What's new

Yellow | Whatever happened to Article 61 section 1

BIG R GUY said:
I gotta say EL. That’s funny. Refusal to follow a direct work order.
Insubordination, not following assigned work assignments, calling the supervisor a Jack O££ to his face, profanity? Goes on daily with no discipline.
Click to expand...
Can’t afford to lose drivers, petty violations enforced. Warning letters are toilet paper, suspensions are welcomed by drivers. We used to get letters for misloads on routes. Now drivers are belittled for not attempting those misloads. It’s all one big joke, smh!
 
Elwood said:
Can’t afford to lose drivers, petty violations enforced. Warning letters are toilet paper, suspensions are welcomed by drivers. We used to get letters for misloads on routes. Now drivers are belittled for not attempting those misloads. It’s all one big joke, smh!
Click to expand...
PIE was very lenient on discipline, you had to screw up big time to get a letter.
Like other companies, they would take spells of writing petty letters.
They decided those letters cost them hundreds of dollars when a driver manufactured a breakdown.
Paying breakdown, and the cost of a vendor got very expensive.
 
seabreeze said:
PIE was very lenient on discipline, you had to screw up big time to get a letter.
Like other companies, they would take spells of writing petty letters.
They decided those letters cost them hundreds of dollars when a driver manufactured a breakdown.
Paying breakdown, and the cost of a vendor got very expensive.
Click to expand...
All TM’s have to deal with their superiors about proof of discipline. When those times happened, I attempted to explain to inexperienced TM’s and supervisors the consequences of their actions. The good ones learned, the others went on meds for high blood pressure and soon disappeared.
 
392.3 ill or fatigued operator as long as you have a Dr note medical issues you can take as much time off as needed without discipline even when sick and vacation time exhausted
 
Triplex said:
That's insubordination. Calls for discipline absolutely, immediate discharge no, not for the first instance anyway. It's not one of the contractually stipulated reasons for immediate discharge (unless it is specifically stated in your supplement). Repeated instances of course is another thing. Under civil law, any arbitrator decision must absolutely follow the contract. If not it can be overturned in civil court. Believe me, been there, done that. :smile new:
Click to expand...
ROADY said:
Tell the truth, you want her to discipline you. :hide: :27::6788:
Click to expand...
Flsa says it can be mandatory you are in the wrong business if you do not want ot
 
Yrcer said:
Flsa says it can be mandatory you are in the wrong business if you do not want ot
Click to expand...
We all GET THAT.
It's a question of IF it is a part of the absentee policy and refusal is considered an unexcused absence.

And if we all just say that's ENOUGH.
THEN WHAT?
Fire us all?
Suspend us all ?
About half our city drivers booked off yesterday because they've had enough.
3 guys retired early in the last couple months due to it.
The HUNGRY days seem to have come to an end in this business.
Now what?
We are the drivers.
We ARE the business.
 
The problems with the above post and the one asking if OT is part of attendance are 2 separate issues.
The OT/attendance thing was a dock issue.
I agree they can force 10 if told by 6th.
Disagree that it should be combined into missing work/attendance discipline.
The progressive discipline in the Attendance Policy would maybe be a good idea opposed to the current...its a voluntary quit or disobeying a work order for refusing OT.
But it isn't there and it doesn't appear that mixing and matching tardiness and missing work and it refusal would be combined.

Maybe membership should come up with a voluntary quit policy for our officials.
Do your job for the day at hall and come over to nearest freight terminal and take out a 2-3 hour trip....or you voluntary quit your official gig.
3 times per week it can be done. If done consecutively for 1 month then maybe you can file....what ya get out of filing is useless...but you can file.
 
slavenomore said:
We all GET THAT.
It's a question of IF it is a part of the absentee policy and refusal is considered an unexcused absence.

And if we all just say that's ENOUGH.
THEN WHAT?
Fire us all?
Suspend us all ?
About half our city drivers booked off yesterday because they've had enough.
3 guys retired early in the last couple months due to it.
The HUNGRY days seem to have come to an end in this business.
Now what?
We are the drivers.
We ARE the business.
Click to expand...
There is a severe driver shortage.
Companies will do what is necessary to retain drivers who, in the past, would have been disciplined to the maximum extent. If one is willing to tolerate the system, it is highly unlikely one would be fired for absenteeism, unless it is deemed ‘excessive and habitual.’
 
Elwood said:
There is a severe driver shortage.
Companies will do what is necessary to retain drivers who, in the past, would have been disciplined to the maximum extent. If one is willing to tolerate the system, it is highly unlikely one would be fired for absenteeism, unless it is deemed ‘excessive and habitual.’
Click to expand...
We don't have a problem with excessive absenteeism on drivers.

My initial post on the OT/absentee policy question relates to a habitual violating dock worker.
My concerns with that are the way it was finished off....by tacking an OT refusal on as final termination. 1st OT refusal. Written up as unexcused absence under Article 44 and national uniform attendance policy violation.
I'm concerned about setting a precedent at our terminal with that...even though the guy was a habitual violator at the time. Dock guys were violating and it needed addressing since the drivers are being overly used.
If they wrote up as refusing to follow work rule there'd be no issue on the termination due to his record.
But sliding in the discharge in this way is low imo. The guy was able to be discharged for most anything at the time but they chose this wording under stupidity or trying to set a precedent with this policy imo.

Our drivers don't call off over the limit too much.
But the OT by sending guys put on 2nd run swaps late is wearing us out.
And they used the voluntary quit crap in us. The problem is the waste of time at shift start. Drivers load here. And the YRC system makes us get out too late waiting for freight. And now a new computer system which is slowing everything down even more on top of our already present OT frustrations.
Bad timing.
I don't know how many drivers will be here too long and the future looks dismal. They also cut our road board from like 25 to 3 and the rest are now UE. And work the dock 4 or more hours/shift and are getting more OT than they want. A lot of them.
15 years ago they worked the dock. Then drove on bottom of road list a few years....now back to dockwork. in the middle of the night just like when they started here.
 
slavenomore said:
We don't have a problem with excessive absenteeism on drivers.

My initial post on the OT/absentee policy question relates to a habitual violating dock worker.
My concerns with that are the way it was finished off....by tacking an OT refusal on as final termination. 1st OT refusal. Written up as unexcused absence under Article 44 and national uniform attendance policy violation.
I'm concerned about setting a precedent at our terminal with that...even though the guy was a habitual violator at the time. Dock guys were violating and it needed addressing since the drivers are being overly used.
If they wrote up as refusing to follow work rule there'd be no issue on the termination due to his record.
But sliding in the discharge in this way is low imo. The guy was able to be discharged for most anything at the time but they chose this wording under stupidity or trying to set a precedent with this policy imo.

Our drivers don't call off over the limit too much.
But the OT by sending guys put on 2nd run swaps late is wearing us out.
And they used the voluntary quit crap in us. The problem is the waste of time at shift start. Drivers load here. And the YRC system makes us get out too late waiting for freight. And now a new computer system which is slowing everything down even more on top of our already present OT frustrations.
Bad timing.
I don't know how many drivers will be here too long and the future looks dismal. They also cut our road board from like 25 to 3 and the rest are now UE. And work the dock 4 or more hours/shift and are getting more OT than they want. A lot of them.
15 years ago they worked the dock. Then drove on bottom of road list a few years....now back to dockwork. in the middle of the night just like when they started here.
Click to expand...
That’s a lot of issues in one post. If senior guys are frustrated with excessive OT, just bid dock and be off in 10 hours at most.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top