPS!

In an effort to get the governor to sign the bill, management not only asked members to write support letters, they also instructed Teamsters to give them back to supervisors in unsealed envelopes! UPS could use copies of such letters in court to show that some drivers did not support the case, which involves millions of dollars in pay UPS owes for overtime worked through lunch periods.

The bill was opposed by other industry groups, including the California Manufacturers and Technology Association. Other businesses probably would have welcomed the deal, but not a special deal for UPS. Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill in September.

October 18, 2006. UPS learned a major lesson in 1997: that working Teamsters can unify and use their power. Then, like now, UPS did everything possible to divide members and keep our union on the defensive. Despite management’s best efforts, members took a strong and clear stand that got the attention of the entire world.

We have that same potential—and more even—today to take on and win a contract fight at UPS. Here are five reasons why.

1. The legacy of 1997 continues to pay benefits today. The strike is still fresh in the memories of management, the media, shippers and investors. UPS management’s eagerness to bargain early is a sign of how anxious they are to avoid coming close to a strike deadline.

2. The pension cuts are a threat to our members and union, but also an opportunity. Membership anger and expectations are high. That frustration needs to be shaped into a positive force for Teamster unity and power.

3. The 100-year anniversary takes place in 2007. The possibility of actions, leafleting and media outreach during the anniversary period is leverage that can be used.

4. Change at the top. Right now we have the chance to elect new leadership to the top of our union and put aggressive bargainers at the table with UPS.

5. UPS is still at the top of the heap. FedEx and DHL have expanded in recent years, giving UPS some cause for concern. But UPS is still and will continue to be in the lead. Their investments in Overnite and Menlo and their central position in China and other emerging markets put them in a strong position. They will want to capitalize on their position and not jeopardize it with a fight with the Teamsters Union.

We have power—if we are determined and have a leadership that knows how to use it.

Legacy of the “Best Contract Ever”

October 18, 2006. Mention the “best ever” contract of 2002 to UPS Teamsters and you’ll probably get a roll of the eyes. But the issues behind the contract are serious.

With Hoffa agreeing to early negotiations, now is the time to look carefully where our union stands relative to UPS management.

First-Ever Benefits Cuts

The top UPS priority is to turn back the clock on pension benefits. For the first time ever, UPS Teamsters covered by our largest and best pension funds have been hit with cuts. Thirty-and-out and 25-and-out benefits for Central States members have been eliminated (except for years already accrued by 2003). Changes in medical providers in many areas have resulted in health coverage cuts.

Some Teamster funds have so far avoided making cuts. But the overall trend in benefits has shifted from improving pension and health coverage for all UPS Teamsters to a establishing a multi-tier benefit situation, where members doing exactly the same work in one region receive worse pensions than members in other regions.

Part-time workers in the Central Region, Southern Region, North and South Carolina and Colorado are still stuck in the company’s pension plan, with no money going to support our union Central States Pension or Health and Welfare Plan.

UPS funnels the youngest and healthiest participants into their own fund. The Central States Pension and Health funds are robbed of much-needed contributions. As a result the Central States Funds are burdened unnecessarily and member benefits are jeopardized in the long run.

De-Skilling Jobs More than Ever

Meanwhile, UPS has implemented one of the most revolutionary changes in their operations in decades. The new sort and delivery systems (PAS/EDD) are an attempt to shift delivery knowledge and expertise from individual drivers to management. While the start up of the new system has been rocky, UPS has been able to ratchet up production demands for pre-load and package car members. In the process, package and preload jobs are gradually becoming more like assembly line work.

More Work than Ever from Fewer Workers

Package car drivers are all too familiar with the problem of excessive overtime. Despite some improved language on this issue last contract, the problem has become worse. Rather than hire more drivers, management forces some drivers to work days of ten, 11 or more hours. Requests for relief are ignored. Grievance panels, at best, only partially deal with the problem.

The age-old problem of supervisors doing bargaining unit work is another means that UPS uses to reduce the number of good union jobs.

Less Progress than Ever on Full-time Jobs

UPS has tried to make some Article 22.3 combination jobs as undesirable as possible. At the get-go in 1997 they refused to abide by the language. In 2002 the Hoffa administration gave UPS two years during which no jobs were created. Some members and locals doubt that all the jobs won have been retained. Supposedly 15,000 full-time inside jobs have been created to date, by combining some 30,000 part-time jobs.

First-Ever Changes Without Votes

UPS implemented schedule changes on Teamsters in New England and in Jacksonville, Fla. In both cases the International went along with the deal and refused to allow members the right to vote.

First-Ever Nonunion Expansion

Work erosion via subcontracting is not only on the increase but has entered an entirely new dimension, thanks to UPS’s new divisions (Supply Chain Solutions, etc.). For the first time ever UPS has a large and rapidly growing nonunion domestic operation. Overnite is the largest, but not the only nonunion subsidiary. UPS employs tens of thousands of nonunion drivers, warehouse and clerical workers who handle shipping, packaging, assembly and other work for major corporations. This cancer could seriously undermine our bargaining power unless it is dealt with now.

What Will It Take to Win Real Improvements?

The current (2002) contract has been a period of serious threats to UPS Teamsters. We need leadership that can chart a new and bold road forward. We need to mobilize every last bit of our potential power. We need real leverage, and we can’t give away the leverage we have by playing management’s game of settling early and ignoring the growing problems.

Aggressive Contract Proposals Needed for UPS Contract

October 18, 2006. We all have high hopes for improvements in our UPS contract, but an over-arching goal has to be to strengthen our union and secure our future. With that in mind, concerned UPS members and leaders are looking at what it will take in our contract to undo problems in the current contract, and protect our future on the job and in retirement.

Secure our Pension & Health Benefits

• Provide sufficient funding to strengthen our funds and undo the pension cuts of the past two years.

• End the benefit cuts and restore 25- and 30-and-out to Central States Teamsters.

• Bring all Teamsters into the union health and pension funds. (End the practice in the Central States Fund of keeping part-timers, the youngest and healthiest participants, in separate employer funds.)

Health and Welfare

• Maintenance of benefits (as already in place in the West).

• Protect our future with unionization of UPS.

• Provide a fair “card-check” and neutrality agreement for UPS Freight and all nonunion subsidiaries, to bring tens of thousands of UPSers into our union and our pension plans.

Wages and Pay Progression

• Raise part-time starting rates to a minimum of $12.50 per hour.

• Reduce progressions and the number of pay tiers by bringing all employees up to union scale within six months.

End Excessive Overtime

• Double time for all hours worked over ten per day.

• Minimum of five eight-hour days per month, if requested.

• Automatic penalty of double time for all hours worked if eight-hour request denied.

• Eliminate “complete assignment” from overtime relief language.

• Management must provide adequate cover help to accommodate overtime release requests (other drivers will not be forced to pay the price for overtime accommodation).

• Mechanism in place to require hiring more drivers in centers with excessive overtime.

End Subcontracting our Jobs

• Automatic penalties of triple pay for subcontracting.

• Forbid non-bargaining unit employees from delivering packages to UPS facilities within the same shipping zone.

Improve and Increase 22.3 Jobs

• Upgrade pay of combo positions to reach package-car rate during the life of the new agreement.

• Part-timers not forced from their preferred job as a result of full-time job creation.

• Back pay and penalties if full-time jobs are not bid and filled by July 31 of each year.

• Create 3,000 new 22.3 jobs per year, with no years skipped as was done in the current contract.

Protect Against Unfair Production Standards

• Management must not post or publicly distribute production related information about individuals or groups.

Restrictions on Supervisors Working

• Limit supervisors doing bargaining work for training purposes to a maximum of one hour.

• Triple-time penalties paid to grievant or highest seniority employee if no grievant named, minimum of one hour pay for each incident of supervisor working.

Grievance Procedure

• Right to strike over deadlocked grievances. Bring the “hammer” in the freight contract to the UPS contract.

BNA Daily Labor Report
Rick Valliere

October 2, 2006. Drivers for FedEx Home Delivery are statutory employees of the company and not independent contractors, a National Labor Relations Board regional director ruled Sept. 20, ordering a union representation election sought by the Teamsters union at two Massachusetts locations (FedEx Home Delivery & Teamsters Local 24, NLRB Cases 1-RC-22034, 22035, 9/20/06).

The decision is the latest in a string of victories before various tribunals around the country by FedEx Home Delivery drivers contesting what they consider illegal misclassification as independent contractors.

It also is the fourth recent decision by an NLRB regional director concluding that FedEx Home Delivery drivers should be classified as employees.

"The facts adduced in this case are remarkably similar to those in the above cases, and, accordingly, do not warrant a departure from the results in those cases," wrote NLRB Region 1 Director Rosemary Pye.

The board has affirmed the findings by regional directors concerning drivers in New Jersey in 2004 and 2005 and in Northboro, Mass., in 2006.

FedEx Ground, the parent of FedEx Delivery, in a statement, said the decision "is not surprising or inconsistent" with Pye's earlier ruling, which the company is appealing. "Our contractors have shown us repeatedly that they do not want third-party representation as we currently have no unionized facilities," it added.

Galen Munroe, a spokesman for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, said the election ordered in January in Northboro has been postponed indefinitely because of pending unfair labor practice charges. The Teamsters lost one of the New Jersey elections in a unit that included other workers in addition to drivers, while the other election involved an independent union, he said.

In addition to the NLRB rulings, advocates for FedEx drivers are pursuing a nationwide class action lawsuit, currently in the discovery stage, consolidating cases from around the country (In re FedEx Ground Package Sys. Inc., Employment Practices Litigation, N.D. Ind., No. 03:05-MD-527-RM, filed 8/10/05).

Other rulings upholding the employee status of drivers, according to attorneys for the drivers, include a recent court decision in California, Internal Revenue Service rulings in Wisconsin and Missouri, and unemployment agency rulings in various states, including a Massachusetts case in August (163 DLR A-4, 8/23/06 ).

FedEx Home Established in 1998

FedEx Home Delivery was established in 1998 when the parent company acquired Roadway Package Systems Inc. Almost all of the subsidiary's drivers are classified as independent contractors, while drivers for the parent company are classified as employees.

The units found appropriate by Pye are 24 drivers at a company terminal in Wilmington, Mass., and 16 drivers at a separate annex terminal, also in Wilmington.

In her decision, Pye noted that the company "exercises substantial control" over how drivers perform their jobs. Although drivers own their own trucks, the vehicles must display a company logo and drivers must wear a company uniform. The company "unilaterally establishes the rates of compensation," she found.

Factors cited by the company--drivers' responsibility for their vehicles, flexibility in scheduling, absence of fringe benefits, and lack of withholding by the company--are insufficient to demonstrate independent contractor status, she concluded.

By Rick Valliere

Major IBT Employers Back Hoffa

October 18, 2006. Give UPS management credit. When they decided to back Hoffa, they didn’t go halfway.

Not only did UPS management give Hoffa unlimited access to campaign inside their largest facility, the UPS Worldport hub in Louisville: UPS management literally chauffeured Hoffa around the grounds.

Management drove Hoffa and his entourage from building to building in a company van so he could campaign throughout the facility on Oct. 13, just as ballots were arriving in Louisville.

Are these the actions of a company that is worried about having to face Hoffa across the bargaining table—or a sign that UPS is eager for another ‘Best Contract Ever?’

UPS management’s warmth toward Hoffa has a long history. When Hoffa first ran for office, a UPS lobbyist was caught donating cash to his campaign. After he took office, industry analysts declared that UPS was “in love with Hoffa” (Source: Traffic World).

Before the 2002 contract talks, UPS spokesperson Norman Black told the media that, “We are certainly not dreading or fearing negotiations or anything like that. The Teamsters under its current leadership has shown a willingness to work with us…We’re very confident.”

UPS Teamsters found out why after Hoffa gave management a six-year deal that delivered pension cuts and toothless protection from excessive overtime and supervisors working. They’ve built up nonunion subsidiaries under Hoffa’s nose.

Leedham Campaign Strikes Back
After Hoffa got the Louisville tour, the Leedham Campaign immediately filed an election protest over the company’s illegal contribution to the Hoffa Campaign.

As a result, UPS was forced to give Secretary-Treasurer candidate Sandy Pope equal access to the Worldport hub. For breaking the rules, the Hoffa Campaign had to pay for Pope’s airfare to Louisville.

Pope and running mate Mark Huckleberry campaigned at Worldport on Oct. 16. Pope told Convoy, “We had a fantastic response. Teamsters know what it means when management supports Hoffa.”

UPS is far from the only employer that has been campaigning with Hoffa. Safeway, Yellow-Roadway, and Dial Corporation are just some of the other Teamster employers that have been caught supporting Hoffa.

April 22, 2006: Feeder driver Henry Gallet could not believe that he was being forced to return to work with less than four hours off-duty by Lenexa feeder manager Steve Mitchell. It seems that Mitchell has the divine authority to interpret Department of Transportation regulations as he sees fit. This authority also grants the right to falsify the DOT required Drivers Daily Log, as he compelled Gallet to log off-duty (from Lenexa, Kans. to Clinton, Okla., 12:15 a.m. to 6:45 a.m.), while in the sleeper berth on Tues., March 7, 2006.

Mitchell’s divinity has also been noted as he changes work rules, seniority rights, and contract language with impunity. It is rumored that he walks on water in his spare time! Whether divine authority or divine stupidity, Mitchell’s above the law management style alienates employees, reduces productivity, and subjects UPS to liability. —Michael A. Savwoir, Local 41, Kansas City

April 22, 2006: Members of Local 384 in Philadelphia are telling their local officers in no uncertain terms that a plan by UPS to replace four established full-time
shifter jobs with combo positions is out of the question. It is also a
violation of Article 22.3 of the contract, which states that new full-time
jobs will be created out of “existing part-time” positions. At least one
other local in Philly has signed off on the deal. UPS management continues to try new ways to undermine the creation of full-time jobs, which is no surprise, but the lack of coordination from the IBT in countering these attacks continues to be a factor making it harder for members to defend rights and conditions.