ethics in management

[soberups]

Originally Posted by tieguy

or so ron told you.

I respect the point that you're still loyal to ronnie's BS after he has been totally discredited at this time.

Ron was full of BS, but I read the contract offer. There was a clause in it that would have allowed unlimited subcontracting at the discretion of the company. This would have rendered all other aspects o the contract irrelevant. If I can find a copy of the proposal I will post a link.

[soberups]

Originally Posted by tieguy

The point still remains that ups spent six billion dollars to fix the CS pension regardless.

When someone steps in to fix a pension I don't think anyone cares that it might help ups's bottom line five years from now. Think about it.

Lord knows the teamsters union was not going to get it fixed.

UPS put up the 6 billion to fix the pension, but it is getting that money back by keeping future part-time hires starting at minimum wage with no benefits. My point was that UPS didnt just cough up 6 bil. in order to "be nice".

[Griff]

Originally Posted by pretzel_man

I think the pay for part timers is poor. I would like it higher.

Where does that money come from?

I find it interesting that you want to take credit for the good pay of full time drivers, but blame UPS for the poor pay of the part timers.

Isn't it all part of the same contract? I guess it wasn't important enough to either side.

P-Man

It's not important to either side because PT employees generally carry around one of two mindsets.

1) I'm just using this as a stepping stone to become <insert higher paying ups job>.

2) I'm just here for the benefits/college reimbursement.

Very rarely will you come across a PT employee who is entrenched in the union culture. A lot of them are transitional workers like college students just looking for beer money. Depending on how strong your local is, you'd be hard pressed to find a PT employee at a union hall meeting.

The squeaky wheel gets the oil and PT'ers don't make any noise.

Soberups couldn't of said it any better than he has in this thread. It speaks volumes about someones critical thinking skills when they personally believe UPS went out of their way to "save their pension". Like soberups said, it was nothing more than a savvy business decision and they will come out on the winning end of it financially. UPS doesn't care about you, your family or your well being (beyond being able to produce for them) -- for anyone to believe otherwise is very sick and twisted. Hourly, management, union or non-union -- it doesn't matter. This is a business and you're just another replaceable cog in the big brown machine like the rest of us, you aren't special.

Edit -- I also feel it's worthy of noting that in my transition from a PT hourly to a FT hourly, I noticed a very large difference in representation and the BA's vested interest. Since my dues are way higher than a PT employee, they seem to care more. Issues that I brought to the table as a PT employee were often put on the back burner and now as a FT driver these issues are placed in the spotlight. I find this practice to be downright criminal and something needs to be done about this.

[1989]

Originally Posted by soberups

UPS put up the 6 billion to fix the pension, but it is getting that money back by keeping future part-time hires starting at minimum wage with no benefits. My point was that UPS didnt just cough up 6 bil. in order to "be nice".

The teamsters sure didn't cough up 6 billion. UPS shouldn't have had to pay anything to fix a problem they offered to fix a decade ago.

[soberups]

Originally Posted by 1989

The teamsters sure didn't cough up 6 billion. UPS shouldn't have had to pay anything to fix a problem they offered to fix a decade ago.

Their proposed "fix" for the problem a decade ago would have been to allow unlimited subcontracting and turn UPS into a non-union company. No union=no pension. Problem solved.
I agree that Central States needed to be saved...my only point is that it shouldnt be done on the backs of part-time employees who havent even been hired yet. I voted "no" on this contract, I felt that the cost should be borne by the current, highest-paid membership.
The Pension Reform Act of 2008 is what forced UPS to confront this issue....it had absolutely nothing to do with generosity or compassion. The fund was over 6 billion in the hole. The money had to come from somewhere. UPS cut a check, but the part-timers of the future are the ones who are really paying the bill.

[1989]

Originally Posted by soberups

Their proposed "fix" for the problem a decade ago would have been to allow unlimited subcontracting and turn UPS into a non-union company. No union=no pension. Problem solved.
I agree that Central States needed to be saved...my only point is that it shouldnt be done on the backs of part-time employees who havent even been hired yet. I voted "no" on this contract, I felt that the cost should be borne by the current, highest-paid membership.
The Pension Reform Act of 2008 is what forced UPS to confront this issue....it had absolutely nothing to do with generosity or compassion. The fund was over 6 billion in the hole. The money had to come from somewhere. UPS cut a check, but the part-timers of the future are the ones who are really paying the bill.

Sub-contrating feeder runs is a different issue than the pension problem. Maybe the teamsters should have had to pay the difference between the cost of getting out in 1997 and getting out now. Do you think the burden should have been on all full timers or just the ones in the central states? Such in life, the unborn has no say on their future or possible future.

[soberups]

Originally Posted by 1989

Sub-contrating feeder runs is a different issue than the pension problem. Maybe the teamsters should have had to pay the difference between the cost of getting out in 1997 and getting out now. Do you think the burden should have been on all full timers or just the ones in the central states? Such in life, the unborn has no say on their future or possible future.

The '97 proposal would have allowed unlimited subcontracting in packages as well as feeder. UPS would have "bought out" the pension, only to eliminate all union employees and replace them with fedex ground-style independent contractors with no pensions at all.
As to your second question; the burden of buying out Central States should have been on ALL fulltimers nationwide, myself included. As a bargaining unit we are only as strong as our weakest link. I am in the Western Conference, my pension is in good shape, but only if we can continue to bargain effectively on a nationwide basis.
Do some reearch. Learn the facts. The 6 billion buyout from UPS wasnt charity. It was part of an overall economic equation, no different from any other contract we have ever negotiated....except the people who are really getting hosed havent been hired yet.

[satellitedriver]

Originally Posted by soberups

UPS's first "offer" in 1997, if taken would have allowed unlimited subcontracting at the discretion of the company. You wouldnt have a pension, because you wouldnt have a job.

Sober up, soberups.
No where in the contract offer in 97' did it give Ups "unlimited" subcontracting rights.
You use this term in all your posts in this thread and it is false.
I lost 60% of my pension since 97' under The teamster/cs plan.
Ups brought the amount back to 100% of what the teamsters promised 11 years ago.
I still have my job, without the teamsters help.
It is called doing the job you are paid to do.

[soberups]

Originally Posted by satellitedriver

Sober up, soberups.

I lost 60% of my pension since 97' under The teamster/cs plan.
Ups brought the amount back to 100% of what the teamsters promised 11 years ago.
I still have my job, without the teamsters help.
It is called doing the job you are paid to do.

No, the part-timers who havent been hired yet are the ones who are bringing your pension back up. UPS cut a check for $6 billion to comply with the Pension Reform Act of 2008. That 6 billion is coming from somewhere. It isnt charity, it isnt a "gift".
You have seniority, you have a pension, you have job security and bidding rights because of yor labor agreement. Ask a FedEx Ground or DHL driver about seniority or bidding rights sometime.

[1989]

Originally Posted by soberups

The '97 proposal would have allowed unlimited subcontracting in packages as well as feeder. UPS would have "bought out" the pension, only to eliminate all union employees and replace them with fedex ground-style independent contractors with no pensions at all.
As to your second question; the burden of buying out Central States should have been on ALL fulltimers nationwide, myself included. As a bargaining unit we are only as strong as our weakest link. I am in the Western Conference, my pension is in good shape, but only if we can continue to bargain effectively on a nationwide basis.
Do some reearch. Learn the facts. The 6 billion buyout from UPS wasnt charity. It was part of an overall economic equation, no different from any other contract we have ever negotiated....except the people who are really getting hosed havent been hired yet.

Not true, there was a pension in 97 and no subcontracting in package. At least in the western confrence.

[1989]

Originally Posted by soberups

No, the part-timers who havent been hired yet are the ones who are bringing your pension back up. UPS cut a check for $6 billion to comply with the Pension Reform Act of 2008. That 6 billion is coming from somewhere. It isnt charity, it isnt a "gift".
You have seniority, you have a pension, you have job security and bidding rights because of yor labor agreement. Ask a FedEx Ground or DHL driver about seniority or bidding rights sometime.

If ups got out in 97 they wouldn't have had to spend 6 billion, it would have been a much lower amount. Shareholders took a burden for the 6 billion. That's why this years PE is 225. Where I'm from dhl drivers are teamsters and they have a better pension than us

[Brown Dog]

I have found a majority of my CMs, DMs, and supes to be lacking in ethics and generally disrespectfull and unappreciative. A few(in my 28 years) have been totally upstanding and ethical. I've also found some of my hourly coworkers to be unethical, BUT, in reverse proportion. I take it all in stride. Whether or not a "boss" is ethical or not is not as importent as how I let it affect me. Do I sink to their level, or do I continue to do what I know to be true and correct. ass bosses will come and go but I have to look myself in the mirror every morning and hold ME accountable for my actions. I understand my job is to "work as directed" Sometimes I don't like or agree with the directives or who is dictating them. Doesn't matter, I accept. I also accept my pay, vacations, and pension. I'm not in Central states, but I'm glad my "brothers" in central states have their pension restored. It was the right thing to do. We are all in this together, we might as well do the best we can.

[705red]

Originally Posted by satellitedriver

Sorry to disagree with your opinion.
Carey engineered the strike, to try and combat the power struggle between himself and Hoffa.
He was up against a possible no confidence vote by the union and by an investigation by the government of trading union money to the democratic campaign for a donation to his election fund.
Ups's first offer, if taken, would have avoided the huge bale out that UPS had to supply to Central States to keep our pension solvent.
Thank you UPS, for to be willing to expense 6 billion dollars to protect my pension.
The CEO of UPS had to sign off on that amount of money.
What did the union have to sign off?
Jack, nada, nothing.
I know I am going to catch some heat for this post, but UPS saved my pension and I am grateful .

Of course you grateful to ups, thats because none of your fellow drivers will talk to you for stabbing them in the back and scabbing.

Originally Posted by UPS Lifer

How do you screw some one that isn't hired yet?

The intent of the contract is designed for those folks who can vote at the time there is an offer.

If you hire on after the contract has been implemented you accept the terms of the contract. You are not getting screwed if you decide to work here. You make a conscience decision to accept the job. You can go elsewhere if you don't like the contract.

Lifer if every contract screwed the unborn at the time of signing none of us would be were we are at today. Its called taking a stand for the future something todays union members cant grasp. Most of todays unionized members are out for themselves and dont care about the sacrafices others have made to benefit them. Sad.

Originally Posted by wannabeups

Amen the Union sold out the part-timers. It is a clear case of people thinking only of themselves.

Everyone that didnt take the time to vote sold everyone else out. If your not happy with something than vote no, but when a contract is voted on by the members and agreed to by those same members its the membership that sold out and the blame does not lie alone with the teamsters. I will agree the ptimers have been screwed in recent past contracts, in 97 they received the first starting raise in 15 years but in the last two more should have been done.

Originally Posted by tieguy

or so ron told you.

I respect the point that you're still loyal to ronnie's BS after he has been totally discredited at this time.

NOT GUILTY TIE!

Originally Posted by 1989

Not true, there was a pension in 97 and no subcontracting in package. At least in the western confrence.

When did you start with ups? I have a feeling that you were not here than. But you find it necessary to question others who went 17 to 19 days without pay to stand up for what we believed than and what we believe now. Do you understand that you probably have your fulltime driving job because of our sacrafice? We refused to settle for less and we won tens of thousands of new jobs just from that job action. No need to thank us for it we were looking out for future ups teamsters the problem is these new upsers are only looking out for themselves. By the way im now ftime because of that strike and i will never forget the ftimers that helped us ptimers and i will never forget were i came from (ptime).

[705red]

Originally Posted by 1989

If ups got out in 97 they wouldn't have had to spend 6 billion, it would have been a much lower amount. Shareholders took a burden for the 6 billion. That's why this years PE is 225. Where I'm from dhl drivers are teamsters and they have a better pension than us

I dont work for the shareholders and neither do you. What local are you in and what local does dhl belong to, we can look up the pensions to prove your statement.

I get a better pension than my fellow dhlers in local 705 so i find it hard to believe.

[satellitedriver]

Originally Posted by soberups

No, the part-timers who havent been hired yet are the ones who are bringing your pension back up. UPS cut a check for $6 billion to comply with the Pension Reform Act of 2008. That 6 billion is coming from somewhere. It isnt charity, it isnt a "gift".
You have seniority, you have a pension, you have job security and bidding rights because of yor labor agreement. Ask a FedEx Ground or DHL driver about seniority or bidding rights sometime.

Huh?
I will not waste my time trying to explain how wrong you are and how little you know of the subject.
The only labor agreement I entered into was with UPS,and we have both met our agreement.
I work and they pay me.
I have worked at UPS for over 2 decades and that is how I gained seniority.
I could care less about people that haven't even been hired yet.
Please, spare me from hearing that I would not have what I have, if it wasn't for the union.
You might need the teamsters, but I do not.

[satellitedriver]

[quote=705red;327007] Of course you grateful to ups, thats because none of your fellow drivers will talk to you for stabbing them in the back and scabbing.
Red, what crystal ball you have been looking into, to see who will talk to me?
You might polish it up and look again.
You are incorrect about the way I get along with my fellow drivers.
I am grateful to UPS, for allowing me to earn a paycheck.
I was stabbed in the back in 97' and it wasn't by UPS.

[trplnkl]

Originally Posted by satellitedriver

Huh?
I will not waste my time trying to explain how wrong you are and how little you know of the subject.
The only labor agreement I entered into was with UPS,and we have both met our agreement.
I work and they pay me.
I have worked at UPS for over 2 decades and that is how I gained seniority.
I could care less about people that haven't even been hired yet.
Please, spare me from hearing that I would not have what I have, if it wasn't for the union.
You might need the teamsters, but I do not.

Having grown up it Texas (a right to work State) my first experience with unions was when I started with UPS. My first three years was as a non-union clerk working in the office, I did my job and went home. I did however keep