For those who didn't go to the meeting.......

Discussion in 'UPS Union Issues' started by trickpony1, Oct 20, 2007.

  1. trickpony1

    trickpony1 Well-Known Member

    Based on the facts as I understand them from the meeting this morning, all those who wanted to blindly vote "yes" may want to reconsider this......

    Article 14, new language basically eliminates the concept of "past practice" and grievances that have been won by the member establishing "precedent". So, essentially, for the company, each day is a new world.

    Article 34, Paragraph (I), "....benefit is unreduced if payable at Normal Retirement Age (age 65)....", the video, as well as the printed "new" language goes on to contradict itself as to what, exactly, retirement age is.

    Article 34, Section 4 "Re-allocations of Contributions/Wages", Paragraph 1., states, in part, "thirty-five cents ($0.35) of any GWI may be re-allocated as an increased contribution to a Teamster Pension or Health and Welfare fund.". Those who think the company isn't gonna take 1/2 of our raise and say the Pension needs it is a fool. So......there goes our magnificent raise.

    Article 26 talks about sub-contracting feeder work for " a reasonable start-up period, "not to exceed thirty (30) days". All the company has to do is stop the sub-contracting on the 29th day, wait a week and then start it up again. IMO, this opens the door for sub-contracting and, eventually, eliminating the feeder department and it's drivers. Article 26 also refers to no feeder driver with more than three years seniority will be laid off if loads are put on the rail. Considering that there may be a mass exodus of high seniority feeder drivers if this contract passes, there will be alot of feeder drivers with less than 3 years seniority.

    Article 36 changes the word "handicap" to "physical disability". So a person with an other than physical disability can be discriminated against and excluded. You know where the company is going with this one.

    These are my opinions only and are based upon what was presented at the meeting today. I could be wrong and I welcome intelligent, civil counterpoints. For those who think I am voting "NO" on this proposal for the sheer thrill of it are wrong. I feel the company is dangling the retirement "carrot" in front of us and slipping some major givebacks under the table.

    Those who are deciding what to do with their first "$0.75" raise may want to look a little further down the road and read between the lines.

    Just my opinion.....
     
  2. Captain America

    Captain America SuperDAD to the rescue

    I agree. Spread the word get people to actually VOTE.
     
  3. Damok

    Damok Member


    Who were those that wanted to "blindly" vote yes?
     
  4. upsdude

    upsdude Well-Known Member

    Hey Trick, I'm glad your Local had a meeting, mine didn't. My Local doesn't have one scheduled either.
     
  5. Just Lurking

    Just Lurking Member

    My thought too. Percentage wise, I did not think it was that magnificent.

    Does area have classification seniority?

    On a lighter note - maybe this does not matter because mental. My wife asked one time "Why do you enjoy doing this job?" Honestly sometimes I believe that my answer would be pure BS anyway that I answered it.

    I could not agree any more with you. It is hard to imagine that CS is driving force behind the contract. It is like the tail wagging the dog. So many things at UPS do not make with reality. Part timers allow themselves to worked over even though if they voted could control their destiny. CS members are a minority compared to rest of the union employees at UPS.
     
  6. ihadit

    ihadit Member

    Local 804 had a meeting last Sunday, October 14. The executive board was an embarassment. Our president was like a 'deer in the headlights', he could not even answer questions brought up by the rank and file. He claimed he had not yet read through the tentative agreement, yet we received a letter from the union, dated October 4, asking for a yes vote!!!!!!!!
    No wonder the rank and file are disgusted with this group of clowns.
     
  7. Fredless

    Fredless APWA Hater

    two sides in my local, causing some pissing matches and some bitterness between old friends. I don't get it, theres always two sides to an arguement..present your sides and let the members vote on it.

    Plain and simple.

    We have meetings this coming week just for UPSers to go over the contract.
     
  8. Coldworld

    Coldworld Well-Known Member

    Article 36 changes the word "handicap" to "physical disability". So a person with an other than physical disability can be discriminated against and excluded. You know where the company is going with this one.

    They are probably trying to be more PC, no company uses "handicap" anymore...but I really know what you mean. Everybody knows ups's record with handicapped folks who work hard at this company, they have many lawsuits with the americans with disibillity folks.
     
  9. trickpony1

    trickpony1 Well-Known Member

    1) the people who sit outside the fence on the weekends hoping to catch a glimpse of their package car;
    2) the runners and gunners;
    3) the people who give the company their meal everyday;
    4) the people who crossed the line last time;
    5) the people who won't be able to make the payment on the boat, the house and the kids Toyota Forerunner if we strike and;
    6) the people who are new, wide-eyed, impressionable and in awe of all that is big business and management thereof.
     
  10. Cezanne

    Cezanne New Member

    SHEEP MENTALITY will not work with this contract, just too many wolves out there. It is time to see how many RAMS are in the herd.

    :thumbup1:

    Do not count on the sheep dog for protection, he has gotten too fat and lazy and may be in sleeping in the wolves' den.
     
  11. BCFan

    BCFan Active Member

    My friend the International is pushing this thru to gain the Card Check for our new "partner" UPS Freight. Its a bonafied SELL OUT of the "Brown Sheep" General President Hoffa seems to be quick to "bend" us over, (in a manner of speaking). Your Local President has recieved his marching orders from Washington D.C. ,and those orders are very clear..."Let's Get This Contract Ratified!":censored2: BC:thumbup1:(not Billary Clinton)
     
  12. 1timepu

    1timepu Member

    " All the company has to is stop Sub- Contacting on the 29th day and wait a week and startup again" Where did you get this from cus it is not in the contract, if you are giving your opinion then sate that, if you are interputing it then state that!!!!
     
  13. Damok

    Damok Member

    I understand what you meant generally but the way you initially presented it made it sound like there were some people here that you had in mind. My bad if that's not what you meant.
     
  14. pontiac467

    pontiac467 New Member

    it says if the company does not have the equipment or manpower they can use subcontracting for a reasonable start up time of up to 30 days, but the way the company is they will run it 29 days and then stop for a week and then startup again.
     
  15. Coldworld

    Coldworld Well-Known Member

    ponitac, you are so right. Nobody should have a problem with ups taking loads off the trains....there has been lots of problems with the trains being unreliable(thats why fedex ground trucks all their loads). Start up of something can be time consuming, you know train new feeder drivers, hire pkg car drivers from a shrinking pool. But ups finds very "interesting" ways in doing things....look at the split raises. They violate the contract, its not by accident, so the 29 day thing would not surprise me one bit. Its not too much to ask to fix some of the language...make it clearer.
     
  16. trickpony1

    trickpony1 Well-Known Member

    .......if you will read my original post again, SLOWLY, you will see that I stated, "Just my opinion.", although the BA that held the meeting said the same thing. I will try to make my posts more clear and easier to understand in the future.

    It's not beyond my feeder dept to do something like run a load for 29 days and then stop, only to continue a week or so later so they don't have to bid it.
     
  17. trickpony1

    trickpony1 Well-Known Member

    The state adjacent to mine continually runs loads to our hub using contractors. The excuse our dispatcher gives us is, "....they are out of drivers.".
    One can assume one of two things:
    1) God quit making people in the state adjacent to mine or;
    2) the company doesn't feel like exerting themselves and their management team to have a feeder school.
     
  18. pontiac467

    pontiac467 New Member

    i am a feeder driver and i see contractors all the time, more so on wed. I think the way the new contract is you will see more of it and it sucks, im my opinion there will be fewer full time feeder guys hired on, because of the way they will play the game with the new lanuage.
     
  19. Braveheart

    Braveheart New Member

    Hit the nail on the head!!!!

    Art 14 was a good catch!!!!

    Our managers are all bragging about how great the new contract will be for them with regards to contract language changes!!!

    That scares the brown outta me!!!