Discussion in 'UPS Union Issues' started by filthpig, May 6, 2008.

  1. filthpig

    filthpig Active Member

    I can't find my contract and was wondering how the Cost of Living Allowance worked. Anyone know?
  2. trplnkl

    trplnkl 555

    very badly.

    seriously, I don't understand what I have read about COLA.
  3. trplnkl

    trplnkl 555

    Article 33

    Cost-of-Living (COLA)
    All seniority employees who have completed their appropriate wage progression schedule shall be
    covered by the provisions of a cost-of-living allowance, as set forth in this Agreement.
    Employees who have not completed their appropriate wage progression on the effective date of a COLA
    increase, shall receive the adjustment on a prospective basis on the date they complete their wage
    progression schedules.​

    The amount of the cost-of-living allowance shall be determined as provided below on the basis of the
    "Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, CPI-W (Revised Series using
    1982-1984 Expenditure Patterns), All Items (1982-84= 100), published by the Bureau of Labor
    Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor" and referred to herein as the "Index".​

    Effective August 1, 2003 2009, and every August 1 thereafter during the life of the Agreement, a costof-
    living allowance will be calculated on the basis of the difference between the Index for May 2003
    2009 (published June 2003 2009) and every May thereafter, and the base Index for May 2002 2008
    (published June 2002 2008) and every May thereafter, as follows:​

    For every 0.2 point increase in the Index, over and above the base (prior year’s) Index plus 3.0% there
    will be a 1 cent increase in the hourly wage rates payable on August 1, 2003 2009, and every August 1
    thereafter. These increases shall only be payable if they equal five ($.05) cents in a year.
    All cost-of-living allowances paid under this Agreement will become and remain a fixed part of the base
    wage rate for all job classifications. A decline in the Index shall not result in the reduction of
    classification base wage rates.​

    Mileage paid employees will receive cost-of-living allowances on the basis of .25 mills per mile for each
    1 cent increase in hourly wages, subject to the threshold set forth above.​

    In the event the appropriate Index figure is not issued before the effective date of the cost-of-living
    adjustment, the cost-of-living adjustment that is required will be made at the beginning of the first (1st)
    pay period after the receipt of the Index.​

    In the event that the Index shall be revised or discontinued and in the event the Bureau of Labor
    Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, does not issue information which would enable the Employer and
    the Union to know what the Index would have been had it not been revised or discontinued, then the
    Employer and the Union will meet, negotiate, and agree upon an appropriate substitute for the Index.
    Upon the failure of the parties to agree within sixty (60) days, thereafter, the issue of an appropriate
    substitute shall be submitted to an arbitrator for determination. The arbitrator’s decision shall be final
    and binding.​
  4. filthpig

    filthpig Active Member

    That cleared up everything! Thanks, though.
  5. JonFrum

    JonFrum Guest


    The contract language quoted above will be a bit less confusing if you ignore the references to "2002" and "2003." Those dates are from the previous contract and should appear with the strike-out character running through them, but BrownCafe's version of the contract dropped much of the formatting.

    Bottom line: The "yes" voters voted to accept a new contract over seven months early (Dec. 19, 2007 rather than Aug. 1, 2008), and to forgo any COLA for the first 19 months. Apparently accepting much smaller raises, and delaying half of them six months, wasn't enough.

    To make matters worse, this time we would actually have qualified for a COLA raise because the hard-to-trigger COLA formula would have actually been triggered.
  6. smokey711

    smokey711 Member

    No COLA this year, if that helps.
  7. BigUnionGuy

    BigUnionGuy Got the T-Shirt

    Jon Frum TDU,

    What percentage of your local (even if... you are a teamster and work for ups) voted to accept the contract....????

    About average.... 25 to 28%....????

    Why wasn't it triggered for freight...??? Might want to ask Ken.

    What you're saying is UPS members are stupid. But TDU is smarter.

    Probably why you are not a registered user of this site.... No Guts !! Just like TDU !!


    "You might not like what I say, but I always tell the truth."
  8. BigBrownSanta

    BigBrownSanta New Member

    Did Jon Frum say something that was incorrect?
  9. JonFrum

    JonFrum Guest


    I've been a UPSer and a member of Local 42 in Lynn, Ma. since 1973. We voted to accept the Master 90 to 42, and to accept the New England Supplement 94 to 38.

    I maintain there was very little discussion of the issues before the vote. Partly because of the Hoffa information brownout, and partly because of the APWA distraction which coincidently occured during the pre-vote period. Most people didn't know what they were voting on, or didn't vote. With so much turnover at UPS, and with the gulf between part-timers, full-time package drivers, and feeder drivers, most members are not well informed. Just look at how many people don't even know the new contract has been in effect since December 19, 2007 and not August 1, 2008!

    I wish I could give every UPSer nationwide a test on the Contract details. I'm betting most would flunk. I try to remedy this sad situation by posting information on BrownCafe. I wish more people would get information from TDU.

    I don't fault people for being uninformed, or asking questions. If someone is still uninformed as the voting deadline approaches, I'd rather they just not vote instead of blindly voting "yes." I am disappointed with those who willfully vote ""yes" for a contract that contains so many bad features, both new language, and old. Such people impose the bad features on the rest of us, and many spent their careers at UPS complaining about things that they, in fact, vote to impose on themselves. Just look at all the gripes posted on BrownCafe. I'll bet some of these posters actually voted for present and past contracts that allowed the very situations to which they now object, either by specific language, or by contract silence on the issue.

    When you vote "yes" you are voting to accept ever word of the contract, to accept every issue that went unaddressed, every problematic old language that went unchanged, and you are voting to impose this on the "no" voters, and those who didn't vote, and non-Teamster members of the bargaining unit, as well as all the "unborn" who will be hired in the future. We are now stuck with this contract for over five years and seven months. This may be the begining of the end of the Teamsters Union.
  10. Cezanne

    Cezanne New Member

    For all it's worth I voted "NO"!:whiteflag:
  11. cachsux

    cachsux Wah

    I hear this year we`re getting diet COLA. None of the money,none of the benefits,same great taste!