UPS has not dropped the 30/60/90 requirement for employees 3/28/13

[realbrown1]

We gained some 22.3 jobs. Lost some volume. Delayed alot of people from going full-time for years, myself included. Most of the customers came back eventually but I'm afraid they'd be less forgiving a second time around. Our services are vital to so many opperations, I just pray for a contract that we can agree on.

What about your pension? Glad mine in not in UPS's hands.

 

[Atomic_Smurf]

Do you donate to any charities to help out the disadvantaged? Just because I have excellent benefits doesn't mean I'll snub my nose at the less fortunate. I have been paying taxes in WI for years to support Badger Care long before Obamacare was passed. Quite a few families that work at Walmart are enrolled under the program. Why don't they cover their own employees instead of pushing them on to the tax payers?

Yes I do & yes they should(wal-mart), however union people weren't supporting Obamacare because it was the charitable thing to do. Instead I believe it was a blind loyalty to the party that is "supposed" to support unions along with the endorsement of our union leaders. The union I've always known sought better wages, better benefits & better, safe working conditions than non-union workers. Seems that a lot of Teamsters attitudes toward our healthcare is evolving from "Obamacare wont affect us" to "Well, at least it's for a good cause". Unfortunately Obamacare isn't going to help people as much as it's going to hurt them. Obamacare leaves a "loophole" for companies like Wal-Mart to continue not providing insurance for some of it's employees. They can either cut their hours back, or pay a 4% penalty. When the employee still has no insurance Obamacare mandates that individual to either purchase it or pay a fine for not having it. Personally I prefer the good old fashion charitable route. Thanks for doing your part.

 

[balland chain]

The deal is, as it seems, we are going to get screwed either way.. This sucks ! The Union needs to make the insurance issue a strike issue. I read another post about the potential problems if the union controls our healthcare.. It said, in a nutshell, that if the Union has control of the insurance they can make any changes they want with out a vote by the members. I believe that would be a hugh mistake on our part. Giving them our insurance with out any guarantee in writing, or no repercussions if they make changes ( and they will) will make our insurance even worse than what it currently is. I would rather the company come out with a realistic amount for us to pay as opposed to the union taking it over.... just my opinion...

 

[mamirk69]

I am curious to how much do a part time supervisor, full time supervisor, and a manager pay for their insurance and the difference in coverage compared to this garbage they are offering us now so I can truely see a difference?

 

[BrownTie]

For Example: FT Supervisor for a family of 4 will pay between
$375-400 a month. That is with $15 co pay and only 80% is covered. 20% is out of pocket..

 

[Catatonic]

For Example: FT Supervisor for a family of 4 will pay between
$375-400 a month. That is with $15 co pay and only 80% is covered. 20% is out of pocket..

More info to the above - First 500 is 100 percent by employee and then after $5000, insurance covers 100%.
Rx are around 20% by employee and there is no limit.

Can somebody verify all this?

 

[Wally]

Wouldn't it be better to take less of a raise, if it came to that, vs paying for insurance? You pay less tax that way.

 

[BrownTie]

More info to the above - First 500 is 100 percent by employee and then after $5000, insurance covers 100%.
Rx are around 20% by employee and there is no limit.

Can somebody verify all this?

Hoaxster: The example is from 1 plan UPS provided to Management. It could be different State to State whether they have Kaiser and other HMO choices. We were provided with three choices, Kaiser and two HMO. One HMO would be like your example and the other like my example and Kaiser.

 

[The Other Side]

Hoaxster: The example is from 1 plan UPS provided to Management. It could be different State to State whether they have Kaiser and other HMO choices. We were provided with three choices, Kaiser and two HMO. One HMO would be like your example and the other like my example and Kaiser.

KAISER?

You'd be better operating on yourselves.

Peace

TOS

 

[LongTimeComing]

Hoaxter is close enough considering the variables. But for hard numbers....When I was a PT sup with the Traditional (read: expensive) PPO health care option, I was paying $72 a week for me, wife, and baby. The deductibles were $500 per person, $3000 out of pocket max, 85% coinsurance, prescriptions that ignore deductible, etc etc.

In comparison, the Healthy Savings option for me + family is something like $16 a week....terrible deductibles....like $6000 out of pocket max...and the family deductible had to be met before any coinsurance was paid....perscriptions are subject to the deductible...blah blah blah. Pretty wretched plan, basically. Only benefit is the savings on the premium from week to week.

Both plans are hardly anything to write home about. I'm certain that even if this contract requires teamsters to pay, the plans themselves will still be tons better than what we have to deal with.

 

[Atomic_Smurf]

Wouldn't it be better to take less of a raise, if it came to that, vs paying for insurance? You pay less tax that way.

I think so, but as Obamacare is implemented the redistribution of the healthcare that we earn as a part of our compensation, is inevitable.