upschuck
Well-Known Member
Makes for a small pool to spread the risk. IMO, that was a poor decision.
Enough is enough
- Thread starter Ron Carey lives on
- Start date
Bubblehead
My Senior Picture
In the past contracts in the Central Region where I work, it would have been the company "siphoning" the raises which would have been easily rebuked or struck if attempted.
What counter-measures or recourse will we have when the union decides to take such an action?
Last edited:
upschuck
Well-Known Member
As more requirements kick in for ACA, the higher the premiums get.
Bubblehead
My Senior Picture
BulShip, UPS should be on the hook for that cost, not the front line employee.
upschuck
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately, there won't be much we can do, but complain about it here.
Harry Manback
Robot Extraordinaire
C'mon Dear Leader... Surely you know how to conjugate "you" and "are".
Sent using a Potato
Bubblehead
My Senior Picture
And there in lies the problem.
What was a system of checks and balances, now requires a leap of faith for us who were in the company plan.
It's hard to have that faith in light of the annual deductibles built into the last year of the contract.
We fear it is just the tip of the iceberg.
Those who were already in Teamcare were duped, as they realized temporary gains to be preceded by a slow bleed.
I never wanted more than them, rather for them to have what I had.
Now it's gone for ever.
What a shame.
Last edited:
Atomic_Smurf
Well-Known Member
This is the result of the steaming pile of healthcare law that was dropped in the middle of the negotiation table for both sides to contend with. (At our unions invite I might add) If this anti-worker law had come from the other side of the isle we'd be mobilizing to change it. So why not now?
Irishman Collins
Well-Known Member
What? I am sorry, but somehow you have the inside track on what really happened in negotiations to lead us to concessions? I beg of you, please enlighten me (us) on this information. Honestly, whether you believe this or not I would much rather be on your side of the fence because on my side there is disbelief, shock and anger over all this. If you have some inside information that could help us all understand and give us a reasonable explanation to this most serious issue. Then I am all ears and will be willing to jump back on the wagon if any of it makes reasonable sense.
Ron Carey lives on
Well-Known Member
We never had the right to strike. We all know that Bro
Sent using BrownCafe App
Sent using BrownCafe App
Last edited by a moderator:
Ron Carey lives on
Well-Known Member
I guess brown cafe isn't the place to try to build some unity. Hope Everyone had a great labor day, and thanked old union members who faught for the rights we enjoy today
Sent using BrownCafe App
Sent using BrownCafe App
10 point
Well-Known Member
Some didn't get the right to vote. But some, having the right to vote didn't.
If the NMA would have been voted down at least two times we may have gotten rid of the four yr progression and got stronger harassment language.
The insurance? Well, that's probably a different story.
Ron Carey lives on
Well-Known Member
The national barely passed. Even if it didn't, WE NEVER HAD THE RIGHT TO STRIKE( SUPPLEMENTS, NATIONAL, RIDERS) The proper paper was not filed by the GEB. Thats what Bojangles is sitting on. Do the research, it is fact
Sent using BrownCafe App
Sent using BrownCafe App
Perhaps not for those who were in the Company plan. Hours-based Health and Welfare Trusts are another animal and guess who just went from Company plan to Health and Welfare trusts? You SHOULD expect general wage increases to be diverted during the life of the Contract if the cost of health care raises.
Before the conversion to dollars-based health coverage, we voted on diverting raises to the Health & Welfare Trust. If we voted it down, the vote was overridden by the Trustees. Now that we are dollars-based, there is no need to vote as it is squarely in the hands of the Trustees (we have given up liberty for security without the freedom to self-determine). NO ONE has been able to explain me how the new participants in TeamCare are supposed to hold the Trustees accountable if they are not in the Central States jurisdiction.
upschuck
Well-Known Member
Ok, Mr Fear Mongerer, I will expect my raise to go to my healthcare, and be pleasantly surprised when my check gets bigger next August.
No fear... just facts on what has already happened. I set the condition under which to expect a diversion based on prior experiences of myself and others around the country. There are no guarantees either way. You are free to ignore why and how past diversions have occurred. If it doesn't happen, then it doesn't happen. I have no dog in the fight (other than voting on other Teamster's health coverage with the NMA and twice with Western Region) because I am in a sustainable Health and Welfare Trust (more expensive to operate than most but more sustainable than most).
BTW, I voted to divert wage increase to the Health and Welfare Trust in my Local. It was defeated roughly 3-2. I suppose I should have been happy to have the vote overturned by the Trustees; however, I see little point in votes that have a predetermined outcome.
upschuck
Well-Known Member
What has already happened is that no raise has been diverted to pay for Teamcare since this provision has been in contact. Teamcare is healthy.
Could you possibly set a lower bar? Seriously... the provision has not been in effect for a year yet.
Healthy you say? Well, I guess that covers it since you say it is healthy. Nothing to look at here...
upschuck
Well-Known Member
It HAS been in effect for at least the last two contracts. No raise diverted. If you can't accept that, then there is no use arguing about it to you. Good day.
Atomic_Smurf
Well-Known Member
Whether it was in past contracts or not doesn't matter, the ACA was not an issue then. Prices are going to continue to rise in the years ahead. The law is designed to end employer coverage over time.
Similar threads
