Before COVID, workers invitied to MnDOT's annual District maintenance winter readiness meetings (held weather permitting) got a good idea by mid October, broken down by truck station, who had priority assignment (first meaning called first when a shift splits) and for every subarea, vacation leave allowances rationed to hold a bare minimum of drivers available. The good news for being priority: near certain OT. The bad: on-call status without call duty pay, maybe no winter leave time?
Plan handouts like the attached, presumably arising through a contractual labor/management meeting formality, as suggested in statewide AFSCME agreement, show what winter plans once looked like, back when there were winters, and plans were not vaporware.
Not shown - method used to ration leave and OT-opportunities. Coin tosses? Wagering? Draws by lot? "Can you guess how many fingers have I behind my back?" Why would the word favoritism come up with such quiet yet thorough care taken to oppotune the unfavored?
Over time, the scale, scope and certainty of published handouts presented at wide area District winter maintenance planning meetings telescoped, adjusting to fit between the winter mission and resources available for those willing to work at it.
However, few would dispute stresses and tensions during the COVID pandemic were not spread equally. In families, everyone experiences harm when the stress is not knowing what is next or when it will end. If MnDOT winter planning buy-in was accomplished via favoritism by the real name for that: bargaining in the workplace, if that ever had worked, faltered and fell from favor.
Winter policy documents appared without union signature, tightening focus on improving comfort levels for everyone, everyone but those sent out to risk their life, until finally, planning ends up a flat, opaque put-off, "Plan? Your supervisor will speak about the winter plan, when the time comes."
2010.pdf