J
JonFrum
Guest
For the record . . .
Tieguy,
The 10,000 jobs are new, combination jobs, above and beyond the usual 10,000 package car driver jobs.
ARTICLE 22. PART-TIME EMPLOYEES
Section 3.
"The parties agree that providing part-time employees the opportunity to become full-time employees is a priority of this Agreement. Accordingly, the Employer commits that during the life of this Agreement, it will offer part-time employees the opportunity to fill at least twenty thousand (20,000) permanent full-time job openings throughout its operations covered by this Agreement.
This commitment shall include the obligation to create at least ten thousand (10,000) new full-time jobs from existing part-time jobs during the life of this Agreement throughout its operations covered by this Agreement" . . .
http://www.browncafe.com/community/threads/ups-teamsters-national-master-agreement.335360/
Tieguy,
The 10,000 jobs are new, combination jobs, above and beyond the usual 10,000 package car driver jobs.
ARTICLE 22. PART-TIME EMPLOYEES
Section 3.
"The parties agree that providing part-time employees the opportunity to become full-time employees is a priority of this Agreement. Accordingly, the Employer commits that during the life of this Agreement, it will offer part-time employees the opportunity to fill at least twenty thousand (20,000) permanent full-time job openings throughout its operations covered by this Agreement.
This commitment shall include the obligation to create at least ten thousand (10,000) new full-time jobs from existing part-time jobs during the life of this Agreement throughout its operations covered by this Agreement" . . .
http://www.browncafe.com/community/threads/ups-teamsters-national-master-agreement.335360/
RockyRogue
Agent of Change
OWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!! Talk about a gut check!!! First, I'm no sell-out. Second, I am the most honest person you'll ever meet. Third, the union gets these things from UPS, yes, but if a strike is called for the wrong reasons, do you truly expect all to honor the lines??? I have responsibilities to live up to and an example to set to people other than UPS'ers. Refusing an order to work from my employer would send the exact wrong message to those individuals that look up to me. In the end, its my call. I pray I don't have to make such a decision. -Rocky
tieguy
Banned
Tie, if ups put 2000 new package car jobs up every year how come ptimers to ftimers was about 5 to 1 ratio? Now whos blowing smoke, carey combined 2 ptime jobs which pays $8.50 an hour and made them into 1 ftime job paying $21 plus an hour.
I'm surprised you don't read your contract more. Pick up the copy prior to 97 and you'll see language in it guaranteeing an increase of 2000 jobs per year. UPS had no problem making that committment since their national growth alone is creating that many jobs each year. Only difference this time was the jobs were created as combos at a lower wage rate. This great success of Careys fighting for full time jobs actually turned out to be a con job where higher paying full time jobs were traded for low paying combo jobs. I hate to rub all this salt in your wounds but I really think you need to spend more time watching your own guys instead of looking for the fictitous bogeyman.
I'm surprised you don't read your contract more. Pick up the copy prior to 97 and you'll see language in it guaranteeing an increase of 2000 jobs per year. UPS had no problem making that committment since their national growth alone is creating that many jobs each year. Only difference this time was the jobs were created as combos at a lower wage rate. This great success of Careys fighting for full time jobs actually turned out to be a con job where higher paying full time jobs were traded for low paying combo jobs. I hate to rub all this salt in your wounds but I really think you need to spend more time watching your own guys instead of looking for the fictitous bogeyman.
tieguy
Banned
Another popular misconception perpetrated in 97 was that the part timers did not have benifits when in fact they had benifits better then many full timers with other companies.
Tie im seeing a pattern of you being wrong alot here. I was ptime in 97 and it wasnt until 02 when ptimers stopped paying out of their pockets for prescriptions and had to fill out paperwork in order to get reimbursed.
Look at your response to my post. Was I wrong? Did part timers have benifits better then many friend/ters with other companies in 97? You're now grasping for straws in what appears to be desperation. Whats next more crap like this or do we see trick and cole try to rescue you again. Stick to the facts if you can.
Tie im seeing a pattern of you being wrong alot here. I was ptime in 97 and it wasnt until 02 when ptimers stopped paying out of their pockets for prescriptions and had to fill out paperwork in order to get reimbursed.
Look at your response to my post. Was I wrong? Did part timers have benifits better then many friend/ters with other companies in 97? You're now grasping for straws in what appears to be desperation. Whats next more crap like this or do we see trick and cole try to rescue you again. Stick to the facts if you can.
tieguy
Banned
Before we get too far off track I'm not posting on this thread to put down unionism. I'm not here denying the benefits of collective bargaining.
My points again are :
1) 97 was a sham for Ron Careys glory that cost many fine upsers their well deserved retirement.
2) When we discuss the solutions to fixing these pension plans we have to get rid of the old "company is here to steal your pension" language. That does not mean you negotiate company control in fact you negotiate joint control. But the pensions are not getting fixed if you exclude UPS as part of the fix.
3) if you do an honest comparison the teamsters have shown they can not handle the responsibility of managing pension funds. They can not have direct control of your pension if you want it fixed.
My points again are :
1) 97 was a sham for Ron Careys glory that cost many fine upsers their well deserved retirement.
2) When we discuss the solutions to fixing these pension plans we have to get rid of the old "company is here to steal your pension" language. That does not mean you negotiate company control in fact you negotiate joint control. But the pensions are not getting fixed if you exclude UPS as part of the fix.
3) if you do an honest comparison the teamsters have shown they can not handle the responsibility of managing pension funds. They can not have direct control of your pension if you want it fixed.
Cole
Well-Known Member
Then why didn't they add those jobs. Even afterwards they only started complying close to the end of the contract in rush fashion. Granted I work in a somewhat smaller center and wouldn't see as much of it as some.
As far as tying up with mngmnt it is our duty as stewards. We get the complaints and we have to roll our sleeves up and deal with the many problems we get dailey. Until you've taken that responsibilty how can you tell us how to do it?
I've been with UPS for almost thirty years. I have file one grievance, as far as management goes I have seen to good, bad, ugly. I have been bless with over all good managers and supervisors. I do see a big change in our district. On Road Supervisor are being promoted with no on road experience, which I think the company is letting us down as service providers. For the most part all drivers want to do the right thing for their custmers. In our district we have had to lower the standard for hiring part-timers which means when they go full-time you don't have what it takes to be a good driver. I know it all comes down to money. Back in the 70's and 80's with contact talks we wanted the pension to be taking care of, and the union wanted more money per hour. Left the part-timers out in the cold, union said they wouldn't stay more than 4 yrs. Now some 30yrs. later the same thing is going on. For those of us with more than 25yrs. retirement is coming and what do we have with CS? Not what we all wanted. For upsers with less than 15 yrs. take a good hard looking at what your pension is, or what it should be.
tieguy
Banned
Re: For the record . . .
Jon I should have known you would be the one to catch that little item. I even threw red a clue when i talked about the language in the prior contract. I'd give you points if you had a real ID.
Jon I should have known you would be the one to catch that little item. I even threw red a clue when i talked about the language in the prior contract. I'd give you points if you had a real ID.
tieguy
Banned
Don't think its an avoidance issue. Its a compatibility issue. Lot of these jobs don't fit into our existing system very well. Probably most.
Red, you are so blinded by the Teamsters, that you can't see the handwriting on the wall. The pension plan in CS is only 47% funded and going further into debt each year by approximately $3 billion. At the current pace, the pension fund will be bankrupt in roughly 7-10 years. Something needs to be done, but you and your Teamster cronies keep backing up CS and the Teamsters. They don't have a clue or a solid financial plan to remedy this situation, so you divert attention away from this issue by blaming everyone else. You would rather allow the Teamsters to continue on this reckless path than to let someone else manage this fund. Why? The answer is obvious. As long as the Teamsters control the pension fund, they can steal money for themselves in the form of administration fees which are astronomical. Does it take over $120 million to run the pension fund and another $61 million to administer the health and welfare benefits?
705red
Browncafe Steward
E im not steering anyone away from the critical pension crisis, i was just pointing out that the teamsters are not the only one to blame. They hold a big share of the blame and of course a manager (tie) is blaming the teamsters only. Now i agree 120 million is in excess, but from what ive heard for the size of the fund its not that unreasonable, now i have nothing to compare that to, maybe you can research and post similiar funds through out the country and what their expenses are.
J
JonFrum
Guest
Tieguy,
The Article 22.3 combo jobs are created by joining two already existing, back-to-back part time jobs. What could be simpler? The process should only take a few moments of thought, plus the time it takes to send an email notification to payroll. But UPS has fought the process every step of the way.
705red
Browncafe Steward
The pension is crucial to alot of my fellow teamster brothers and sisters retireing in a timely manner, no one knows what is really on the table as the proposal and we have no idea if a counter proposal has been made, ite really to early to start all these rumors. There are alot of questions that need to be answered like does social security affect your pension payment like the part-time pension that ups currently holds on our behalf? What will the monthly payments be to retirees? What will health care cost us? If we decide to leave our spouses our pension after death what would they receive? Do you see what i mean tie, just because ups comes out and says they want to fix the plan, we would like to see the plan that should fix the pension woes! If its a multi- employer fund what are the other companies that will be making up this fund? And whats to say that between the same teamsters and ups trustees wont tank this new pension plan?
tieguy
Banned
No guarantees that it won't. But you would have one less factor affecting the results. No more chapter 11 retirees draining the fund.
If the plan is single employer then your insurance is also much better.
705red
Browncafe Steward
Tie just a question, if ups slows down and or goes out of business who will float our chapter 11 a$$es under a single-employer fund?
Overpaid Union Thug
Well-Known Member
I hate to say it but so far the best option, well...ONLY option, I've seen presented is to go with the joint pension offer by the company. It sucks but sadly it is better than what the Teamsters have offered to try and fix the problem. Which so far is nothing. Maybe in time another solution will present itself but right now it's not looking to good for all of us that are covered by Central States.
krash
Go big orange
Rocky,
Again you miss the point. You enjoy what you receive today because someone didn't report because the boss told him too. The labor laws and contracts we have was made possible by men and woman who didn't cross the line. If they would've had your mentality of "The boss told me too", we'd still be working 7 days a week, 14 hours a day, no benefits an poverty wages. Now I would rather show those that look up to me that it's better to take a stand when needed so they can have a better future than to show them that I can be a good boy to the boss man.
Again you miss the point. You enjoy what you receive today because someone didn't report because the boss told him too. The labor laws and contracts we have was made possible by men and woman who didn't cross the line. If they would've had your mentality of "The boss told me too", we'd still be working 7 days a week, 14 hours a day, no benefits an poverty wages. Now I would rather show those that look up to me that it's better to take a stand when needed so they can have a better future than to show them that I can be a good boy to the boss man.
tieguy
Banned
who will float it if CS folds? Same insurance provider only the single employer plan is insured 4 times better then the multi-employer plan. Kinda makes it a no brainer don't it red.
RockyRogue
Agent of Change
With all due respect, Krash, I don't think I miss your point. I just approach the issue from a different perspective. I'll make a suggestion. There's a book called The Jungle written in 1906 by Upton Sinclair. Unions certainly played a role in the legislation stopping those abuses but this book started a movement. History tells us that when Teddy Roosevelt finished reading the book, he went ballistic. I suggest you read it and find out why. -Rocky
