Central Region Supplement - Giving up our right to Strike

[InsideUPS]

UPS continues to gain power over our Union with each and every contract. One of the more egregious examples of this occurs in the Central Region Supplement Tentative Agreement:

"Following due and proper notice given to the parties to appear and present their case, it is agreed that they are empowered to hear and decide the deadlocked case even if only one (1) of the parties submits it to them, or, if one (1) of the parties fails to appear at the hearing to present evidence. They shall have the authority to apply the provisions of this Agreement and to render a decision on any grievance coming before them, but shall not have the authority to amend or modify this Agreement or establish new terms and conditions under this Agreement. Their decision shall be final and binding on all parties and employees involved. If they are unable to agree, the grievance shall be submitted to the United Parcel Service President of Labor Relations or his designee and the I.B.T. National Package Director or his designee for resolution. It is understood either party shall be permitted all legal and economic recourse, including the right of the Union to strike and the right of the Employer to lock out. Prior to any legal or strike/economic recourse, the Union shall have approval from the I.B.T. National Package Director."

The "newly added" language reduces Local Union autonomy in the right to strike. While this may not seem important to some, giving the power to one person (the I.B.T. National Package Director) in the right to strike is a very dangerous proposition. Without going into details, I can assure you that it is very important that each and every Local have the capability to handle "strike issues" independently in accordance with the laws and the NLRB. Relying on one person that may be indebted to UPS in other ways is far too risky and reduces the overall strength of our Union.

 

[Catatonic]

UPS continues to gain power over our Union with each and every contract. One of the more egregious examples of this occurs in the Central Region Supplement Tentative Agreement:

"Following due and proper notice given to the parties to appear and present their case, it is agreed that they are empowered to hear and decide the deadlocked case even if only one (1) of the parties submits it to them, or, if one (1) of the parties fails to appear at the hearing to present evidence. They shall have the authority to apply the provisions of this Agreement and to render a decision on any grievance coming before them, but shall not have the authority to amend or modify this Agreement or establish new terms and conditions under this Agreement. Their decision shall be final and binding on all parties and employees involved. If they are unable to agree, the grievance shall be submitted to the United Parcel Service President of Labor Relations or his designee and the I.B.T. National Package Director or his designee for resolution. It is understood either party shall be permitted all legal and economic recourse, including the right of the Union to strike and the right of the Employer to lock out. Prior to any legal or strike/economic recourse, the Union shall have approval from the I.B.T. National Package Director."

The "newly added" language reduces Local Union autonomy in the right to strike. While this may not seem important to some, giving the power to one person (the I.B.T. National Package Director) in the right to strike is a very dangerous proposition. Without going into details, I can assure you that it is very important that each and every Local have the capability to handle "strike issues" independently in accordance with the laws and the NLRB. Relying on one person that may be indebted to UPS in other ways is far too risky and reduces the overall strength of our Union.

Perhaps the intent here is to not let a rogue/out of control Local hold all UPS Teamsters hostage to try and get excessive/irrational terms and conditions that apply only to that Local.
I thought it was a Brotherhood of Teamsters?
​This seems to correct some of the gripes heard on here about a lack of solidarity within the IBT.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

The "newly added" language reduces Local Union autonomy in the right to strike.

Let me try and help you with this one.

No Local in the Central Region has had the "autonomy" to strike.... ever.

As the result of a deadlocked grievance.... it was the last option. But, that decision was made by the Teamsters Central Region Director.

(And ultimately.... the IBT) Any action by a Local would be a "wildcat".

That language, was first put in to the Central Region language in 1973.... long before the National agreement.

Prior to that.... deadlocked grievance's were referred to arbitration for final disposition. (No option to strike)

Perhaps the intent here is to not let a rogue/out of control Local hold all UPS Teamsters hostage to try and get excessive/irrational terms and conditions that apply only to that Local.

Nope.

There is a chain of command. All Locals know the procedure.


I know what InsideUPS' concerns are....

In 1993, there was a "new" subsection added to Article 17 (the discipline section). Specifically.... Article 17 (i) other serious offenses.

Since then.... it has been the most abused subsection, of that Article (As another example of the company's abuse of agreed too language).

The intent of that subsection was.... serious offenses.... Like fighting or sexual harassment.

But, over the years.... the company has gone way beyond it's original intent. To the point, of ridiculous extremes.


That brings us to now.

In every Central Region contract negotiation since 1997....

The Union wanted that language removed. The company's counter offer was to "remove" the strike clause (thus eliminating both).


It seems now.... there is a different agreement.



​-Bug-

 

[Dracula]

We will never go on strike. Our International knows UPS is their breadbasket, and thus, is scared to upset the big boys. Any talk of strike is just that, talk. It's no more than pillow talk, drunk talk, or ramblings from an insane person.

 

[RocknSteady]

Not really...ive heard it at my hub. People are pissed off.

 

[chuchu]

The language change makes it suspect especially coupled with the rest of the damaging language changes and sub par medical coverage. Sure glad the company is making tons of money.... or the hourly would be buying the management turkeys at peak. VOTE NO! on National and Central States sup.

 

[Inthegame]

... Prior to any legal or strike/economic recourse, the Union shall have approval from the I.B.T. National Package Director."

The "newly added" language reduces Local Union autonomy in the right to strike. While this may not seem important to some, giving the power to one person (the I.B.T. National Package Director) in the right to strike is a very dangerous proposition. Without going into details, I can assure you that it is very important that each and every Local have the capability to handle "strike issues" independently in accordance with the laws and the NLRB. Relying on one person that may be indebted to UPS in other ways is far too risky and reduces the overall strength of our Union.

This goes both ways kimosabe. How about an out of control Local Union PO that has a terminated "friend" who then doesn't have the good sense to at least contact the Central Region Director before he sends a 72 hour strike letter to UPS. Little bit of risk there too. That exact scenario took place not long ago. Whether or not that was merely a threat, one will never know but that wolf call ended that game.
Cheap shots at hall integrity are really weak, and question any credibility your posts may have.