Wait...what? Am I reading this correctly? You correlate housing prices to driver wages and then determine that it's the company's job to make sure you make enough money to buy a house with your wages?Well…. Uhhh… hmmm… sorry yea I can expect 75$. Don’t let your lack of imagination hold you back brother
And it’s just not expecting that, that is how much I got paid 15 years ago in real money. The same house I bought would have a payment more the 2.5x what my payment is currently. That would be right about 80$ an hour to be samsies. Ups shipping rates have also double since then.
With that reasoning, the cheapest Lamborghini in 1982 was just shy of $100,000, the Lamborghini Countach, so the company should have to double my pay rate so I can buy the cheapest Lamborghini in 2023 (which is the Lamborghini Huracan, just north of $200,000).
Because then we're "samesies". Absolutely ridiculous reasoning. It's like punishing the company for inflation. The only way the company should cover for inflation is cost-of-living adjustments that result in actual raises when considering inflation, not by making pay rates exactly commensurate with buying power and the prices of things 15-30 years ago. These are the kinds of idiotic arguments that, if they were successful and the union negotiated based off them would bankrupt the company in short order.
Don't be stupid. The company has given a fair deal for the workers. Now, if you choose to vote no because you think the company has to bend over and give all it's profits to us then if the world worked the way you wanted it to you'd be standing in the bread line along with everyone else that works at UPS, hourlies and management included. Great idea.