ethics in management

[1989]

Originally Posted by 705red

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.

I was in 174 for 13 years (between 1989 and 2006)red...I walked the picket line and got my $300 a week strike from our srike fund...Funny thing is, that $300 was almost what I was making driving at the time.

[satellitedriver]

Originally Posted by 705red

You have your land and your house because of the teamster negioated contract that was bargained on all of our behalf. You are out for only yourself and thats fine, as a steward i have to defend your rights under the contract but as a fellow man i would walk over your dying body if you laid in the street in front of me. I mean that whole heartly!

Red,
I paid for my land before I worked at UPS.
I designed and built my home.
Drove nails, laid tile, moved dirt and what ever else it took, until 2:00am and got up at 5:45 am, to drive a 110 mile commute to work a full day at UPS.
I never missed a work day in 21 1/2 yrs.
Can you say the same?(nope)
Your contract had Jack to do with my land and home.

So, if you think you can punk me with your rhetoric about walking over me, then you better be very tall, because I am still standing.
I would never ask, or depend on, someone like you to defend me.
You have never stood on your own two feet earning a living without a union to keep you propped up.
I have.
My work record at UPS is my defense, if that isn't good enough, I will move along with no regrets.
In closing,
If you see me dying on the street, Red, I would advise you to stay away from me as far as possible.
Never know what one will do in dying tremors.

[satellitedriver]

Originally Posted by govols019

If you were terminated by UPS for what you felt were unwarranted reasons would you employ Teamster representation or just leave?

I would mount my own defense without the unions help.
There are other legal avenues.

[soberups]

Originally Posted by satellitedriver

I would never ask, or depend on, someone like you to defend me.
You have never stood on your own two feet earning a living without a union to keep you propped up.
I have.
My work record at UPS is my defense, if that isn't good enough, I will move along with no regrets.
.

I have no doubt that you are a man of many skills, and could probably earn a good living elswhere.
Your work record may indeed be admirable, but it has nothing at all to do with the wages, benefits and seniority you have. Those are all defined in the collective bargaining agreement.
The people who proclaim that "the union does nothing for me" conveniently overlook the fact that union-negotiated wages and benefits are the reason they sought employment at UPS to begin with.
If you feel I am wrong, then try this simple test; go down to the local DHL of FedEx hub, apply for a job, and tell them that you feel you should make a full UPS wage simply because of your "work record". Let us know how it goes....

[soberups]

Originally Posted by satellitedriver

I would mount my own defense without the unions help.
There are other legal avenues.

The company has unlimited resources to hire attorneys. You, on the other hand, don't....especially when you have been terminated.
For that matter, a non-union company doesnt have to fire you, they can just lay you off indefinately. "Seniority" is a contractually negotiated benefit, not a legal right.

[satellitedriver]

Originally Posted by soberups

I have no doubt that you are a man of many skills, and could probably earn a good living elswhere.
Your work record may indeed be admirable, but it has nothing at all to do with the wages, benefits and seniority you have. Those are all defined in the collective bargaining agreement.
The people who proclaim that "the union does nothing for me" conveniently overlook the fact that union-negotiated wages and benefits are the reason they sought employment at UPS to begin with.
If you feel I am wrong, then try this simple test; go down to the local DHL of FedEx hub, apply for a job, and tell them that you feel you should make a full UPS wage because of your work record. Let us know how it goes....

When I applied and hired in at UPS in 1986, I had no idea they were union.
It wasn't a criteria for me.
It still isn't.
You are not wrong about the majority, but you are wrong about my actions.

[soberups]

Originally Posted by satellitedriver

When I applied and hired in at UPS in 1986, I had no idea they were union.
It wasn't a criteria for me.
It still isn't.
You are not wrong about the majority, but you are wrong about my actions.

When I applied and was hired in at UPS in 1987, I had no idea they were union either. It wasn't a criteria for me.
It is now, because when I look at other jobs in the industry it is obvious that the huge discrepancy in wages and benefits is due to the labor agreement. I am not naive enough to think that UPS chooses to pay me what they do simply because they like me and my work ethic.

[wannabeups]

Originally Posted by satellitedriver

I would mount my own defense without the unions help.
There are other legal avenues.

I kind of agree with you satellite driver, The more business dealings I have with Local 41 in Kansas City, the more convinced I am that it is only about the select few in the union.

[tieguy]

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".

even if thats true and only time will tell it does not negate the point that ups saved that pension fund.

[tieguy]

Originally Posted by soberups

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.

i'd be interested to see it.my copies didn't have any changes to the subcontracting language.

[tieguy]

Originally Posted by 1989

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

Agreed. what you're saying when you say UPS asked for unlimited subcontracting is that ups asked to dissolve the union.

no need to use union labor if you have unlimited subcontracting.

If you make the argument that ups is smart enough to spend the six billion for the CS pension plan to save or make money later then you have to agree that the same level of intelligence would have prevented them from asking for unlimited subcontracting.

[tieguy]

Originally Posted by 705red

You have your land and your house because of the teamster negioated contract that was bargained on all of our behalf. You are out for only yourself and thats fine, as a steward i have to defend your rights under the contract but as a fellow man i would walk over your dying body if you laid in the street in front of me. I mean that whole heartly!

pretty harsh. I would never walk over anyones dying body including careys.

Time to stop and think. If you believe your support of your union justifies this mindset then maybe just maybe its time to rethink your position.

Ultimately I think we all belong to a much higher union of humanity whatever your spiritual beliefs may entail.

[tieguy]

Originally Posted by soberups

The company has unlimited resources to hire attorneys. You, on the other hand, don't....especially when you have been terminated.
For that matter, a non-union company doesnt have to fire you, they can just lay you off indefinately. "Seniority" is a contractually negotiated benefit, not a legal right.

But yet when the contractual grievance process fails to get you the desired results you would have no problem recommending a brother seek justice through the courts?

[trplnkl]

Originally Posted by satellitedriver

Doing what we do, I have to agree that we would not make the money that we do.
Where does this money come from?
Mainly, non-union workers.
All the unions in America represent only 8 to 10% of the working class.
The teamsters are only a percentage of that 10%.
In my post I ended with saying, you might need the teamsters, I do not.
What I need is customers to deliver to.
While I drive my pkg car in my uniform, made by non-union workers,delivering non-union made products, to people who are non-union,directed by non-union management, I can easily say that I do not need the teamsters.
I could make far more money than I make at UPS, but, I will not make the trade off of leaving my land and my home.
My choice, my life.
I will not wear the teamster collar.

Having worked for a company that it's employees are represented by the union for your whole career at UPS, you have no idea really what you have been protected from. For example, in Texas(a right to work state) the employer doesn't need a "good reason" to fire you as long as they do not violate your Constitutional rights. WITH the union you also have contractual rights to protect you from harassment, from personality conflicts and other unjust(but not illegal) work conditions.
If the new CM decided you were being dishonest in signing your name for a customers package and taking it home for safe keeping until the customer came back from vacation, you could/probably would be fired. The union would at least have a chance to save your job, a court of law would probably not even hear the case.
You said" I could make far more money than I make at UPS, but, I will not make the trade off of leaving my land and my home.". If I understand what you mean, it's that you would have to relocate to another area to match or beat what you make at UPS. If that is correct then, yeah, the union negotiated contracts have allowed you to keep you land and home and exercise your choice to stay where you are.
Have you even been told by a management person " IF you don't like it, you can quit."? If you have, you probably own the fact that you still have a job to the unseen protection of the union. Unless you are prefect, you have made mistakes that you could have been legally fired for but with the union there are contractual rules that keep that from even being an issue.
In the debates that Tie and those two FedEx guys the question arose that the two jobs were essentially the same and they are(with different levels of load size, yadda yadda). UPS Drivers make roughly a third more than Fedex couriers, is it because their average package size is less than ours? No, the difference is in the union contract. Then there are the benefits that are negotiated also. FedEx pays what they do to keep the union out, not from of the goodness of their hearts.
My point here is that union does much more for you than you give them credit for. Is the union prefect? no. Do I wear the union collar? not hardly. Do I see a need for the union when it comes to dealing with UPS? Damn right I do.

[tieguy]

[quote=trplnkl;327430]. WITH the union you also have contractual rights to protect you from harassment, from personality conflicts and other unjust(but not illegal) work conditions.
[quote]

I think its actually easier to fire a union employee then a non-union employee.

Think about it. The contractual arbitration process protects the company from lawsuits. I fire you. You go to panel. Panel agrees. Arbitrator agrees. Powerfull defense material that the company was just.

If I fire you and you have no grievance process then we go straight to the courts. Even if the company wins it gets to be expensive fighting every case in court.

Management also has a grievance process with an impartial arbitrator at the end of the process.

It takes an act of god to fire a non-union clerical person. And a deadly sin to fire a management person.

I personally think you would see less terminations if you did not have a union. How many discharges have you seen over the years where somone gets discharged and then agrees to accept time served as a suspension.

You are far from protected as a union person. If anything we fire more of you then we would if you had no grievance process.

[dannyboy]

Several thoughts.

Who wanted the Union at UPS in the first place? Was it the workers, or was it the UPS founders? Then since you know the answer, why would the founders want the union to deal with if it were not to their benifit? Now, if the Union is a benefit for and to UPS, then how do you figure as a driver, you make out like a bandit and UPS gets the shaft because we are union?

Sat: I think this is what you are trying to say in a way, so correct me if I am wrong.

Several years ago we had some upper level teamsters at our center. HE was trying to recruit part timers into the union and his tactics were a bit tough to swallow.

I asked him about the intimidation he was using trying to force the part timers to join. He told me "without the union, you aint " And further on, he also stated somewhat simular to the posters above "if it weren't for the teamsters you would be making minimum wage"

Well, first off, it was a real eye opener when it comes to the way the Teamsters view the rank and file. Everything is great and photo opps appenty when you recruit a bunch of people into the teamsters. But to view us as not without them giving us what we have earned, and without them we would living in poverty?

I calmly informed him that if I did not make the the money at UPS, I would not be working at UPS, but somewhere else. And the amount I would be making would be simular, because I am agressive enough not to be satisfied with anything less. And unlike so many others at UPS, I did further my education past highschool.

I dont owe the teamsters my life, my livelyhood or my job. Each one I have either created or accepted. And I sure as hell dont ever talk down to or treat someone as less than human because of belonging or not belonging to a union.

Now, that being said, the teamsters are a part of the UPS culture. And there is a contract with UPS that the company and the union (and the hourly employees by vote) have agreed to follow. Simple really. And if you accept the job, then in most cases you need to accept the union as part of that job. For better or worse.

But I whole heartedly reject that I would not have in my life what I have, had it not been for UPS or the teamsters.

d (well except the bad knees)

[Griff]

[quote=tieguy;327620][quote=trplnkl;327430]. WITH the union you also have contractual rights to protect you from harassment, from personality conflicts and other unjust(but not illegal) work conditions.

I think its actually easier to fire a union employee then a non-union employee.

Think about it. The contractual arbitration process protects the company from lawsuits. I fire you. You go to panel. Panel agrees. Arbitrator agrees. Powerfull defense material that the company was just.

If I fire you and you have no grievance process then we go straight to the courts. Even if the company wins it gets to be expensive fighting every case in court.

Management also has a grievance process with an impartial arbitrator at the end of the process.

It takes an act of god to fire a non-union clerical person. And a deadly sin to fire a management person.

I personally think you would see less terminations if you did not have a union. How many discharges have you seen over the years where somone gets discharged and then agrees to accept time served as a suspension.

You are far from protected as a union person. If anything we fire more of you then we would if you had no grievance process.

Heard this one before, usually spoken by the same union-buster wannabe who claims that UPS drivers would make more money if we weren't union too. What a joke.