Offical Post! What Behind The Numbers!

[tourists24]

What control???? Taking the pensions out of multi empolyer pension plans is GOOD, I could CARE LESS for other teamsters for other companys, and if you think that UPS has control, you are misinformed both the Teamsters and UPS will over see the pensions,

If you think 6 Billion to bail out the CS, which by the way went to Las Vegas courtesy of Jimmy Hoffa sr, and the money $32hr after 5 years take home 1,000 dollars for a 40hr work week, and to KEEP PACE as u say we would need ONE MORE RAISE FOR 45 CENTS to keep pace? so you tell me you want to vote this down for 45 cents????????? I vote yes cus to me it aint worth 45 cents and my Pension wont get reduced and I dont have to pay for healthcare

First of all, it still gives UPS more control than they had. Second, we just differ on what voting "yes" or "no" is worth. Ive been around long enough to know that we dont deserve to take a step back on pay when we dont have to. Admittedly, its a tough call because they did put up a lot of money, but we ARE taking a step back if we accept the a smaller raise.

 

[1989]

Well now I feel much better...lol

Doesnt change the fact that I think we deserve the same raises that we've been getting.

If you didn't strike in "97 in order to bury your pension in the future. UPS would have saved maybe 2 or 3 billion maybe even more and there would be more money for your raises. (in 1997 thru 2000 it was a .60 raise and .70 in 2001)

 

[1timepu]

First of all, it still gives UPS more control than they had. Second, we just differ on what voting "yes" or "no" is worth. Ive been around long enough to know that we dont deserve to take a step back on pay when we dont have to. Admittedly, its a tough call because they did put up a lot of money, but we ARE taking a step back if we accept the a smaller raise.

So what do u suggest?????? It takes 45 more cents 1 year raise per hr to bring to even pay raise for last contract, U tell me it is worth it alone on this issue to vote no, if you say yes I would like to see yur financial statement which is probably a mess

 

[80GRAND]

If you didn't strike in "97 in order to bury your pension in the future. UPS would have saved maybe 2 or 3 billion maybe even more and there would be more money for your raises. (in 1997 thru 2000 it was a .60 raise and .70 in 2001)

hey 1989 do the math! the raises were mor 10 years ago!!!!

1st year .46
2nd year .48
3rd year .48
4th year .52
5th year .57
new raises!! the truth behind the mess!

 

[1timepu]

First of all, it still gives UPS more control than they had. Second, we just differ on what voting "yes" or "no" is worth. Ive been around long enough to know that we dont deserve to take a step back on pay when we dont have to. Admittedly, its a tough call because they did put up a lot of money, but we ARE taking a step back if we accept the a smaller raise.

So what do u suggest?????? It takes 45 more cents 1 year raise per hr to bring to even pay raise for last contract, U tell me it is worth it alone on this issue to vote no, if you say yes I would like to see yur financial statement which is probably a mess, "it still gives UPS more control"? is this a fact or opinion? if a fact Back it up, I know the answer, but I am guessing you dont

 

[BUSCRUNCHER]

But was that raise a partial raise for 6 months and the rest 6 months later NO big difference saying you are getting a .70 cent raise when that is not factual at least for a full year. You might not think it is much but take the .35 cent that UPS is not paying for 6 months multiply it at 40 hours a week by 230,000 employee's for 6 months, it you want to call that CHUMP change than you are exactly the kind of employee UPS is looking for brain dead and unablr to figure things out on your own. Think about it they are making big money off our so called raise, do you think we will see any of it hell no.

Hell you might as well come in 2 hours early sort your truck, work through your lunch, and help them save even more money.

VOTE NO NO NO NO

 

[80GRAND]

i Just Got My T Shirts Printed Up!
vote No!!!!
7.99 Shipped On Ebay!!!!
will Have It On !! So All U Runners! Stop Loading Ur Trucks When I Walk In At Start Time!
and Buy A Shirt!

 

[1989]

hey 1989 do the math! the raises were mor 10 years ago!!!!

1st year .46
2nd year .48
3rd year .48
4th year .52
5th year .57
new raises!! the truth behind the mess!

Yes, but UPS has greater costs now too. I would have no raises to secure peoples pension. The cs doesn't even affect me. Be a team player once in a while. Look at the big picture.

 

[BUSCRUNCHER]

So what do u suggest?????? It takes 45 more cents 1 year raise per hr to bring to even pay raise for last contract, U tell me it is worth it alone on this issue to vote no, if you say yes I would like to see yur financial statement which is probably a mess, "it still gives UPS more control"? is this a fact or opinion? if a fact Back it up, I know the answer, but I am guessing you dont

Not alone there are a few more, including what is happening to the part time workers who are getting screwed even worse.

1. 12 months for benifits, 18 months for family members.
2. Increased progression time for top rate
3. partial pay raises give in 6 months intervals (who thought of this)
4. UPS gaining partial control of pension plan ( think hard on that )
5. Minimum wage locked in till 2013 ( long time )

These are just a few the International Reps could have done better on some of these. Example would have been for partial pay raises over 6 months they could have gone for decreasing the progression for top rate instead of increasing it. Think of the hell the NEW HIRE package car drivers are going to catch for three years.

 

[tourists24]

So what do u suggest?????? It takes 45 more cents 1 year raise per hr to bring to even pay raise for last contract, U tell me it is worth it alone on this issue to vote no, if you say yes I would like to see yur financial statement which is probably a mess, "it still gives UPS more control"? is this a fact or opinion? if a fact Back it up, I know the answer, but I am guessing you dont

You can sugarcoat this all you want and I will say "yes" that I think we deserve the raises. It's called taking a stand on right and wrong and I say we in no way deserve to be getting smaller raises in this contract when UPS can afford it. Nowhere have I said that the pension parts are horrible but YES the raise offers are worth voting no. Nothing wrong with my financial statements. You sound like an angry one to me. If you want to accept the contract the way it is then fine, vote yes and take the raise UPS is offering. If you win, I'll buy you a beer and we can still be friends...lol

 

[satellitedriver]

hey 1989 a secure pension is not enough if the new hires will not be able to make seniority because of the new 60 working day period!

also 3 years is a long time to busy ur butt everyday just so u can support a family! so in that case a secure pension is out of the window! and not enough

If someone can't cut it for 60 days and prove their lasting power in 3 years, then they never will be able to secure themselves a 25 year pension.
I guess you just want the money upfront and promise the company you will stick around to fullfill your obligation.

 

[satellitedriver]

i Just Got My T Shirts Printed Up!
vote No!!!!
7.99 Shipped On Ebay!!!!
will Have It On !! So All U Runners! Stop Loading Ur Trucks When I Walk In At Start Time!
and Buy A Shirt!

I'll buy one, if it says vote no to Hillary.
By the way do you ship via UPS or the US mail?

 

[govols019]

it is the other ventures like Logistics, International, and freight and customs and others which are making the big profits for UPS,

OK, prove that statement. I want to see facts and figures from a respectable source.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

If someone can't cut it for 60 days and prove their lasting power in 3 years, then they never will be able to secure themselves a 25 year pension.
I guess you just want the money upfront and promise the company you will stick around to fullfill your obligation.

What I'm wondering is what will happen if a part-timer has already completed a 30 day qualification under the current contract and goes full-time under the proposed contract. Will that 30 days count towards the new 60 day requirement? I wonder if this was thought of during the negotiations?

 

[outamyway]

What I'm wondering is what will happen if a part-timer has already completed a 30 day qualification under the current contract and goes full-time under the proposed contract. Will that 30 days count towards the new 60 day requirement? I wonder if this was thought of during the negotiations?

Lets just hope the make it 30 days.

 

[1timepu]

OK, prove that statement. I want to see facts and figures from a respectable source.

Goto your human resources office ask for financial's for company especially the domestic package division. wait let me guess you dont trust the company you work for rite??? so exactly where could you get this info then??????

 

[1timepu]

Company should have just gave raises of $2.00, $2.25, $2.50, $2.75 and $3.00 per hr over life of contract, would've been cheeper. It seems the only item 80grand and company look at is hrly wage.

You must be on Crack, never had raises like that

 

[pkg-king]

hey 1989 a secure pension is not enough if the new hires will not be able to make seniority because of the new 60 working day period!

also 3 years is a long time to busy ur butt everyday just so u can support a family! so in that case a secure pension is out of the window! and not enough

I hate to sound selfish but...as a 20 year employee this really doesn't affect me.

 

[pkg-king]

I'll buy one, if it says vote no to Hillary.
By the way do you ship via UPS or the US mail?

Definately vote NO to Hillary...it's a no-brainer

 

[1timepu]

I hate to sound selfish but...as a 20 year employee this really doesn't affect me.

Looks like the Part timers are going to sell us out, they cant get it through their thick heads that a part time job you wont get rich on, but they want to ruin what might lay down the road for them and ruin the pension system including thiers