Contract Change proposals. "On Topic Only Please"

Integrity

Binge Poster
Are you dense?

You want language?
How bout we leave the language the same way it was in the last contract?
Wouldn't that be better than these concessions?
Why are we going backwards?

Why are we giving them concessions in this economic environment?
Do you have anything to add to this discussion, or are you just here to sell this crap contract?
I have made my suggestion for a change to the TA.

I actually started this discussion.

I am trying to sell nothing.

Just trying to help.

There are those in existence, even here on the BC who are perpetually dissatisfied.
 

JustDeliverIt

Well-Known Member
Not sure where exactly it would end up in the contract but I want to see:

All package car drivers are guaranteed a maximum work week of 60 hours. Should the company get permission from the DOT to increase the hours to 70/week, it will be the employees discretion to waive his/her right to a 60 hour work week.

This puts straight forward, simple language to protect those who don't want to work over 60 and for those who liked the long work week, they have the option to work those hours. Protects employees for what they want, no matter which side of the fence they fall on. Anything short of this I will always vote no.
 

BigBrown87

If it’s brown, it’s going down
You came to this discussion.
I come into a lot of discussions that seem good or actually beneficial, and then I get to discussions such as this one that serve no purpose at all. Just like going into the casino some are good some are bad but it entertains me. Keep up the hard work I can see you have made great progress with you crappy thread.
 

Integrity

Binge Poster
I come into a lot of discussions that seem good or actually beneficial, and then I get to discussions such as this one that serve no purpose at all. Just like going into the casino some are good some are bad but it entertains me. Keep up the hard work I can see you have made great progress with you crappy thread.
Ok.

Thanks for the encouragement to continue.
 

Box Ox

Well-Known Member
You are entitled to your opinion.

Hand this to our well-paid Teamster lawyers and make a yes vote Contract happen, boss.

oFMcNoF.jpg
 

Box Ox

Well-Known Member
Wholesale condemnation makes one look ignorant. I will not do this.

You will have to be more specific to a point.

Sorry.

That's a weak sauce cop out and you know it. Any one of those individual points is enough for a no vote. And if that comes across to you as being the whole Contract, then so be it. Would just go to show how much of an overhaul its current form really needs.
 

2old2load

Active Member
Increase for full time and part time should be
1.00
1.00
1.20
1.30
1.50

The language for No driver being discharged for electronics should be changed to any employee.

22.4 will be able to opt in to the 9.5 list

22.4/22.3 top pay should be 39.50 by the end of contract

9.5 language should be changed from 3 days over 9.5 to 2 days over 9.5 penalty should be 3 hours top pay x2 penalty

Black Friday triple pay or increased ph days by 2 days

Part time skilled work should be $1 per hour increase

Top rate progression for drivers and mechanics should be 3 years max

Feeder jobs should be bid within the local union by seniority and not by building seniority

Any discrepancy in pay shall be paided within 24hrs of notice.

60hr work week limit. Unless opt’d in a 70hr work week

This would be a start.

Not gonna waste my time trying to copy and paste the actual contract till my fingers bleed
 

Time for change

Well-Known Member
Give all part timers not getting skilled pay the $1 plus whatever bump new hires are getting and it will pass. Get rid of 22.4 and it will pass in flying colors.
 

DriveInDriveOut

Inordinately Right
I have made my suggestion for a change to the TA.

I actually started this discussion.

I am trying to sell nothing.

Just trying to help.

There are those in existence, even here on the BC who are perpetually dissatisfied.
What was your suggestion?
"Sunday through Thursday"?

Your suggestion for the entire tentative agreement is adding THREE WORDS?
And in your mind, that isn't trying to sell the agreement?

Are you trying to be the ultimate example of self delusion?
Or do you think we are too stupid to see that you're just trying to sell this agreement 'as is'.....?
 
F

Frankie's Friend

Guest
The suggestion was for the benefit of those who may be viewed as malcontents.

My experience has shown that malcontents are not given serious consideration when discussing serious issues of the membership.

Just sayin.

If you want to be taken seriously write some better language.

You know what is supposed to look like.

Feel free to not take any suggestions.

It is your call.
"Malcontents " vote .
Idk how their prose affects the ibt leadership.
End of story.
That is not suggested alternative language.

Statements like this wholesale condemnation in my opinion, will not be taken seriously.
Neither are you.
Union halls will be opened.

Vote. End of story.
 
Top