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
UPS debt?
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="JonFrum" data-source="post: 855148" data-attributes="member: 18044"><p>I was responding to several things you said in this thread. Go back and read what you said.</p><p></p><p>The Arbitration was over the lack of creation of 2000 jobs in the first Contract Year, not the whole 10,000.</p><p></p><p>Like I said, the "reduction in volume, causing layoffs" language was a big issue in both the 1993 and 1997 negotiations. In fact, the 1993 jobs wern't created until the end of that Contract, and only after an Unfair Labor Practice charge was filed against UPS.</p><p></p><p>I tried to post the Arbitrator's decision so everyone could read for themselves, but the Browncafe rules won't allow a 113kb HTML file attachment. I can't accurately summarize 34 screenfuls of text in one post. Post an email address and I'll send you a copy.</p><p></p><p>The Arbitrator's discussion about volume reduction and layoffs starts in <u>1993</u> and continues on from there. (This doesn't necessarily mean volume was <u>always</u> down; just that it was an ongoing topic of discussion in both negotiations, and cited as an ongoing excuse for delay in creating the agreed upon jobs.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JonFrum, post: 855148, member: 18044"] I was responding to several things you said in this thread. Go back and read what you said. The Arbitration was over the lack of creation of 2000 jobs in the first Contract Year, not the whole 10,000. Like I said, the "reduction in volume, causing layoffs" language was a big issue in both the 1993 and 1997 negotiations. In fact, the 1993 jobs wern't created until the end of that Contract, and only after an Unfair Labor Practice charge was filed against UPS. I tried to post the Arbitrator's decision so everyone could read for themselves, but the Browncafe rules won't allow a 113kb HTML file attachment. I can't accurately summarize 34 screenfuls of text in one post. Post an email address and I'll send you a copy. The Arbitrator's discussion about volume reduction and layoffs starts in [U]1993[/U] and continues on from there. (This doesn't necessarily mean volume was [U]always[/U] down; just that it was an ongoing topic of discussion in both negotiations, and cited as an ongoing excuse for delay in creating the agreed upon jobs.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
UPS debt?
Top