Slashdot Mirror
Plow Operators Object to GPS Tracking System
An anonymous reader writes "The Boston Globe is reporting on a dispute between private plowing contractors and the state highway department. The state has mandated all trucks to equip with GPS enabled cellphones for tracking. The drivers have refused, just in time for a big winter storm. The latest seems to be that they have reached a compromise (no details yet), but the dispute highlights the public safety versus employee privacy issue. Presumably plowing could be more efficient and possibly save lives during storms if the trucks could be tracked.. a good thing. Or is this simply a step closer to an Orwellian society, where the State knows where we all are?" This earlier story does a much better job of detailing their grievances - apparently it's about money as much as anything, with the GPS tracking system being only a secondary issue.
They're being paid by the hour (and quite well, $42-$300 according to the article) and the government wants to make sure they're actually working while they're getting paid.
While I'm working I have a cell phone and two-way pager strapped to my hip at all times. It's my employer's business where I am when I should be working. I get my privacy back when I quit for the day and take those appliances off.
Work is not time to run the kids to school, run errands, or do anything besides work.
Of course this is hypocrisy on my part. I'm at work right now wasting time on Slashdot. That said, plow operators have seasonal jobs. If any of them wants to give up their $300/hr gig (several times what I currently make per hour), I'll gladly trade with them, work my ass off for a few months, and then screw around for the rest of the year.
Game... blouses.
The problem is we sub-contracted most of the snow removal jobs to the lowest bidder. Yup you guessed it, the lowest bidder was Jeff and Ackbar's shovel your driveway/interstate business.
A few winters ago, I was driving through a major snowstorm with about 8-10 inches of snow on the highway. I drove for over 150 kilometers and saw only one snowplow. And guess what he was doing?
He was parked on the side of the road drinking a coffee and taking a really long break. How do I know this? That was the funniest part, the snow was just as deep infront of him as it was behind him. He must have been sitting there quite awhile.
From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
I've heard some unions in the US are pretty bad for that but I don't think it's true of all unions, and certainly not many in the UK. I'm a union shop steward and I spend most of my Union time protecting members basic rights and pointing out when managers are breaking the law or going against their own written procedures. Sometimes you do have to do things and represent people that you'd rather not but when it comes down to it if you let management get away with an abuse against someone you don't like or has done something wrong then it weakens your case when they try the same thing against someone who is innocent. It's like if the Federal Government breach an ammendment to secure a conviction against a paedophile then the ACLU has to defend the paedophile, not because they want to defend paedophiles but because they have to defend the bill of rights. If the ACLU let them get away with it once then it weakens their arguement in all other cases.
Unionisation can work well for both employers and the employed as it gives a forum for the raising of grievences and for negotiation. It also means that individual managers often have someone around who is knowedgable about the procedures and can advise them (most of the queries about procedures I get are from managers as they individually probably only have to apply many of them once every few years but I am constantly involved in them so can tell the managers (many of whom are also union members) how those procedures work).
As a shop steward I will campaign for fair pay, people doing the same job to the same level should be paid the same; equiable treatment, no one should be refused promotion or subject to harsher disapline simply becuase of their race, gender, faith or simply because their manager doesn't like them; safe working practices, we have laws about health and safety in the workplace thsat managers should follow. What I will oppose is people being paid for more than their labour or worth. Having said that I do support minimum time payments for 'call out staff'. I've sure that any of us who have done 'call out' work will have at least once had a call where we've had to go into the office/data centre or whatever and the time it took to actually do the job was so short that it would cost us more in gas to go in than we would get paid. But I think one to two hours would be reasonable, four hours (unless there's a good reason) seems a bit excessive to me.
On the subject of the story the way I figure it is that if I'm at work then my employer has a right to know what I'm doing and where I am. As soon as I clock out that right ceases.
Stephen
"Don't write down to your readers, the only people less intelligent than you can't read" - Sign on Newspaper Office Wall
I'd find a way to remove the tracking device and attach it to a taxi, a bus, or a police car. I don't operate a snow plow, but I am in a company truck all day.
i have heard other companies upgrading their trucks towards this type of management. i have discussed this topic with the driver of the commercial garbage/dumpster pick-up service at the store I work for. a couple months ago, they upgraded all of their trucks with a GPS tracking system and so-called "tattle-tale" ("tattler") boxes, which start beeping if you stay too long in one place. he also has to scan barcodes at every stop so the computer records when and where service is made.
my first reaction was sympathy towards the driver's Orwellian fear. he said the drivers were filing many grievances with their union, but no major decision has been made as of yet.
later I realized that these are THE COMPANY'S equipment, so it seems they should have the right to know where their eqipment is and how it's being used. if the employees have a problem with doing their job, then they should look for other employment. this is, after all, what they get paid for.
there are, however, things that many people overlook---on both sides of the issue. the company may benefit from a precise tracking system so they can ensure their customers are receiving satisfactory service. customer satisfaction can obviously work in favor of the company in the form of more revenue. more revenue can mean more jobs or higher wages.
the driver i've spoken with also said that the "tattle tale" boxes are only triggered if you use the parking/emergency brake instead of just the foot pedal brake. he said he used to take quick 20-minute power naps before the tracking systems were installed, since his shift is so long. taking power naps, he said, is considered much safer than driving long hours without sleep. but now, if he engages the parking brake, the buzzer goes off and he risks punishment. he said some of his co-workers try to take these power naps with only their foot on the pedal brake to keep the buzzer from going off. obviously this isn't safe, especially when you consider that these trucks could easily be hauling over 10 tons of garbage.
my point is that the companies that install this type of equipment may not be considering all the counter-measures that their employees may take to avoid punishment, and some of these counter-measures may be unsafe. perhaps the motivation for attempting this tampering comes from ungrounded Orwellian fears or previous company-union disagreements.
Warning, there is a snowplow two feet behind you. Have a Nice Day!
Mind you, in the future, we'll all have flying cars and we won't need plows. Right?
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
I do not see anything wrong with be able to track an employee who says he is working. After every snowstorm, there are numerous reports of thousands of dollars being claimed by plow operators for work that was not done. One time a guy claimed 24 hrs of pay in a 24 hr time period, even though his neighbors saw him spend all day at his house. And, at up to $300 dollars per hour, as a taxpayer, I certainly want to know that joe sixpack snow plow operator is actually working. Afterall, he can make more in one good storm than many workers make in a month.
The employer (which happens to be the state) wants to know if the employee is really doing the work (or as much of the work as) the employee claims.
I'd always heard the stories of street sweepers (I live in San Diego, live we ever see a snow plough) hanging out for most of their shift, then driving quickly to notch up the mileage at the end, but I'd figured it was overblown hype.
Then, on thanksgiving, I stopped by a local deserted target lot where a friend was working security. We were standing in the lot, talking, when a street sweeper litteraly flew by.
If you watch Formula 1 racing, you'll see the drivers, on the warm up lap, swerving from side to side as much as possible to get as much mileage (and therefore as much warming) as possible in to the tyres. Well, this guy seemed to be doing the same. About 30 miles an hour, swerving from one side to the other of the lot, rocketing down one row and then up the next.
There was nothing, whatsoever, to indicate street cleaning was actually happening: He was churning up, not cleaning away, the biggest cloud of dust I've ever seen from one of those things. The was just no way the vehicle could actually clean at those speeds.
What he was obviously doing was notching up the correct number of miles, somewhere largely deserted, before logging his vehicle back in.
Charmed as I am to pay taxes for that "service", I'd personally much rather he was tracked by GPS and actually had to do the job he's paid for. Privacy has got nothing to do with it - set the system to turn off during scheduled breaks, attach it to the vehicle not him, whatever you like. It's all about stopping people from taking advantage of jobs they know are hard to supervise and monitor.
They actually have to do the job they're paid for? My heart bleeds.
You said it! The company that I work for hires drivers from a contracting firm.
The fact is that we don't know if we're being ripped off or not. The itemization of monthly services is weak at best.
I've recommended that we put GPS tracking into the contract, but what do you know, the company that we contract with is refusing, saying that it would add "undo burden and lower reliability"!
Funny, since my company would PAY for the equipment, and if errors are reported we'll work with the contracting firm to settle the differences.
That's OK that they don't want to play - we'll find someone who'll be willing to play our game and drop these guys like a rock. Thats what contracts are all about.
I have read US history, you arrogant little shit. Just because I disagree with you, doesn't mean I'm stupid. You're not even addressing my argument. A lot of the union issues today are totally different from what happened 70 frigging years ago. It's those differences I oppose, and argued against in my comment, not the struggle for safer working conditions. GPS would actually make these workers jobs safer, but they're still opposing it.
If people want to unionize, fine. Does the company have the right to put workers in the bullpen or under lockdown like in the 1930s? Hell no! Does it have the right to fire the workers if they can't perform? Hell yes.
Representative government has absolutely nothing to do with the situation.
This is the government we're talking about, not a robber baron corporation. If I want a government employee to be paid more, I'll vote for it. If you really believe in democracy, I'm sure you'll love that notion.
If this was about working conditions, it'd be a different story. But you know what? It's not. Too many unions nowadays protect people who are incompetent and they often support promotions on the basis of years worked for the company rather than actual ability. Too many unions are against monitoring for the purpose of quality control. Why should I support this? I'd honestly like to know. Why should I support a union's struggle to not be monitored for the purpose of quality control while they're on the job?
I've worked for a company that did employee monitoring. Believe me, it was needed. A lot of people weren't doing their jobs. And any union who argues in favor of a person's right to not do their job is going to lose popular support real quick, regardless of what happened 70 years ago.
>And history shows that the powerful will always >try and impose their will on those without >power in order to perpetuate that power
And a lot of unions, the moment they get a bit of power themselves, have done just that. If someone can't do their job, they SHOULD be fired. If a union helps to insure quality of labor in addition to fighting for its members, I'll usually support it. What I can't stand is when a union stands behind someone who can't do the work, just because these people have worked at a particular company for a while.
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.