Local 177 members and other locals that voted down supplements need to know this.

opie

Well-Known Member
There's a rumor on the Vote No on UPS Contract Facebook page, that hall will be at the Edison hub tomorrow morning.
 

brownone

Well-Known Member
You believe? So... you're not sure? I know some who are certain that we got no more than was first offered. Regardless, the circumstances are entirely different, your representative shook hands and agreed to the deal, in '97 this never happened. Strike fund? How about new career path, after we go on strike about half of the no voters will no longer have a job at UPS.

If there is a strike there will be no Teamsters returning to deliver packages, it will be a non-union work force. UPS if it survives will be 60% the size of the current company.
 

kingOFchester

Well-Known Member
Spoke to my locals Recording Secretary and Secretary-Treasurer today.

I was told, as we all suspected, that the Teamcare is a done deal, and will not be addressed in the supplement.

I am sorry to see that this is the way it played out, but with that, I am willing to admit defeat.

Time to unite with the majority, and accept the master. That said, I hope this is a good opportunity for our local to address seniority issues in regards to PT's going full time, and other issues.
 

BrownBrokeDown

Well-Known Member
UPS can't fill spots quickly any more.

I have never worked at a job that had 10% of the turnover that my shift at the local hub has. It is quite a bit worse then it was 3 years ago, too. As loaders go, 3 years ago the average tenure was probably about a year, now it is more like 4 months. In my area, the most senior loader has less than 6 months. The majority have quit, not went to other areas/ft.
 

brown_trousers

Well-Known Member
Strike fund? How about new career path, after we go on strike about half of the no voters will no longer have a job at UPS.

Very correct! It would be extremely irresponsible to vote yes to strike in this economic situation, knowing you will be voting for hundreds of fellow teamster to go unemployed, foreclose on their houses, declare bankruptcy, etc....

It was a different situation in 97 (so ive been told) as it did not result in losing massive market share and mass lay-offs.

I would never wish (or vote) unemployment upon my fellow teamsters by voting yes to a strike knowing full well of the lay-offs that would ensue. In the end it would only possibly save a couple thousand a year in healthcare at the expense of kicking my coworkers to the unemployment line
 
Top