Jester said:
And this is part of the fundamental problem of having leads as what I would call "gate managers". Leads aren't Management, but they have accountability for flights departing on time and to give CONX runners enough time to perform their assignments, so they are squeezed by the Company to cajole and berate their union brothers and sisters into unsafe practices... it is an ugly situation. Frankly, we need some larger force of the union to step into the issue to directly address the matter with the Company instead of relying upon on an ad hoc, grassroots effort by leads who are subject to write-ups.
If the ramp leads aren't willing to draw the line then nothing will change, whether the impetus is something "grassroots" or "some larger force of the union" (which for a union should be one and the same); if their unit leads will back them up and their fellow leads will back them up and if the union will back them up then they can simply decide that starting whenever, they will take the initiative and declare that no solo bin scanning will occur on their gate henceforth.
All a lead has to do is check out his bag and inform the assists and local runner that no one will be scanning alone in the bin on that gate on that day and the work will be done accordingly. The lead sets the tone and pace for the work and by and large the assists go with what the lead says because it's all on him. Maybe only one bin can be unloaded at a time, or maybe only some or most of the bags get scanned instead of all of them. It might be necessary to remove the battery from the second scanner to keep any overly-enthusiastic agents from setting one up themselves and hopping in the bin with it. Refusing to work unsafe may cause local bag drop times, departure times, and scanning % numbers to go down, but it will also certainly cut the incidence of "stingers" and long term physiological damage caused by working that way. This will inevitably cause friction with management and lead to disciplinary confrontations,
but these may be necessary in order to rectify how ramping in done in PHX.
So long as the lead can demonstrate that performance hits were the result of refusing an unsafe work practice and not spite or negligence no disciplinary action can stick as long as the lead in question
and his union representation are willing to see it through. Written up for a delay or a hit on local times? An irregularity report should be filled out explaining exactly what happened and the safety reasoning behind it. A grievance should be filed to boot. I suggest further an ethics complaint lodged against ramp management in general and any manager in specific for utilizing disciplinary measures to knowingly and intentionally maintain an unsafe work culture and environment, because if that isn't unethical I don't know what is. Others have mentioned involving regulatory agencies such as the FAA and OSHA, and these should certainly be put to full use or at least notified of the situation. Don't we have a safety committee? Could they be mobilized to help in the effort?
By seeking resolution through various channels above and around PHX ramp management one effectively reduces the degree to which they can control the outcomes, which they are desperate to do given their obsession with saving face and shrinking their operating budget. It will take work and require people to stand up for themselves, but it can be done. If not, and if nothing changes I don't know who they'll have to blame but themselves.
