ups79 said:
where's sawman? he can provide you with all the information you need to know.
I think sawman may be one of the new persona's that pop up now and then and he could be the one that started this thread. Notice this is their first post!
As to the pension being the one trick pony of APWA,(no disrespect to our browncafe Trickpony) well I say yes and no. On the surface it would appear the pension is the only thing but it does go deeper than that. The pension is a major issue and on many fronts seems the hot topic of concern. Therefore it will get the most mileage. As we approach the contract in 08' I believe it will heat up but so will medical coverage and this issue will spill across the board with fulltimers where as fulltimers with 15 or less years aren't as concerned right now with retirement but having to pay more out of pocket for medical costs does effect them right now. Money once earmarked for medical benefits is being diverted to shore up the pension plans and I only see the crisis worsening as we get closer to 08'. And Hoffa or Leedham runing the show will make no difference IMO as this crisis is not just at UPS but across the board with many employers, union and non-union. I support the APWA effort and it's need to be openly and honestly discussed because at the very least I see APWA and it's potential threat as a ballbat to beat the union leadership with in order to make them do the right thing. Until APWA can gain enough strength to get a center somewhere to de-certify the IBT and go with APWA then I just don't see this effort going anywhere. At the very least, they could be a potential growing political faction within the IBT and if they ever realize that their numbers have the potential to grow to the point of threating not only the old guard but the TDU factions in some union locals in the south, they could greatly influence the direction of the IBT especially in the southern States. Problem is this is a UPS only movement and many freight folks aren't that keen on the IBT becoming a UPS dominated union. I can understand that.
As to the comments of ditching the pensions and putting the monies into individual 401k plans? Amen, but it won't happen. This idea would be just as opposed to by the union as the company taking over the pension because for them the results would be the same. I'm also not sure the company would want it either. Reason being, under the current system, they got you locked in for a specific duration in order to get any meaningful pension payment so they have a somewhat stable workforce within the FT ranks. With a 401k system only, the problem would be that FT UPSers could fatten the 401k pot early, building a secure fund for those retirement years and then once the pot is really self sustaining and on it's on building nicely, the UPSer after only a 10 or 15 year FT career could walk in one day and tell his/her customers that today is their last day and they are moving on to do something else. If you look around at people who work jobs where there are no pensions and 401k's and especially IRA's are the rule of the day, you see very little loyality to a single employer for the longhaul but rather multiple employers over a working lifespan. At that point the goal is totally about the money and nothing else and you market yourself accordingly. Several neighbors of mine have taken this approach and built up not only nice retirement nest eggs but nice stock portfolios to boot and now have broken from that cycle and have opened their own businesses. With the huge turnover rate we have within the PT ranks, just think of what would happen if the above scenario started happening within the FT ranks and say at on a 15 to 20% rate on top of the normal turnover rate you have now? The training cost and the cost of the new drivers coming up to speed to fill what was lost would effect the bottomline in the sense for one you'd need more supervisors in order to train the new drivers to fill the constant turnover.
JMO.