3rd Vote

QKRSTKR

Well-Known Member
Need to be compensated a day in the week (vacation day, holiday, option day, etc...). Other than that why shouldn't someone have to work? Really.
Holiday is the day before or the day after which is how its been for years. Supplements may be different in other areas.
A continued no vote isn't going to change these things.
What about disability? If I hurt myself at home off the job will my insurance continued to be active?

There are people on the bottom of our feeder board that were just hired off the street who could very well not work a day of the week in our slow period. It can happen.
 

Stonefish

Well-Known Member
How can u say this? Why not?
It is just my opinion not that that means anything but if they were to get rid of 17 I or allow Ohio to have a carve out the rest of the Central and other regions would never pass another contract and everyone would try to be the last man standing. Like I said it's just my opinion.
 

Bubblehead

My Senior Picture
It is just my opinion not that that means anything but if they were to get rid of 17 I or allow Ohio to have a carve out the rest of the Central and other regions would never pass another contract and everyone would try to be the last man standing. Like I said it's just my opinion.
You're right, they should probably just start all over.
 

Stonefish

Well-Known Member
What about disability? If I hurt myself at home off the job will my insurance continued to be active?

There are people on the bottom of our feeder board that were just hired off the street who could very well not work a day of the week in our slow period. It can happen.
If you have an off the job injury the Company is required to pay 4 weeks of health and welfare and you have 26 weeks of disability which includes healthcare coverage. Also if you go on long term the company is required to pay a year of healthcare.
I agree that full-timers will/could get laid off that's why under Article 3 of the Central Region they have the right to bump to packages or full-timers have the the right to bump 1 or 2 part-time employee(s). Then they receive their full healthcare and pension payments even if they only bump 1 shift.
That should have been relayed to everyone with those concerns. At least I hope. When you get a chance look at Articles 3 and 14 of the Central Region.
 

O/C

Well-Known Member
It is just my opinion not that that means anything but if they were to get rid of 17 I or allow Ohio to have a carve out the rest of the Central and other regions would never pass another contract and everyone would try to be the last man standing. Like I said it's just my opinion.
True, this contract will be in limbo for quite a long time no matter what happens to the Ohio Rider. Last man standing wins, I am afraid this will get uglier.
 

Bubblehead

My Senior Picture
If you have an off the job injury the Company is required to pay 4 weeks of health and welfare and you have 26 weeks of disability which includes healthcare coverage. Also if you go on long term the company is required to pay a year of healthcare.
I agree that full-timers will/could get laid off that's why under Article 3 of the Central Region they have the right to bump to packages or full-timers have the the right to bump 1 or 2 part-time employee(s). Then they receive their full healthcare and pension payments even if they only bump 1 shift.
That should have been relayed to everyone with those concerns. At least I hope. When you get a chance look at Articles 3 and 14 of the Central Region.
Article 3 doesn't always apply.
It's interesting how you always seem to forget that, especially seeing that you claim to be from my local. (He really isn't)
Doesn't it concern you, that what you just stated won't be the case for the people you claim to be your immediate coworkers, not to mention yourself?
What a martyr you are. LOL
 
Last edited:

Stonefish

Well-Known Member
Article 3 doesn't always apply.
It's interesting how you always seem to forget that, especially seeing that you claim to be from my local. (He really isn't)
Doesn't it concern you, that what you just stated won't be the case for the people you claim to be your immediate coworkers, not to mention yourself?
What a martyr you are. LOL
Did I say it applied in my local?? Do to think so sunshine
 

O/C

Well-Known Member
You never intended on voting yes anyway but that's ok it's a democratic process and I support it. You still haven't responded to a post last week
Did some quick math about the percentages of how much this Master passed. Only 39 percent even bothered to turn in their ballots, slightly over half of those voted yes (34307 yes/30202 no). The Master was only passed with 7.28 percent of the union UPS membership who could of voted fully supporting it.

In hindsight for those who voted yes, would you have changed your vote for the Master or Supplements if you had the chance to do it over again?
 

Anonymous 12

Non active member
Did some quick math about the percentages of how much this Master passed. Only 39 percent even bothered to turn in their ballots, slightly over half of those voted yes (34307 yes/30202 no). The Master was only passed with 7.28 percent of the union UPS membership who could of voted fully supporting it.

In hindsight for those who voted yes, would you have changed your vote for the Master or Supplements if you had the chance to do it over again?
Nope
 

O/C

Well-Known Member
No I wouldn't say that but what would you have wanted that would have made it worth your while? Let here what you have to say.
I went down to the Union hall and submitted proposals, good ones at that, primarily relating to retirement language with the IBT/UPS plan. You are in that plan, how do you like that under age 57 with 25 years clause. Of course those 25 years have to be under the Central States or IBT/UPS plans. Most of us were not lucky to start full time with UPS, we have vested time under various company controlled plans that are not considered under the service retirement options. We have 22.3 people who put in for retirement with over 35 years finding out the pension benefit would be better if they would of stayed part-time.

Can go on and on, but how did you all do with your proposals being addressed with this contract?
 

Anonymous 12

Non active member
I went down to the Union hall and submitted proposals, good ones at that, primarily relating to retirement language with the IBT/UPS plan. You are in that plan, how do you like that under age 57 with 25 years clause. Of course those 25 years have to be under the Central States or IBT/UPS plans. Most of us were not lucky to start full time with UPS, we have vested time under various company controlled plans that are not considered under the service retirement options. We have 22.3 people who put in for retirement with over 35 years finding out the pension benefit would be better if they would of stayed part-time.

Can go on and on, but how did you all do with your proposals being addressed with this contract?
We did pretty good but we are very lucky in my local due to having out business agent that sits on every negotiating committee.
 

BigUnionGuy

Got the T-Shirt
Most of us were not lucky to start full time with UPS, we have vested time under various company controlled plans that are not considered under the service retirement options.

Are you suggesting some sort of reciprocity.... with a non-union pension plan ??


We have 22.3 people who put in for retirement with over 35 years finding out the pension benefit would be better if they would of stayed part-time.

Did they not understand....

Changing job classifications would put them in to a different pension plan??

Help me out here.



-Bug-
 
Top