Driver Two-Tier Wage Pros & Cons??

Discussion in 'UPS Union Issues' started by InsideUPS, Jan 20, 2013.

  1. InsideUPS

    InsideUPS Active Member

    Although I know the topic of a two-tier wage system exists on this forum, I would like to have your input on the various pros and cons of a Two-Tier driving wage with this 2013 contract (grandfathered to exclude ALL existing employees waiting to go driving). I would like to keep emotion out of this topic so please remain civil if possible.

    To Start... Pro 1) A two-tier system could benefit older drivers by better retirement

    Con 1) Jealousy.
    Con 2) Company attempting to get rid of older drivers through harassment, etc..
  2. air_dr

    air_dr Member

    Con: In my mind, having drivers, collectively speaking, take a pay cut while working for a company which is highly profitable is just one more example of what some people call the "race to the bottom" where ordinary people who are putting in an honest days work are being asked to get by on less and less.
  3. UpstateNYUPSer

    UpstateNYUPSer Very proud grandfather.

    Pro: Allows us to remain competitive with Ground.

    Con: Older drivers will have a target on their backs.
  4. ocnewguy

    ocnewguy Member

    who cares. just give us part timers more money. you old farts can pound sand :happy-very:
  5. Brownslave688

    Brownslave688 You want a toe? I can get you a toe.

    Completely disagree with this con. Why waste your time on the guys with 20+ years in and are already vested for the pension. The ones with a huge target will be the ones with under 10 years time in.
  6. pretender

    pretender Active Member

    Pro: It allows us to remain competitive. I know this is a touchy subject, and there is no doubt that drivers deserve every dollar they make. However, there is the danger of pricing yourself out of a job. I just don't see how it can be sustained.

    Pro: The company can use the money saved to bolster the pension funds that are in trouble, and to raise the ceiling of their contribution to the retiree health care package.
  7. cachsux

    cachsux Wah

    "Pro: The company could (but won't) use the money saved to bolster the pension funds that are in trouble, and to raise the ceiling of their contribution to the retiree health care package."

    I think it would be more like that. Why take away money from some drivers and give it to others?
  8. 'Lord Brown's bidding'

    'Lord Brown's bidding' Well-Known Member

    What will the company use that money for?

    The pot UPS will give us is set; the question is how will it be divided amongst us. Savings won't go to the shareholders; it will be given to another who shares of the pie so that money for the shareholders doesn't have to be re-directed for our compensation.
  9. tourists24

    tourists24 Well-Known Member

    cant be sustained? have you checked the profits of UPS in the last 10 years? dont think you'll see them in the red....
  10. Re-Raise

    Re-Raise Well-Known Member

    Pro. It might tip the scales in favor of adding more full-time lower wage drivers instead of working the current higher wage drivers so much overtime.
  11. pretender

    pretender Active Member

    My response was in reference to the 2013 contract negotiations--the increased contributions would have to be negotiated in exchange for the two tiered wage system.

    As I said, this is a touchy subject, and I am sure I am in the minority--but I don't see it as taking away from drivers when they have not even been hired yet.

    I remember years ago, just at the beginning of GM's problems, wondering how could they afford to pay the wages/benefits to their employees. Look where they are today. I live in a neighboring state to you, and in my city, GM barely has a presence any longer. Daily, I go by a one square mile area that used to be a stamping plant--It has been razed.

    For that matter, until a few years ago, my wife used to work for major company in the office furniture industry. She is now "retired" because they sent her job to Mexico. We never saw it coming, because she had a white collar job that she thought was safe. Maybe that is why I am a little paranoid--I just don't see how UPS can keep on paying the high wages and stay in business delivering packages. Quality and service are important, but they don't mean nearly as much as they used to. The bottom line is price...
  12. Gumby

    Gumby *

    once you give something up you never get it back!!!! Look at your stops per hour now versus 10 or 20 years ago!!!More and more work=more pay not less pay!!!
  13. 'Lord Brown's bidding'

    'Lord Brown's bidding' Well-Known Member

    GM, EMD (GM's rail division, bought by Canada), Hostess, and others said this. In addition, less cost per worker would mean the hiring of more workers.
  14. Gumby

    Gumby *

    Why would UPS hire anybody they didnt have to.The less they pay the more they will put in their pocket!!! Question How many new routes have you seen them put in? Answer zero
  15. Buck Fifty

    Buck Fifty New Member

    Pro: To the best of my knowledge NONE !

    Con : Divide the drivers we have, and dumb down the ones we would get !
  16. anonymous4

    anonymous4 Active Member

    There are no pros. It is a major step backwards if this were to see the light of day at this point in teamster/UPS history.
  17. bigblu 2 you

    bigblu 2 you Active Member

    so lets just give back a portion of our pay to keep this from happening.i mean ups management deserves it.i have always worried about the jim kellys,mike eskews,and scott davis's surviving aftre retirement.i dont want them to have to drive what i do,and budget groceries and all like this over paid driver does.get real,if there serious about cost they look where it really rentals,dinners,fuel reimberesment,and i could go on but wont.and it aint the drivers my man.they can jump in a lake before i give back.i want to see then give first and then ill pause and consider.

    QKRSTKR Active Member

    Is UPS having problems? I just don't like the comparisons with other companies and industries that always go thru slumps. Just show me the last time UPS lost money in any quarter, and I'll gladly start concessions. Auto companies regularly record losses and while it was going on the union was still demanding strong contracts. That's what hurts struggling companies. UPS is not struggling.
  19. DS

    DS Fenderbender

    My take on this is that they "again" are stepping over dimes to pick up pennies.
    Where I am they are pushing us to be back and punched out by 7.They are telling
    us to just leave if the customer is not ready.In their attempt to push the center
    management team to achieve this,they are failing to realize that the customer has
    other choices. I have an oncall I get every Friday that supplies airplane weather components
    to aerospace companies.My on car told me to just leave if they were not ready.
    They want to save $15.00 by not paying me a half hour OT,and risk losing an account
    that ships $160,000 worth of computer components to Mcdonnell Douglas and Honeywell.
    I just shake my head.
  20. Brownslave688

    Brownslave688 You want a toe? I can get you a toe.

    If they ship out every Friday and you are there around the same time why aren't they ready? I will wait about 5 minutes for someone who knows I pick up at the same time everyday that's it.

    I remember a PCM we had during the worst part of the recession. Basically it was that we needed to get sales leads because we had just had our worst quarter ever. Our largest drop in revenue year over year. Then came the part that made me realize ups was going to be just fine. Our center manager said if we have 8 more quarters like this we won't be making money anymore. So it was going to take 2 years worth of progressively worse quarters before we no longer made a profit?!?!?!? No not bankrupt just to the point that we would be in the red. With the stock pile of cash prob a good while after that before we even sniffed bankruptcy.