FIREWORKS in the Southwest over Andy Ms "carve-out!"

[Bubblehead]

I made reference to that letter in my last post genius. No wonder your called bubblehead. Fred made promises he could not keep while we got a carve out. If Fred listened to Andy M you could be in our Healthcare plan. Yet it's the IBT's fault. I'm sick of your conspiracy theories.

Are you saying that Fred Z, during any point of the negotiations in 2013, was in the position to sign off on behalf of the Central Region?

 

[LagunaBrown]

Are you saying that Fred Z, during any point of the negotiations in 2013, was in the position to sign off on behalf of the Central Region?

I'm verry clear about what I said. Fred Z told you he could win contract issues that he could not deliver while the West negotiated and retained benefits. Don't blame the IBT because the man you trusted failed you.

 

[Bubblehead]

I'm verry clear about what I said. Fred Z told you he could win contract issues that he could not deliver while the West negotiated and retained benefits. Don't blame the IBT because the man you trusted failed you.

You're mistaken, Fred Z never told me anything back then????
I'm not from Local 89.

Remember, that was back in 2013, before there was a Teamsters United.
I guess with guys like you, that live in a vacuum and are spoon fed as minions, losing track of time can be common.

 

[Whatbrownwontdoforyou]

You're mistaken, Fred Z never told me anything back then????
I'm not from Local 89.

Remember, that was back in 2013, before there was a Teamsters United.
I guess with guys like you, that live in a vacuum and are spoon fed as minions, losing track of time can be common.

The western conference healthcare wasn't available for only a couple of locals.....the e boards that spoke up to h and h that there members weren't excepting the change got the ok to join the western conference plan.....the problem is Fred and Tim didn't speak up for the members of 89 and 804 and say they wanted better healthcare.......they were ok with the healthcare plans in 2013

 

[wide load]

Remember, that was back in 2013, before there was a Teamsters United.

Hence why Fred and the big fat thief of 804 didn't say a word during negotiations until TDU and the members told them to do so.

 

[LagunaBrown]

Whenever Evil's posts a lame thread, we put that thread to bed. #truthhurts

 

[Evil]

Whenever Evil's posts a lame thread, we put that thread to bed. #truthhurts

Why don't you text "the used car salesman" and ask him the round of applauses Local 186 leader Abel G received after picking apart Andy Ms carve out at the JC42 meeting in Hawaii? By the way Rick heart attack M was there but no sight of Andy M or TN aka LagunaBrown, why?

Why don't you ask the used car salesman about Jay P 396 and Randy C 63 praising Abel G for his honesty?

How about Randy C speaking and acknowledging the carve out was a mistake that caused Hoffa to not only lose the Southwest, but nation wide UPS vote?

Why did Randy C advice JC 42 officers and BAs last night to prepare for strike against UPS in 2018?

Oh Randy C did acknowledge that if they didn't listen to the members they would be voted out.

Oh and they all acknowledged Ken H is long gone.

 

[104Feeder]

I'm still waiting for you to answer why your region was afforded "autonomy", while some were "IMPOSED"????

The reason for the "carve out" is because of Article 23 "Maintenance of Standards" language in our Western regional supplement that basically says that all conditions will be maintained at no less than the highest standards of the agreement before. This is language that the East, with the exception of Local 177, seems to have bargained away. You should direct your questions and anger to those in power who bargained your Maintenance of Standards language away long ago.

Hoffa/Hall didn't "give the company a chance", the Company was resolute that they were getting out of the healthcare business. Not wanting to create a whole new HC plan as Andy M did, they just rolled everyone into TeamCare. Andy M & Local 177 were not having any of it and we controlled our own destiny. This fact was obviously not conveyed to you in your contract negotiations, as apparently your leadership did not want to explain why your Maintenance of Standards language was bargained away. I'm proud to be in the West and proud to have been represented by Andy M for so long, as most of us are. We have never known the pain regarding our HC and pension plan that you have in the East but we can only be responsible for our Region. I would suggest redirecting your efforts to get your region a better deal, not throw stones at ours. I would personally love to have everyone in the country in our healthcare plan, and pension plan for that matter, but that is way beyond my non-pay grade in the Union.

 

[Bubblehead]

The reason for the "carve out" is because of Article 23 "Maintenance of Standards" language in our Western regional supplement that basically says that all conditions will be maintained at no less than the highest standards of the agreement before. This is language that the East, with the exception of Local 177, seems to have bargained away. You should direct your questions and anger to those in power who bargained your Maintenance of Standards language away long ago.

Hoffa/hall didn't "give the company a chance", the Company was resolute that they were getting out of the healthcare business. Not wanting to create a whole new HC plan as Andy M did, they just rolled everyone into TeamCare. Andy M & Local 177 were not having any of it and we controlled our own destiny. This fact was obviously not conveyed to you in your contract negotiations, as apparently your leadership did not want to explain why your Maintenance of Standards language was bargained away. I'm proud to be in the West and proud to have been represented by Andy M for so long, as most of us are. We have never known the pain regarding our HC and pension plan that you have in the East but we can only be responsible for our Region. I would suggest redirecting your efforts to get your region a better deal, not throw stones at ours. I would personally love to have everyone in the country in our healthcare plan, and pension plan for that matter, but that is way beyond my non-pay grade in the Union.

I'm not in the East, I am in the Central Region and our Article 4 "Maintenance Of Standards" language reads as follows.

ARTICLE 4 - MAINTENANCE OF STANDARDS

The Employer agrees that all conditions of employment in his/her individual operation relating to wages, hours of work, overtime differentials and general working conditions shall be maintained at not less than the highest standards in effect at the time of the signing of this Agreement, and the conditions of employment shall be improved wherever specific provisions for improvement are made elsewhere in this Agreement. It is agreed that the provisions of this
Section shall not apply to inadvertent or bonafide errors made by the Employer or the Union in applying the terms and conditions of this Agreement
if such error is corrected within ninety (90) days from the date of error. Any disagreement between the local union and the Employer, with respect to this matter, shall be subject to the grievance procedure. This provision does not give the Employer the right to impose or continue wages,hours and working condition less than those contained in this Agreement.

Sound familiar???
It should, because it is word for word the same as your Western Region, Article 23, Maintenance Of Standards language.

So do you want to try and tell me again how the West was able to "carve out" of the H&W language contained in the National Master, when we in the Central Region were told it was not possible?

Btw, you did get one thing right out of all of that. I am mad, on several levels. I just don't let it define me. Thanks for trying to explain.

 

[LagunaBrown]

I'm not in the East, I am in the Central Region and our Article 4 "Maintenance Of Standards" language reads as follows.

ARTICLE 4 - MAINTENANCE OF STANDARDS

The Employer agrees that all conditions of employment in his/her individual operation relating to wages, hours of work, overtime differentials and general working conditions shall be maintained at not less than the highest standards in effect at the time of the signing of this Agreement, and the conditions of employment shall be improved wherever specific provisions for improvement are made elsewhere in this Agreement. It is agreed that the provisions of this
Section shall not apply to inadvertent or bonafide errors made by the Employer or the Union in applying the terms and conditions of this Agreement
if such error is corrected within ninety (90) days from the date of error. Any disagreement between the local union and the Employer, with respect to this matter, shall be subject to the grievance procedure. This provision does not give the Employer the right to impose or continue wages,hours and working condition less than those contained in this Agreement.

Sound familiar???
It should, because it is word for word the same as your Western Region, Article 23, Maintenance Of Standards language.

So do you want to try and tell me again how the West was able to "carve out" of the H&W language contained in the National Master, when we in the Central Region were told it was not possible?

Btw, you did get one thing right out of all of that. I am mad, on several levels. I just don't let it define me. Thanks for trying to explain.

Easy cowboy, I already told you where to find it. Stop being in denial and playing like the victim.

 

[104Feeder]

I'm not in the East, I am in the Central Region and our Article 4 "Maintenance Of Standards" language reads as follows.

ARTICLE 4 - MAINTENANCE OF STANDARDS

The Employer agrees that all conditions of employment in his/her individual operation relating to wages, hours of work, overtime differentials and general working conditions shall be maintained at not less than the highest standards in effect at the time of the signing of this Agreement, and the conditions of employment shall be improved wherever specific provisions for improvement are made elsewhere in this Agreement. It is agreed that the provisions of this
Section shall not apply to inadvertent or bonafide errors made by the Employer or the Union in applying the terms and conditions of this Agreement
if such error is corrected within ninety (90) days from the date of error. Any disagreement between the local union and the Employer, with respect to this matter, shall be subject to the grievance procedure. This provision does not give the Employer the right to impose or continue wages,hours and working condition less than those contained in this Agreement.

Sound familiar???
It should, because it is word for word the same as your Western Region, Article 23, Maintenance Of Standards language.

So do you want to try and tell me again how the West was able to "carve out" of the H&W language contained in the National Master, when we in the Central Region were told it was not possible?

Btw, you did get one thing right out of all of that. I am mad, on several levels. I just don't let it define me. Thanks for trying to explain.

Your diatribe begs the question "Why didn't you ask these questions 4 friend---ing years ago when this was all being negotiated???" Did your Local have any meetings on this significant change that was happening to your Healthcare? Did you bother to attend? WHY, 4 friend---ing years later, are you hashing his out on BC as if it was some huge conspiracy? Anyone who had questions in 104 had multiple opportunities, 3 separate meetings, one at another local's large meeting hall that is more than triple the capacity or ours, to have every question answered by Andy M himself. Instead of throwing stones at MY Secretary/Treasurer who had the stones to Stand Up for all of us in the WEST along with the help of our new best friends in Local 177 WHY DON'T YOU DEVOTE YOUR ENERGY TO HOLDING YOUR OWN REGION ACCOUNTABLE


From my notes, 4 friend---ing years ago, from our local meetings with Andy M:
- Company proposal on HC, Hall breaks off negotiations
- if Co does not drop demands will delay until July
-HC is now about $1500/mo
- 2200-2400 retirees in SW
-letter to retirees for HC to go from $50 to $750 per family 8/1/13 non-negotiable
- can only negotiate for future retirees, legally prohibited from bargaining for those already retired
-we will not vote on a contact that doesn't take care of our retirees
- company proposed $50-750 raise just before we voted on contacts last time, we refused to vote until they backed off
- company wants to slash 20/40% of benefits - deductibles, vision, dental
$7500 out of pocket, no major medical
-Company has never come after HC like this before
- We are in Co. HC plan, 85% on Teamster plans
-Maintenance of Benefits, already signed off on West Level- NATL WOULD SUPERSEDE
-we are not going to pay 1 cent, NON STARTER
-Company made 4.3 billion
-will not open that door
-we have best contract anywhere, at some point we will have to pay part of HC but not now
-Co did typical arrogant "you are indebted to us" proposal
-Retiree $50 now- will go up but going to hold it down
-Teamster plans- South $800/mo for family coverage (retirees)
- MOA saying Co cannot even talk about leaving WCT for 10 years from date signed, would be 4 years contract so that letter would hold out til next contract
-1 of every $3 is paid to HC in the Country. ACA put 4,000,000 people who didn't have HC on the rolls but no $ to pay for it
-Co says 97% of Americans pay for their HC
-Can move money to subsidize retiree HC to keep down to $100-$150/mo

NM was voted on and passed. Supplements failed

-NM is done 5000... retiree plan + dependents
-SPD $1250 copays retiree pays mo/.... actual cost $9220 yr
-2012 $56million shortage existing & future post 65 and surviving spouse
-$1/yr for H&W and Pension
-was going to take 20 cents from general wage increase to pay for retiree HC
-Co cannot afford the liability FASB statute 106 fair accounting standards board
-$22B liability in Jan 2013 20% current cap 30% 5K retirees now + Dependents
-projected $10-12B in 5 years... all driven by UPS being public
-way to reduce was to charge retirees
- Co calculated to make Natl proposal to put everyone on CS H&W took it out of SW & WEST- so we couldn't negotiate our own destiny
-Picked CS because only fund large enough to take on influx of 140k people
-CS= South, Midwest, Eastern Seaboard most
-Co put $629M in enhancements to SW & NJ to make more attractive
-Carve Out came about on last day,- best we could get
-17 Supplements down- 2 not to do with HC
-Cannot reopen National Contract- but we have Carve Out
-Chairman of CS only had 4 YES 100 NO
-w/in constraints of $ paid to CS for Enhanced plan- no reserves to start with
-#s change, Andy thinks $2.2B is understated $2.4B over 5 years
-$.20 ou of Gen WI to buy 52 for retiree coverage/ restored Post 65 coverage with $.05
-Retiree- anyone before 1/1/14 stuck in Co plan (you and spouse)
-Changing from 90/10 to 80/20 across the board (and prescriptions) + deductible & more per month
-.... prior to 12/31 under CO plan- with no Teamcare after after CS or SW carve out
- also get our portion of $629M of Enhancements + dental, disability...
-getting cash up front 50/50 of $1 to HW& Pension can move Pension to H&W- change allows us to vote to move wages to pension
-Plan: Year 1,2,3 use money we have, 3&4 may vote
-Extended UPS agreement indefinitely w/30 day notice
-any increases will be retroactive & no increase in Retiree HC
-900 eligible to retire in next 5 years
-NO way to go back & return H&W to SW & West
-Another $1.25 going into Pension 1st 3 years- improved, nothing changed
-HC not going to be exactly the same, will be better plan than CS w/retiree & dependent coverage
-$9.60/$7.60/hr to Pension .45,.65,.65 1st next 5 years $.25 to $.50 to restore Post 65 so $9.85
- 2yr $.50 3yr $.50 4th and 5th year open
-will carve out a plan so that we can control our own destiny not going to say it can't be done and dumped into CS--- minimum will be CS-Enhanced
-ACA no one knows the effect, it it allows "opt out" it will destroy every Union HC plan

-Same provider- AETNA and Express Scripts/Medco
-$0 premium
-No network change, no deductible Yr 1-4. $100/$200 in Year 5
<notes on details of our plan coverages, this was to sell us on the plan for a "Yes" vote>
-Consequences of 2nd No Vote: National takes over our Negotiations (Andy or Committee)
-We are outnumbered 3 or 4 to 1- rest wanted us to go to CS H&W
-Taft Hartley Trust- 2 years- 2.... already trustees (names)
-Retirees in CO plan will stay in CO plan they are in now ...
-No carry over on FSA (company wouldn't do it)
-If Jan 1st not done will still have HC through Co.

 

[10 Pt]

Your diatribe begs the question "Why didn't you ask these questions 4 friend---ing years ago when this was all being negotiated???" Did your Local have any meetings on this significant change that was happening to your Healthcare? Did you bother to attend? WHY, 4 friend---ing years later, are you hashing his out on BC as if it was some huge conspiracy? Anyone who had questions in 104 had multiple opportunities, 3 separate meetings, one at another local's large meeting hall that is more than triple the capacity or ours, to have every question answered by Andy M himself. Instead of throwing stones at MY Secretary/Treasurer who had the stones to Stand Up for all of us in the WEST along with the help of our new best friends in Local 177 WHY DON'T YOU DEVOTE YOUR ENERGY TO HOLDING YOUR OWN REGION ACCOUNTABLE


From my notes, 4 friend---ing years ago, from our local meetings with Andy M:
- Company proposal on HC, hall breaks off negotiations
- if Co does not drop demands will delay until July
-HC is now about $1500/mo
- 2200-2400 retirees in SW
-letter to retirees for HC to go from $50 to $750 per family 8/1/13 non-negotiable
- can only negotiate for future retirees, legally prohibited from bargaining for those already retired
-we will not vote on a contact that doesn't take care of our retirees
- company proposed $50-750 raise just before we voted on contacts last time, we refused to vote until they backed off
- company wants to slash 20/40% of benefits - deductibles, vision, dental
$7500 out of pocket, no major medical
-Company has never come after HC like this before
- We are in Co. HC plan, 85% on Teamster plans
-Maintenance of Benefits, already signed off on West Level- NATL WOULD SUPERSEDE
-we are not going to pay 1 cent, NON STARTER
-Company made 4.3 billion
-will not open that door
-we have best contract anywhere, at some point we will have to pay part of HC but not now
-Co did typical arrogant "you are indebted to us" proposal
-Retiree $50 now- will go up but going to hold it down
-Teamster plans- South $800/mo for family coverage (retirees)
- MOA saying Co cannot even talk about leaving WCT for 10 years from date signed, would be 4 years contract so that letter would hold out til next contract
-1 of every $3 is paid to HC in the Country. ACA put 4,000,000 people who didn't have HC on the rolls but no $ to pay for it
-Co says 97% of Americans pay for their HC
-Can move money to subsidize retiree HC to keep down to $100-$150/mo

NM was voted on and passed. Supplements failed

-NM is done 5000... retiree plan + dependents
-SPD $1250 copays retiree pays mo/.... actual cost $9220 yr
-2012 $56million shortage existing & future post 65 and surviving spouse
-$1/yr for H&W and Pension
-was going to take 20 cents from general wage increase to pay for retiree HC
-Co cannot afford the liability FASB statute 106 fair accounting standards board
-$22B liability in Jan 2013 20% current cap 30% 5K retirees now + Dependents
-projected $10-12B in 5 years... all driven by UPS being public
-way to reduce was to charge retirees
- Co calculated to make Natl proposal to put everyone on CS H&W took it out of SW & WEST- so we couldn't negotiate our own destiny
-Picked CS because only fund large enough to take on influx of 140k people
-CS= South, Midwest, Eastern Seaboard most
-Co put $629M in enhancements to SW & NJ to make more attractive
-Carve Out came about on last day,- best we could get
-17 Supplements down- 2 not to do with HC
-Cannot reopen National Contract- but we have Carve Out
-Chairman of CS only had 4 YES 100 NO
-w/in constraints of $ paid to CS for Enhanced plan- no reserves to start with
-#s change, Andy thinks $2.2B is understated $2.4B over 5 years
-$.20 ou of Gen WI to buy 52 for retiree coverage/ restored Post 65 coverage with $.05
-Retiree- anyone before 1/1/14 stuck in Co plan (you and spouse)
-Changing from 90/10 to 80/20 across the board (and prescriptions) + deductible & more per month
-.... prior to 12/31 under CO plan- with no Teamcare after after CS or SW carve out
- also get our portion of $629M of Enhancements + dental, disability...
-getting cash up front 50/50 of $1 to HW& Pension can move Pension to H&W- change allows us to vote to move wages to pension
-Plan: Year 1,2,3 use money we have, 3&4 may vote
-Extended UPS agreement indefinitely w/30 day notice
-any increases will be retroactive & no increase in Retiree HC
-900 eligible to retire in next 5 years
-NO way to go back & return H&W to SW & West
-Another $1.25 going into Pension 1st 3 years- improved, nothing changed
-HC not going to be exactly the same, will be better plan than CS w/retiree & dependent coverage
-$9.60/$7.60/hr to Pension .45,.65,.65 1st next 5 years $.25 to $.50 to restore Post 65 so $9.85
- 2yr $.50 3yr $.50 4th and 5th year open
-will carve out a plan so that we can control our own destiny not going to say it can't be done and dumped into CS--- minimum will be CS-Enhanced
-ACA no one knows the effect, it it allows "opt out" it will destroy every Union HC plan

-Same provider- AETNA and Express Scripts/Medco
-$0 premium
-No network change, no deductible Yr 1-4. $100/$200 in Year 5
<notes on details of our plan coverages, this was to sell us on the plan for a "Yes" vote>
-Consequences of 2nd No Vote: National takes over our Negotiations (Andy or Committee)
-We are outnumbered 3 or 4 to 1- rest wanted us to go to CS H&W
-Taft Hartley Trust- 2 years- 2.... already trustees (names)
-Retirees in CO plan will stay in CO plan they are in now ...
-No carry over on FSA (company wouldn't do it)
-If Jan 1st not done will still have HC through Co.

Do you presume that nothing was done to combat these changes in the Central?
Do you also presume that @Bubblehead wasn't a part of the fight against the HC (and other negative) changes in the CBA?

 

[BigUnionGuy]

Your diatribe begs the question "Why didn't you ask these questions 4 friend---ing years ago when this was all being negotiated???" Did your Local have any meetings on this significant change that was happening to your Healthcare? Did you bother to attend? WHY, 4 friend---ing years later, are you hashing his out on BC as if it was some huge conspiracy? Anyone who had questions in 104 had multiple opportunities, 3 separate meetings, one at another local's large meeting hall that is more than triple the capacity or ours, to have every question answered by Andy M himself. Instead of throwing stones at MY Secretary/Treasurer who had the stones to Stand Up for all of us in the WEST along with the help of our new best friends in Local 177 WHY DON'T YOU DEVOTE YOUR ENERGY TO HOLDING YOUR OWN REGION ACCOUNTABLE


From my notes, 4 friend---ing years ago, from our local meetings with Andy M:
- Company proposal on HC, hall breaks off negotiations
- if Co does not drop demands will delay until July
-HC is now about $1500/mo
- 2200-2400 retirees in SW
-letter to retirees for HC to go from $50 to $750 per family 8/1/13 non-negotiable
- can only negotiate for future retirees, legally prohibited from bargaining for those already retired
-we will not vote on a contact that doesn't take care of our retirees
- company proposed $50-750 raise just before we voted on contacts last time, we refused to vote until they backed off
- company wants to slash 20/40% of benefits - deductibles, vision, dental
$7500 out of pocket, no major medical
-Company has never come after HC like this before
- We are in Co. HC plan, 85% on Teamster plans
-Maintenance of Benefits, already signed off on West Level- NATL WOULD SUPERSEDE
-we are not going to pay 1 cent, NON STARTER
-Company made 4.3 billion
-will not open that door
-we have best contract anywhere, at some point we will have to pay part of HC but not now
-Co did typical arrogant "you are indebted to us" proposal
-Retiree $50 now- will go up but going to hold it down
-Teamster plans- South $800/mo for family coverage (retirees)
- MOA saying Co cannot even talk about leaving WCT for 10 years from date signed, would be 4 years contract so that letter would hold out til next contract
-1 of every $3 is paid to HC in the Country. ACA put 4,000,000 people who didn't have HC on the rolls but no $ to pay for it
-Co says 97% of Americans pay for their HC
-Can move money to subsidize retiree HC to keep down to $100-$150/mo

NM was voted on and passed. Supplements failed

-NM is done 5000... retiree plan + dependents
-SPD $1250 copays retiree pays mo/.... actual cost $9220 yr
-2012 $56million shortage existing & future post 65 and surviving spouse
-$1/yr for H&W and Pension
-was going to take 20 cents from general wage increase to pay for retiree HC
-Co cannot afford the liability FASB statute 106 fair accounting standards board
-$22B liability in Jan 2013 20% current cap 30% 5K retirees now + Dependents
-projected $10-12B in 5 years... all driven by UPS being public
-way to reduce was to charge retirees
- Co calculated to make Natl proposal to put everyone on CS H&W took it out of SW & WEST- so we couldn't negotiate our own destiny
-Picked CS because only fund large enough to take on influx of 140k people
-CS= South, Midwest, Eastern Seaboard most
-Co put $629M in enhancements to SW & NJ to make more attractive
-Carve Out came about on last day,- best we could get
-17 Supplements down- 2 not to do with HC
-Cannot reopen National Contract- but we have Carve Out
-Chairman of CS only had 4 YES 100 NO
-w/in constraints of $ paid to CS for Enhanced plan- no reserves to start with
-#s change, Andy thinks $2.2B is understated $2.4B over 5 years
-$.20 ou of Gen WI to buy 52 for retiree coverage/ restored Post 65 coverage with $.05
-Retiree- anyone before 1/1/14 stuck in Co plan (you and spouse)
-Changing from 90/10 to 80/20 across the board (and prescriptions) + deductible & more per month
-.... prior to 12/31 under CO plan- with no Teamcare after after CS or SW carve out
- also get our portion of $629M of Enhancements + dental, disability...
-getting cash up front 50/50 of $1 to HW& Pension can move Pension to H&W- change allows us to vote to move wages to pension
-Plan: Year 1,2,3 use money we have, 3&4 may vote
-Extended UPS agreement indefinitely w/30 day notice
-any increases will be retroactive & no increase in Retiree HC
-900 eligible to retire in next 5 years
-NO way to go back & return H&W to SW & West
-Another $1.25 going into Pension 1st 3 years- improved, nothing changed
-HC not going to be exactly the same, will be better plan than CS w/retiree & dependent coverage
-$9.60/$7.60/hr to Pension .45,.65,.65 1st next 5 years $.25 to $.50 to restore Post 65 so $9.85
- 2yr $.50 3yr $.50 4th and 5th year open
-will carve out a plan so that we can control our own destiny not going to say it can't be done and dumped into CS--- minimum will be CS-Enhanced
-ACA no one knows the effect, it it allows "opt out" it will destroy every Union HC plan

-Same provider- AETNA and Express Scripts/Medco
-$0 premium
-No network change, no deductible Yr 1-4. $100/$200 in Year 5
<notes on details of our plan coverages, this was to sell us on the plan for a "Yes" vote>
-Consequences of 2nd No Vote: National takes over our Negotiations (Andy or Committee)
-We are outnumbered 3 or 4 to 1- rest wanted us to go to CS H&W
-Taft Hartley Trust- 2 years- 2.... already trustees (names)
-Retirees in CO plan will stay in CO plan they are in now ...
-No carry over on FSA (company wouldn't do it)
-If Jan 1st not done will still have HC through Co.

An informative post, by a true Teamster member.


The part I liked best....

From my notes, 4 friend---ing years ago, from our local meetings with Andy M:

I still have my personal (hand written) notes from most major Central Region meetings.

The best being.... retiring BA's from UPS.

Plus, IBT contract reviews.

Why, 4 friend---ing years later, are you hashing his out on BC as if it was some huge conspiracy?

Good question.



-Bug-

 

[LagunaBrown]

People were told that if they kept voting no they could stay in the company plan. It prolonged coverage but Teamcare was inevitable because Fred Z and Tim S did not get an MOU.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

People were told that if they kept voting no they could stay in the company plan.

The funny part about that is.... Teamcare has been financially sound.

Opponents try and claim, they "needed" to be infused with new plan participants.

BS.



-Bug-

 

[Inthegame]

Your diatribe begs the question "Why didn't you ask these questions 4 friend---ing years ago when this was all being negotiated???" Did your Local have any meetings on this significant change that was happening to your Healthcare? Did you bother to attend? WHY, 4 friend---ing years later, are you hashing his out on BC as if it was some huge conspiracy? Anyone who had questions in 104 had multiple opportunities, 3 separate meetings, one at another local's large meeting hall that is more than triple the capacity or ours, to have every question answered by Andy M himself. Instead of throwing stones at MY Secretary/Treasurer who had the stones to Stand Up for all of us in the WEST along with the help of our new best friends in Local 177 WHY DON'T YOU DEVOTE YOUR ENERGY TO HOLDING YOUR OWN REGION ACCOUNTABLE


From my notes, 4 friend---ing years ago, from our local meetings with Andy M:
- Company proposal on HC, hall breaks off negotiations
- if Co does not drop demands will delay until July
-HC is now about $1500/mo
- 2200-2400 retirees in SW
-letter to retirees for HC to go from $50 to $750 per family 8/1/13 non-negotiable
- can only negotiate for future retirees, legally prohibited from bargaining for those already retired
-we will not vote on a contact that doesn't take care of our retirees
- company proposed $50-750 raise just before we voted on contacts last time, we refused to vote until they backed off
- company wants to slash 20/40% of benefits - deductibles, vision, dental
$7500 out of pocket, no major medical
-Company has never come after HC like this before
- We are in Co. HC plan, 85% on Teamster plans
-Maintenance of Benefits, already signed off on West Level- NATL WOULD SUPERSEDE
-we are not going to pay 1 cent, NON STARTER
-Company made 4.3 billion
-will not open that door
-we have best contract anywhere, at some point we will have to pay part of HC but not now
-Co did typical arrogant "you are indebted to us" proposal
-Retiree $50 now- will go up but going to hold it down
-Teamster plans- South $800/mo for family coverage (retirees)
- MOA saying Co cannot even talk about leaving WCT for 10 years from date signed, would be 4 years contract so that letter would hold out til next contract
-1 of every $3 is paid to HC in the Country. ACA put 4,000,000 people who didn't have HC on the rolls but no $ to pay for it
-Co says 97% of Americans pay for their HC
-Can move money to subsidize retiree HC to keep down to $100-$150/mo

NM was voted on and passed. Supplements failed

-NM is done 5000... retiree plan + dependents
-SPD $1250 copays retiree pays mo/.... actual cost $9220 yr
-2012 $56million shortage existing & future post 65 and surviving spouse
-$1/yr for H&W and Pension
-was going to take 20 cents from general wage increase to pay for retiree HC
-Co cannot afford the liability FASB statute 106 fair accounting standards board
-$22B liability in Jan 2013 20% current cap 30% 5K retirees now + Dependents
-projected $10-12B in 5 years... all driven by UPS being public
-way to reduce was to charge retirees
- Co calculated to make Natl proposal to put everyone on CS H&W took it out of SW & WEST- so we couldn't negotiate our own destiny
-Picked CS because only fund large enough to take on influx of 140k people
-CS= South, Midwest, Eastern Seaboard most
-Co put $629M in enhancements to SW & NJ to make more attractive
-Carve Out came about on last day,- best we could get
-17 Supplements down- 2 not to do with HC
-Cannot reopen National Contract- but we have Carve Out
-Chairman of CS only had 4 YES 100 NO
-w/in constraints of $ paid to CS for Enhanced plan- no reserves to start with
-#s change, Andy thinks $2.2B is understated $2.4B over 5 years
-$.20 ou of Gen WI to buy 52 for retiree coverage/ restored Post 65 coverage with $.05
-Retiree- anyone before 1/1/14 stuck in Co plan (you and spouse)
-Changing from 90/10 to 80/20 across the board (and prescriptions) + deductible & more per month
-.... prior to 12/31 under CO plan- with no Teamcare after after CS or SW carve out
- also get our portion of $629M of Enhancements + dental, disability...
-getting cash up front 50/50 of $1 to HW& Pension can move Pension to H&W- change allows us to vote to move wages to pension
-Plan: Year 1,2,3 use money we have, 3&4 may vote
-Extended UPS agreement indefinitely w/30 day notice
-any increases will be retroactive & no increase in Retiree HC
-900 eligible to retire in next 5 years
-NO way to go back & return H&W to SW & West
-Another $1.25 going into Pension 1st 3 years- improved, nothing changed
-HC not going to be exactly the same, will be better plan than CS w/retiree & dependent coverage
-$9.60/$7.60/hr to Pension .45,.65,.65 1st next 5 years $.25 to $.50 to restore Post 65 so $9.85
- 2yr $.50 3yr $.50 4th and 5th year open
-will carve out a plan so that we can control our own destiny not going to say it can't be done and dumped into CS--- minimum will be CS-Enhanced
-ACA no one knows the effect, it it allows "opt out" it will destroy every Union HC plan

-Same provider- AETNA and Express Scripts/Medco
-$0 premium
-No network change, no deductible Yr 1-4. $100/$200 in Year 5
<notes on details of our plan coverages, this was to sell us on the plan for a "Yes" vote>
-Consequences of 2nd No Vote: National takes over our Negotiations (Andy or Committee)
-We are outnumbered 3 or 4 to 1- rest wanted us to go to CS H&W
-Taft Hartley Trust- 2 years- 2.... already trustees (names)
-Retirees in CO plan will stay in CO plan they are in now ...
-No carry over on FSA (company wouldn't do it)
-If Jan 1st not done will still have HC through Co.

This is steward seminar 101 stuff and a lesson for everyone. It shows why notes are so important. Excellent job my good man.

 

[Inthegame]

The funny part about that is.... Teamcare has been financially sound.

Opponents try and claim, they "needed" to be infused with new plan participants.

BS.



-Bug-

Yes sir. 22 months of reserve with expanded coverage levels. 2.5% administration costs. R/X cost reductions.
The sky is staying firmly in place.

 

[Bubblehead]

The funny part about that is.... Teamcare has been financially sound.

Opponents try and claim, they "needed" to be infused with new plan participants.

Yes sir. 22 months of reserve with expanded coverage levels. 2.5% administration costs. R/X cost reductions.
The sky is staying firmly in place.

Then why are unprecedented annual deductibles necessary?

 

[Bubblehead]

Your diatribe begs the question "Why didn't you ask these questions 4 friend---ing years ago when this was all being negotiated???" Did your Local have any meetings on this significant change that was happening to your Healthcare? Did you bother to attend? WHY, 4 friend---ing years later, are you hashing his out on BC as if it was some huge conspiracy? Anyone who had questions in 104 had multiple opportunities, 3 separate meetings, one at another local's large meeting hall that is more than triple the capacity or ours, to have every question answered by Andy M himself. Instead of throwing stones at MY Secretary/Treasurer who had the stones to Stand Up for all of us in the WEST along with the help of our new best friends in Local 177 WHY DON'T YOU DEVOTE YOUR ENERGY TO HOLDING YOUR OWN REGION ACCOUNTABLE

You assume a lot and seem angry.
Not sure where these "stones" are that I'm throwing at Andy M and your region?
Please quote them?
I simply asked two questions, that I have been asking for years.

1. When the National Master barely passed on the first attempt and the Central Region Supplement failed miserably, we were told that H&W was contained in the Master, and consequently could not be addressed in the subsequent regional supplemental proposals. ( Didn't stop them from going back and sweetening the pot in the Master though?)
With this in mind, how is it that the Western Region was able to "carve out" their own plan after a failed supplement?

2. How is it that the Central States Pension plan encountered all of the speed bumps like deregulation of the freight industry and the perils of a volatile stock market that has it at the brink of extinction, while the Western Pension and several others have been able to insulate themselves from these variables and remain fully funded?

They are reasonable questions, asked in a civil tongue, yet you drop veiled friend-bombs in multiple sentences when all I did was debunk your previous ridiculous explanation?
My response was far from a "diatribe".

I too went to all the meetings that were offered in my Local, and I too have notes and still have all of the handouts given (I suspect those are what you are passing off as "notes")

What are you really mad about?
Why does @LagunaBrown continue to pretend that Tim S played any role in this, when his Local had a stand alone contract?
Why do they continue to act like Fred Z had anything to do with anything outside of Local 89 during the contract negotiations?

Why aren't they talking about any of the presidents in Pennsylvania or Ohio, that were in holdout locals also?

The attempt to villainize these two is unfair and suspicious.
What are you guys still afraid of?

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Then why are unprecedented annual deductibles necessary?

Deductibles and co-pays force us to be smarter medical consumers and help to maintain a healthy fund reserve.