396 meeting Sunday June 2, 2013
- Thread starter undies
- Start date
you are exactly right. He said that "he" was not happy with the C6 plan and acknowledged its shortcomings, then when asked why he was promoting it, he said " i am a man of my word, and I gave my word in washington, so I have to keep it'.
That means exactly what you said. He is MORE loyal to the Hierarchy then to the membership. He acknowledged that his state ( arz ) was just as unhappy as we are, and he acknowledged that "we" are unhappy, yet, his loyalty remained with the International.
I realize that its all politics at this point, but he mentions he almost resigned because he was fighting for us, yet supports the very people who screwed him.
That part made no sense, but I see what he was trying to do. Remember, he didnt try to get us to VOTE YES on the contract, he said he was only there to give us the honest truth. Not once did he ASK us for a yes vote.
That speaks for itself.
Peace
TOS
RealPerson
Well-Known Member
Can you please show me, where it says who is getting enhanced and who is not??
LagunaBrown
Well-Known Member
The original plan was us to be in the CSP but the West fought for the MOU . If you vote no the powers that be will use it as ammo saying how the West locals made a big deal about carving out a plan and the members rejected it. So then we go "back to the table" and you go back to square one in the CSP where they can levy West against the Central over healthcare forever. Explain why a yes vote and chance at the West having our own plan (where they can not sprinkle money to buy votes from the Central) is such a horrible idea? If the West stands alone we can negotiate concessions back to us with a worst case scenario of an enhanced C6 Plan but if we are stuck in the Central we are like Siamese twins and will never be able to control our future independently. Bottom line is you roll the dice with a no vote and you roll the dice with a yes vote.
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
OMG. You mean we take a chance if we vote NO.
You must be a chicken. Scare easy?
Take a chance and vote NO. Grow a pair.
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
Can't show you right now, but I did see in the TA about only the teamsters in UPS health plans now, will be getting the enhanced C-6 Teamcare.
104Feeder
Phoenix Feeder
Memorandum of Understanding, Page 27 of what should have been included with your ballot.
2. says Enhancements are only for those covered by CSH&W for the first time Jan 1st 2014 (reduced co-pays, physical exams, well child care, mail order prescriptions)
3. is about the Enhancements for employees on payroll as of July 31st who retire before Jan 1st 2014 get enhanced retiree eligiblity (age 52 vs 55)
4. is UPS enhancing the short term disability, life insurance, and dental by making up the difference of previous benefits prior to Jan 1st 2014
6. details the extra contribution to cover enhanced early retirement eligibility.
If you are in the CSH&W now you will not receive any of the enhancements. I was told there is a slight increase in your prescription drug benefit.
Central & Southern Confrences are not getting any enhancements.
YOU ARE DEAD ON ACCURATE. Thank you.. Everyone can take this to the bank, despite what you B.A.'s in your local are telling you. There is alot of B.S. being spread around by B.A.'s and such, and even in our local, our B.A.'s have been misrepresenting the facts since the T.A. was announced.
At our meeting, our B.A.'s stood there quiet as Brother Marshal contradicted EVERYTHING they have been telling members.
The confusion over this T.A. is by design, and dont be fooled into thinking otherwise.
If you are NOT in the southwest Region or local 177, you WILL NOT get the "enhancements" no matter what you are told.
Peace
TOS
LagunaBrown
Well-Known Member
Wow you really sound intelligent with those childhood responses.
Try reading what I said again but slowly and absorbing it in stead of jumping to conclusions. (This is chess not checkers). Maybe then you can answer the question like an adult.
Laguna Brown how young are you?
Show your 396 brothers proud by speaking for us
LagunaBrown
Well-Known Member
I'll let the union leaders that WE all voted for from the local level on up do it . They are our appointed delegates. Take some ownership yourself if you don't like them and run against them tuff stuff but don't you dare worry about me. I bet half you complainers only show up at the hall at contract time. Apparently they kicked ass enough at negotiations last contract so what makes you think they won't get it done again? Ye of little faith.... If they get the west done would you all be man enough to shake there hands in droves just as you belittle their efforts?
LagunaBrown
Well-Known Member
.[/QUOTE]
Laguna Brown how young are you?
Show your 396 brothers proud by speaking for us[/QUOTE
Whatever that means. Anyways if you didn't notice I was hoping for a reply from TOS this should be talked about among all locals.
Laguna Brown how young are you?
Show your 396 brothers proud by speaking for us[/QUOTE
Whatever that means. Anyways if you didn't notice I was hoping for a reply from TOS this should be talked about among all locals.
Anyone who trusts the majority of these union officials is as gullible as my 2 year old nephew. I have never voted for my local officials and have never voted YES in any of the contracts. Andy M said it himself on Sunday, "this is a bad contract, but its the best we can do." He clearly told us that he gave Junior and Hall his word that he would push for a YES vote. He admitted there that the leadership comes first and not the members. We're all screwed and will end up in the Central States, you can mark my words on this one!
Brother Laguna,
What I found striking about your post is the "reliance" upon voting for a contract "blind" and hoping you will come out on the good end later down the road. First, the carrot is being dangled in our faces ( the west is going to find a better plan) and some are buying into it. I am not sure you have gven this enough thought .
Creating "our own plan" means alot of things. First, you spoke about the MOU as if it strenthens our position in the west. To that extent, IT DOES NOT. I hear people in the west talking about the MOU as if that alone is the safety net we can rely upon, but in actuality, its the MOU that we should be AFRAID of.
As was pointed out to brother Marshall at the meeting, one sentence in the MOU is the most dangerous. "NOTHING IN THIS AGREEMENT SHALL PRECLUDE THE CSH&W FROM CHANGING EMPLOYEE BENEFIT LEVELS".
This says it all. NOTHING will STOP the central states from changing the benefit levels for the employees of the C6 plan. Why would this be placed into the agreement if "change" wasnt inevitable? brother Marshall AGREED with the point the steward made by saying "yes, this is dangerous language"..quote Andy M.
Now, how can we apply this? Well, for starters, the current C6 plan has been "enhanced" to make it attractive to those members in the west who are taking a step down in coverage. Members may say to themselves that "this isnt so bad" and accept the deal. THEN, the central states TRUSTEES wait a period of time for the ink to dry and then call a meeting and vote to "un-enhance" the southwest members down to the current C6 benefit levels. A simple vote by the trustees and its done. They dont have to come to US for approval. They dont have to consult with UPS or our locals. The CSH&W have all the control.
Brother Marshall confirmed this to the steward who asked the question. By voting YES to this contract with these conditions, we are "WAVING" our control over our healthcare to the Trustees of the CSH&W.
Now, on the other hand, those same people are saying that the MOU is somehow going to get us a better plan, but here, Both I and Brother Marshall disagree with you. The MOU is very CLEAR about what is to be created. It says NOTHING about finding a health care plan that "MATCHES" our current plan or benefits. In FACT, its says the opposite. What is "required" is that the west need only find a plan that MATCHES the current C6 plan or exceeds it, BUT, the west cannot spend more money on a plan than is spent or allocated by the CENTRAL STATES.
In other words, YES, a better plan could be out there, and I am sure there is, BUT, the west is PROHIBITED from spending more money on a plan than is allocated by the central states. It says so in BLACK and WHITE. So, even if Brother Marshall could find a plan that "matches" our current UPS benefits, HE CANT BUY IT unless it costs the same as the central states is spending on their plan.
Now, I ask you, "WHERE DO YOU THINK THEY ARE GOING TO FIND A PLAN, better then the C6 for the same money for less employees ? "
Lets look further into this concept. The west will only have the allocation of monies that cover the employees of the southern region ( 10 locals ) plus local 177. They have to hire an actuary to calculate NOT ONLY the cost of a plan, BUT the COST to administrate it. This is where the idea kills itself. Money has to be taken out of the pot that was going to pay for a plan, and used to create a whole NEW administration office. That means staffing, building, office furniture, salaries and benies, computers and the like and a board of trustees. Once you take out that money, whatever is left goes to pay for the plan. Now its pretty simple to calculate that this means LESS money leftover to pay for a plan.
What would be the cost of this? Nobody knows right now, but the union would like you to vote yes in the meantime and you can find out in november that they couldnt make it happen, so here's your "enhanced" C6 plan. At that point, then you have to FEAR the MOU and the sentence that was asked of Brother Marshall at the meeting.
This whole wait till november thing is nothing more than "political cover" for the principle officers of the locals in the west and Brother Marshall. They fight the good fight, convince us all to vote YES, and then in november when we cant do anything about it, come to us and say that they couldnt make it happen, but heck "we fought for you".
As Brother Marshall said himself "you are voting on the C6 plan, because either way, all your going to get is the benefits of the enhanced C6 plan whether from central states or our own run plan" quote Andy M.
Now, you said that "WE" made a big deal out of carving out of the health care plan and then rejected it, but last time I checked, NOBODY from our local ASKED us if we wanted our healthcare plan tabled nationally. What "WE" would prefer as members, is to leave our healthcare ALONE. The company made enough profits to cover our insurance and "WE" would be willing to take less towards raises and the rest applied to maintaning our current plans. "WE" were never consulted about any of this, and the locals in the west made horrible decisions for us in these negotiations.
Unfortunately, "WE" have to fight with our own local who appears to have a loyalty with the hierarchy of the teamsters rather than to the members who elected them. This is clear.
What I think you are misunderstanding, is that "WE" are already "STUCK" with the C6 plan and there will be nothing better coming down the road. If you would like to believe otherwise, well thats your right.
I would suggest you re read the MOU's and see if what I state is accurate. Tell me if you see in the MOU's, anything that says you will have matching benefits to our current plan, OR tell me if you see in the MOU something that says the WEST can spend what it wants on a better plan. We all know everything cost money, and you cant buy the same with less money.
If you listened carefully to what Brother Marshall said at the meeting, you would understand that the best you are going to get is the "enhanced" benefits of the C6 plan and nothing more. He repeated it twice "you are voting on the C6 plan".
You can pin your hopes on "maybe's".... "possibly's".. or..."could be's", but that isnt prudent thinking. What "WE" need are absolutes.
What about this...??
Why not delay the vote until November 15th and work without a contract? Why not extend the period from July 31st to november 15th until the work is done and we see what kind of insurance the west can come up with? Then, once we see ALL our options, we vote. Straight up or down.
This will never happen of course, because thats not what "they" want at the international or the west.
Bottom line is, UPS outplayed the teamsters and what we are seeing is the begining of the end of our benefits. To give up our current healthcare plan without a fight is to de legitimize our efforts in 1997 when we went on strike to protect them.
Just giving them away for a promise that "maybe"... "possibly" we could have a better plan is just foolish.
Hope this helps you with your decision.
Peace
TOS
I will take issue with your interpretation that our local leaders "kicked ass" in the last contract. First, they agreed to extending the progression of the part timers in 2008 taking money out of their pockets ( A CONCESSION) then, they accepted the companys position of split raises costing "US" tons of money each year ( A CONCESSION ) then they accepted the companys position of using technology against us in package ( A CONCESSION ) then they wrote language in article 37 NMA relating to 9.5 hours, then after the contract was ratified, ALTERED that language weakening it as the company requested ( AGAIN, another CONCESSION )
This hardly qualifies as an "ASS KICKING".
This time around so far, they have agreed to: split wages in years 4 and 5 costing "us" money each year ( a concession again) extend part time progression another year to 4 years ( a concession again ) take away our superior health care benefits ( a major concession ) weaken 9.5 language in package ( a concession ) clarified the language in article 6 technology making it easier for the company to take us out ( a concession ) extending the progression for full time drivers who go feeder by two years ( a concession) and finally, if you are unable to fullfill your duties in fulltime because of injury or illness, you can no longer take two part time jobs, and you will have 3 years to rehabilitate or your seniority is BROKEN and you start over in one part time position at the part time rate of pay and pension contribution or you get the
out. ( a concession)This is a strange way of KICKING ASS.
Just Sayin.
Peace
TOS
Last edited by a moderator:
LagunaBrown
Well-Known Member
396 meeting this Sunday
One thing at a time but I do like your points. First off I want to make it clear I am mainly talking about health care. Yes there are language issues but I just wanted to air different perspective about H&W first. Mainly cause its healthy to debate in tough situation like this. I agree in that if ALL we get is an "enhanced c6" plan then that is not acceptable to me. You must realize a West plan on its own is the best for us mythical as it is. Now you say there is no monies but you can read they already diverted .25 cents from pension money to health and welfare for the buy down. The new language is riddled with ways to fund Taft Hartley through GWI, pension and legal trust fund (.15 cents that your local contributes to pension) I am not telling anyone to vote yes or no because as I said before you roll the dice either way. I do know you have to live with it forever. Now I know you will say we will be paying for health care and I it can never be done but technically the money is there and accessible. It all boils down to do you think they can get it done. Obviously there is not a lot of trust here and unfortunately there are not a lot of economists or lawyers on this blog so take information with a grain of salt.
One thing at a time but I do like your points. First off I want to make it clear I am mainly talking about health care. Yes there are language issues but I just wanted to air different perspective about H&W first. Mainly cause its healthy to debate in tough situation like this. I agree in that if ALL we get is an "enhanced c6" plan then that is not acceptable to me. You must realize a West plan on its own is the best for us mythical as it is. Now you say there is no monies but you can read they already diverted .25 cents from pension money to health and welfare for the buy down. The new language is riddled with ways to fund Taft Hartley through GWI, pension and legal trust fund (.15 cents that your local contributes to pension) I am not telling anyone to vote yes or no because as I said before you roll the dice either way. I do know you have to live with it forever. Now I know you will say we will be paying for health care and I it can never be done but technically the money is there and accessible. It all boils down to do you think they can get it done. Obviously there is not a lot of trust here and unfortunately there are not a lot of economists or lawyers on this blog so take information with a grain of salt.
LagunaBrown
Well-Known Member
396 meeting this Sunday
Everyone wants the same old contract, apparently it did kick ass. But you are right the new language about article 14 section 3 can be bad.
Everyone wants the same old contract, apparently it did kick ass. But you are right the new language about article 14 section 3 can be bad.
