Zero Tolerance...For Teamsters Only
....The no tolerance
policy at UPS needs closer examination. The policy states that everyone should
be able to feel safe and secure at the workplace. It also states that there
will be zero tolerance for any form of violent intimidation or
harassment. This is all well and good, but the standard does not seem to apply
when the alleged offender wears a tie.
....There have been
several cases in the Albany building alone where hourly employees have been
"taken out of service" for alleged violent words or action. It
amounts to an unpaid suspension while an investigation takes place. The action
taken would be tolerable except that when a management person is accused
of the same type of infraction he/she is given the due process not accorded
the hourly person. In one instance a member of the management team was seen by
several hourly employees in a physically violent altercation with another
member of the management team. Neither were taken out of service. There have
also been Teamsters accused of sexual harassment and suspended pending
dismissal. Members of the management team have been accused as well and, in
one instance, allegedly caught on tape doing so. They were not suspended.
....Without debating
whether this policy is just or fair as written, it stands to reason that no
policy will ever work unless it is enforced for everyone not just for
employees who pay union dues.
A Premature Guarantee
...For
the last six months, the grievance over non-union "tech" workers at
the Albany Hub of UPS has been winding its way through the grievance system
and was to be the first issue heard by the National Grievance Committee in
January. In the meantime, the IBT, in a written response to a letter of
concern from Head Shop Steward, Mike Marro, assured all that "...
the Latham facility will not be a non-union barn in January".
Now comes word that the Committee has deadlocked on this issue, sending the
grievance to the next level which is a national arbitrator. Unless an
arbitrator is chosen, cases are presented and a decision is rendered all
within two weeks, there most certainly will be non-union "techs" at
UPS in February and well beyond.
....Ignoring
how this makes the IBT look, one wonders how such a guarantee could have been
made knowing that the Committee is made up of an equal number of management
and union representatives. An exact split of the vote down management/union
lines was hardly unexpected. The most unappealing aspect of all is that this
issue may not be resolved until negotiations begin on the next UPS contract
due to expire July 31, 2002. If so, the non-union workers could be a major
negotiating chip and a win-win situation for the Company.
....There
are several scenarios that spring from the possible situation outlined above
that puts UPS in the cat-bird's seat. Even if the arbitrator rules in favor of
the Teamsters, either before or after contract negotiations, UPS still wins in
the amount of money saved in wages as well as benefit contributions by using
non-union workers. If the issue is brought into contract negotiations at the
national level, UPS wins because a major or major concessions would have to be
made for UPS to eliminate non-union workers, assuming they would do so at all.
If, instead, the issue is brought into contract negotiations at the regional
level, UPS still wins because either concessions would be given in some
regions or non-union workers would gain a foothold in right to work states
where eliminating non-union jobs isn't the priority it is elsewhere. These
possibilities don't assume a hard line position on either side resulting in a
strike, a scenario no one wants. They also assume the
Arbitrator does not rule in favor of UPS, an even less desirable outcome.
....The
IBT has its work cut out for it. They need to put as much pressure on to speed
the arbitration proceedings as they can. It is not unreasonable to assume that
UPS will be in delay mode as the impending contract negotiations increase
their leverage. However the arbitration schedule works out, the issue of
non-union jobs can not be allowed to be used to take away gains made in
previous UPS contracts in the next contract. The UPS contract may expire in a
year and a half but, in our opinion, the actions taken (or not taken) now with
the non-union worker grievance could have the biggest impact on an agreement
in 2002.
