Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Is there anybody at the wheel at UPS that can pay attention to the real world?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="PobreCarlos" data-source="post: 543782" data-attributes="member: 16651"><p>dannyboy;</p><p> </p><p>In response to your claim of....</p><p> </p><p>"You still have not responded to the statement I made that clearly showed UPS did what you said they can not"</p><p> </p><p>....I tried real hard to find just where in this thread you made such a "statement"..... and the best I could do find was find - buried in the grass of a multiple-quotation reply - a QUESTION (not a "statement", mind you) that was far from "clear" in referencing the topic, namely your....</p><p> </p><p>"Did the union negotiate with UPS to allow them to give out bonuses to part timers that stayed more than 60 days?"</p><p> </p><p>Tell me, is a question your idea of a "clear statement"? And, in that fertile brain of yours, does a question "clearly show" the validity of something? If so, I think I understand the comprehension problem here.</p><p> </p><p>Of course, later on - after demanding that I respond to your clear "statement", you mutated your question into a less-than-clear actual "statement" of sorts, in which you said....</p><p> </p><p>"They gave out expensive "retention bonuses" to those part timers that stayed more than 60 days. Was not negotiated by the union. The current employees were not eligible, only the new guys."</p><p> </p><p>..and then when your credibility (or, rather, lack of) was pointed out to you, mutated THAT vagary a bit more into.....</p><p> </p><p>"But try on UPS giving new employees new dell computers if they stay for more than 60 days. Oh my God, that's not in the contract, the union did not agree to that incentive, so UPS cant. But they did and I believe still are."</p><p> </p><p>...which provides us with just a WHOLE lot of knowledge; i.e. - what you "believe". One might start out with the standard questions of "who", "what", "where", and "when". But let's step beyond that; tell me, Sport, if the union did NOT "agree to that incentive" as you claim, then it logically follows that it DISAGREED with it. You aware of such disagreement, are ya'? And are you also aware of ALL agreements the company negotiated - formally and informally - with the union? (which, in terms of the company's participation, means the the union's duly authorized representatives)? Those were questions, my friend. By way of comparison, here's a "statement". To wit: take it to the bank that you are NOT aware of all that is "agreed" to.</p><p> </p><p>Now that's a "statement". Nothing equivocating or cowardly about it. Now, here's another...a repetition of a previous one I made. I.e. - you've shown that you essentially don't know your a__ from a whole in the ground, and that you have no compulsion against being dishonest about what you do "know". As for it being a "clear statement", I think your own posts make show just how "clear" it is. As for "coward"...well, just who's more cowardly than some bozo who seems to shade the truth as rapidly as you choose to? Take a little too much courage to actually speak with a measure of HONESTY does it, "danny"?</p><p> </p><p>Lastly, in response to your comment of "Thats [sic] the liberal way", I take it that you don't know your a__ from a hole in the ground when it comes to political characterizations either, 'eh? But I appreciate someone backhandedly referencing me as a "liberal". I suspect there's a few here (and on other forums) who would get a real kick out of that appellation. Some of them might actually be laughing their butts off at it now. "PobreCarlos"...a "liberal". [smile...and just a few minutes ago, on another forum, I was told I was an "extreme reactionary right-winger"]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PobreCarlos, post: 543782, member: 16651"] dannyboy; In response to your claim of.... "You still have not responded to the statement I made that clearly showed UPS did what you said they can not" ....I tried real hard to find just where in this thread you made such a "statement"..... and the best I could do find was find - buried in the grass of a multiple-quotation reply - a QUESTION (not a "statement", mind you) that was far from "clear" in referencing the topic, namely your.... "Did the union negotiate with UPS to allow them to give out bonuses to part timers that stayed more than 60 days?" Tell me, is a question your idea of a "clear statement"? And, in that fertile brain of yours, does a question "clearly show" the validity of something? If so, I think I understand the comprehension problem here. Of course, later on - after demanding that I respond to your clear "statement", you mutated your question into a less-than-clear actual "statement" of sorts, in which you said.... "They gave out expensive "retention bonuses" to those part timers that stayed more than 60 days. Was not negotiated by the union. The current employees were not eligible, only the new guys." ..and then when your credibility (or, rather, lack of) was pointed out to you, mutated THAT vagary a bit more into..... "But try on UPS giving new employees new dell computers if they stay for more than 60 days. Oh my God, that's not in the contract, the union did not agree to that incentive, so UPS cant. But they did and I believe still are." ...which provides us with just a WHOLE lot of knowledge; i.e. - what you "believe". One might start out with the standard questions of "who", "what", "where", and "when". But let's step beyond that; tell me, Sport, if the union did NOT "agree to that incentive" as you claim, then it logically follows that it DISAGREED with it. You aware of such disagreement, are ya'? And are you also aware of ALL agreements the company negotiated - formally and informally - with the union? (which, in terms of the company's participation, means the the union's duly authorized representatives)? Those were questions, my friend. By way of comparison, here's a "statement". To wit: take it to the bank that you are NOT aware of all that is "agreed" to. Now that's a "statement". Nothing equivocating or cowardly about it. Now, here's another...a repetition of a previous one I made. I.e. - you've shown that you essentially don't know your a__ from a whole in the ground, and that you have no compulsion against being dishonest about what you do "know". As for it being a "clear statement", I think your own posts make show just how "clear" it is. As for "coward"...well, just who's more cowardly than some bozo who seems to shade the truth as rapidly as you choose to? Take a little too much courage to actually speak with a measure of HONESTY does it, "danny"? Lastly, in response to your comment of "Thats [sic] the liberal way", I take it that you don't know your a__ from a hole in the ground when it comes to political characterizations either, 'eh? But I appreciate someone backhandedly referencing me as a "liberal". I suspect there's a few here (and on other forums) who would get a real kick out of that appellation. Some of them might actually be laughing their butts off at it now. "PobreCarlos"...a "liberal". [smile...and just a few minutes ago, on another forum, I was told I was an "extreme reactionary right-winger"] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Is there anybody at the wheel at UPS that can pay attention to the real world?
Top