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 Union Issues
APWA
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="wkmac" data-source="post: 104195" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>Teamsterdan,</p><p>Actually your question is a good one and very valid but there is also a good reason that APWA is not and can't run a slate in the IBT. First and foremost APWA is solely focused on UPSers and nothing else. Whether you believe in their ideas or not, they see what is being given over to the IBT on our behalf and what we get in return the difference is not to their liking and many UPSers agree including myself. If they ran an IBT slate, this would mean they also would have to represent the interests of Yellow Freight, Roadway, some DHL (old Airborne) etc. etc. and they have no interest whatso ever in those companies or their futures. In fact, if I had to guess, APWA would like to see those companies go away or at best become a shell of themselves. </p><p> </p><p>In our current position with the IBT, for this to happen would be destructive to some of our own self interrests as in the pension fund as union members. However, in order to protect our fund interest we must protect these companies thereby denying ourselves (as UPS employees) of other job opportunities in the wake if these companies getting smaller and the potential of that business coming to UPS. So you see, we are placed in a position of having in some measure to support and defend our own competition in order to maintain certain benefits, etc. and at the same time deny ourselves probably some monetary and job opportunity benefits. Also you can bet the union also conducts itself with regard to UPS and it's business potentials with the fact that they also represent the interests of UPS' competitors. </p><p> </p><p>So much is made of the fact that UPS doesn't like the IBT and I'm sure on many fronts that is true but let me give you another perspective to consider. UPS over the many years has built a non-union segment and many have alledged that at some point UPS will use this to drive out the union. I don't deny that potential because if in their shoes I'd do the same after what happened in 97' but let me also give you something else to consider about keeping this side of UPS non-union. So much is made of how union labor drives down company profits and for a company who lacks the skill or abilities this is true. I often think of the best way to describe it as lazy management likes non union conditions. At UPS however, I always find it of interest that our profit margins (indicates a more profitable company that has better control over its costs compared to its competitors) is higher for UPS (a union employer) verses FedEx (a non-union employer). Currently according to Yahoo UPS is at 8% plus and FDX at 5% plus and UPS does this with a union workforce. Now to me this flies in the face of conventional wisdom but it's a fact. Now that being the case, why would UPS want to keep part of it's segment non-union? Well the obvious answers are still true but here's one I think most people don't want to discuss. If the Teamsters did organize all of UPS, then UPS would be hand tied in how it broadened it's business because the IBT would have to protect it's other members in the form of UPS competitors at the same time. Right now there is no conditions other than gov't regulatory and business concerns so they are free to adapt. </p><p> </p><p>With APWA or some other form of UPS only union, it would be in the best interest of that union to do whatever it took to encourage and help UPS expand because in that expansion the union would directly benefit and the UPS members would benefit with a growing host of job opportunities. So you see, there's a whole lot more here at stake than just the pension and usual glossy print that we all (including myself here)tend to focus on when we discuss the IBT and APWA or other union options. I also think it ironic that we do have some UPSers covered by other unions, I speak of the machinist union here, and from what I hear, their pensions are in great shape and for the most part things are going well. I'm sure it's not a pure lovefest but I could see where the Machinist union would care less that UPS wants to open into a market segment that competes with say Yellow Frieght for example because the reality it doesn't adversely effect them and in the future they may even benefit. Same can't be said for the IBT.</p><p> </p><p>I also think part of the logic of barring work after retirement has as much to do with protecting these other companies as it does anything else but you'll never hear them utter or admit this. Think about that one folks!</p><p> </p><p>T-Dan, hope that helps explain some of my thinking on this issue. Take care.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 104195, member: 2189"] Teamsterdan, Actually your question is a good one and very valid but there is also a good reason that APWA is not and can't run a slate in the IBT. First and foremost APWA is solely focused on UPSers and nothing else. Whether you believe in their ideas or not, they see what is being given over to the IBT on our behalf and what we get in return the difference is not to their liking and many UPSers agree including myself. If they ran an IBT slate, this would mean they also would have to represent the interests of Yellow Freight, Roadway, some DHL (old Airborne) etc. etc. and they have no interest whatso ever in those companies or their futures. In fact, if I had to guess, APWA would like to see those companies go away or at best become a shell of themselves. In our current position with the IBT, for this to happen would be destructive to some of our own self interrests as in the pension fund as union members. However, in order to protect our fund interest we must protect these companies thereby denying ourselves (as UPS employees) of other job opportunities in the wake if these companies getting smaller and the potential of that business coming to UPS. So you see, we are placed in a position of having in some measure to support and defend our own competition in order to maintain certain benefits, etc. and at the same time deny ourselves probably some monetary and job opportunity benefits. Also you can bet the union also conducts itself with regard to UPS and it's business potentials with the fact that they also represent the interests of UPS' competitors. So much is made of the fact that UPS doesn't like the IBT and I'm sure on many fronts that is true but let me give you another perspective to consider. UPS over the many years has built a non-union segment and many have alledged that at some point UPS will use this to drive out the union. I don't deny that potential because if in their shoes I'd do the same after what happened in 97' but let me also give you something else to consider about keeping this side of UPS non-union. So much is made of how union labor drives down company profits and for a company who lacks the skill or abilities this is true. I often think of the best way to describe it as lazy management likes non union conditions. At UPS however, I always find it of interest that our profit margins (indicates a more profitable company that has better control over its costs compared to its competitors) is higher for UPS (a union employer) verses FedEx (a non-union employer). Currently according to Yahoo UPS is at 8% plus and FDX at 5% plus and UPS does this with a union workforce. Now to me this flies in the face of conventional wisdom but it's a fact. Now that being the case, why would UPS want to keep part of it's segment non-union? Well the obvious answers are still true but here's one I think most people don't want to discuss. If the Teamsters did organize all of UPS, then UPS would be hand tied in how it broadened it's business because the IBT would have to protect it's other members in the form of UPS competitors at the same time. Right now there is no conditions other than gov't regulatory and business concerns so they are free to adapt. With APWA or some other form of UPS only union, it would be in the best interest of that union to do whatever it took to encourage and help UPS expand because in that expansion the union would directly benefit and the UPS members would benefit with a growing host of job opportunities. So you see, there's a whole lot more here at stake than just the pension and usual glossy print that we all (including myself here)tend to focus on when we discuss the IBT and APWA or other union options. I also think it ironic that we do have some UPSers covered by other unions, I speak of the machinist union here, and from what I hear, their pensions are in great shape and for the most part things are going well. I'm sure it's not a pure lovefest but I could see where the Machinist union would care less that UPS wants to open into a market segment that competes with say Yellow Frieght for example because the reality it doesn't adversely effect them and in the future they may even benefit. Same can't be said for the IBT. I also think part of the logic of barring work after retirement has as much to do with protecting these other companies as it does anything else but you'll never hear them utter or admit this. Think about that one folks! T-Dan, hope that helps explain some of my thinking on this issue. Take care. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
APWA
Top