Fred's letter.

[East coast navy]

I like what Fred is coming up with here...

Ok everyone... Let's air it all out.

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.n...__Taylor_Harrassment_9-29-2017.pdf?1506707883

 

[wide load]

I like what Fred is coming up with here...

Ok everyone... Let's air it all out.

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.n...__Taylor_Harrassment_9-29-2017.pdf?1506707883

His 9.5 almost mimics mine except I left in the 3x

 

[MyTripisCut]

I like what Fred is coming up with here...

Ok everyone... Let's air it all out.

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.n...__Taylor_Harrassment_9-29-2017.pdf?1506707883

Pretty innovative thoughts on 9.5 language. Why stop there? 9.5 is an old term from a company that doesn't exist anymore, make it 9 hours. One hour of OT sounds better than and hour and a half.

 

[Gimme Danger]

Good stuff from FZ. The national committee wanted solutions, and FZ came through.

 

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

His 9.5 almost mimics mine except I left in the 3x

As far as the four eight hour requests go there are decisions that give you more than four. Also why would he contradict his proposal on eight hour requests by saying each driver should get two.

 

[sandwich]

I like it.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

I'll give Fred Z credit. That's an impressive wish list.

Problem is, what would he be willing to give up in return ?


If he had such "superior" negotiating skills;

Why is Ups Worldport such a mess ?


When you "jump ship" or "leave the reservation"....

"Hell hath no fury.... than an pissed off Teamster."

Politically speaking. (in this sense)



-Bug-

 

[East coast navy]

I'll give Fred Z credit. That's an impressive wish list.

Problem is, what would he be willing to give up in return ?


If he had such "superior" negotiating skills;

Why is Ups Worldport such a mess ?


When you "jump ship" or "leave the reservation"....

"Hell hath no fury.... than an off Teamster."

Politically speaking. (in this sense)



-Bug-

Why would a good supject to the Hoffa's campaign and a good local leader invite Fred to the table if Hoffa didn't do it once but twice. Smells like fish to me.

 

[MyTripisCut]

I'll give Fred Z credit. That's an impressive wish list.

Problem is, what would he be willing to give up in return ?


If he had such "superior" negotiating skills;

Why is Ups Worldport such a mess ?


When you "jump ship" or "leave the reservation"....

"Hell hath no fury.... than an off Teamster."

Politically speaking. (in this sense)



-Bug-

No disrespect, but why do we have to always "give something up", to gain something contractually. How about UPS starts giving something up?

 

[burrheadd]

I'll give Fred Z credit. That's an impressive wish list.

Problem is, what would he be willing to give up in return ?


If he had such "superior" negotiating skills;

Why is Ups Worldport such a mess ?


When you "jump ship" or "leave the reservation"....

"Hell hath no fury.... than an off Teamster."

Politically speaking. (in this sense)



-Bug-

How about using Black Friday as a bargaining chip

Or has it already been GIVEN away

 

[burrheadd]

What about the PVDs which is total bs

I would hope if the boys in the crystal palace give this up

They at least get something in return

 

[Box Ox]

UPS will never give up its tacit encouragement of hourly harassment by management. They're just not gonna agree to adding enforcement mechanisms unless there's a strike.

Glad it's being brought up nonetheless.

 

[Indecisi0n]

I'm ready to strike.

 

[burrheadd]

I like what Fred is coming up with here...

Ok everyone... Let's air it all out.

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.n...__Taylor_Harrassment_9-29-2017.pdf?1506707883

Looks good

Let's see if there's any bite with that bark

 

[Hump dump and roll]

From my observation of drivers being harassed it is because they are not producing up to the standards set by the company. Maybe instead of treating those can produce like ship the company should start recognizing those who do produce. Now before some of you guys jump all over me and say that's anti union I agree, equal work for equal compensation.

I like to think of the harassment problem like communism.

In theory communism works but in practice it fails because for it to succeed you need one of two things:
1. Total selfless devotion to the ideals of communism
Or
2. Fear. Fear through intimidation. Fear through inprisonment. Fear through forced labor. Fear through totalitarian rule.

We're not going to get 100% sacrifice from every employee in the company. So the company uses fear to keep production going.

If the company looses its ability to run its operation through fear it will need the cooperation of the union for the bargained work force to accept that there is a standard of production to be met.

If a standard is set then everyone will eventually fall to the lowest acceptable standard either by their own willingness or by the company increasing what it finds as acceptable.

When this happens the company again gets to go back and use fear as a harassment tool. The tool of harassment will be used like it is now to force production.

Those who are harassed will worry for their jobs, and increase production, while those who see the harassment will increase their production to prevent from being harassed.

By addressing harassment in such a way, as Fred has outlined, is a slippery slope because it opens up the door for need for production to be recognized. I feel the company has burned too many bridges and has history of acting in bad faith for there to be positive reenforcement mechanism written into the contract; this is an alternative to what Fred laid out in his letter.

For us as a union to make any strides we need to have the power to enforce the fear of a strike against the company.

If there is fear on both sides it will bring more of an equilibrium to the management-employee relationship.

 

[wide load]

Good stuff from FZ. The national committee wanted solutions, and FZ came through.

I saw similar or exact proposals on BUG’s thread. Looks like Fred just fingered the best ones.

 

[Box Ox]

From my observation of drivers being harassed it is because they are not producing up to the standards set by the company.

The production standards set by the Company are often arbitrary and ridiculous to begin with. You can't have a reasonable conversation about production with a driver if what the Company calls a "10 hour day" is not actually a real world 10 hour day in the first place.

So until the standards change, which they won't (because Company-produced standards will always work in favor of the Company), the harassment won't stop either. So the company will never give up its cornering of both production standards and enforcement methods (harassment) that push drivers to fear for their jobs and work faster and harder until the day they burn out or have an accident and are forced out and replaced by a lower wage new driver.

Sure, some drivers push back against it, but the Company gets away with a lot more than it doesn't. And they'll want to keep it that way.

 

[burrheadd]

From my observation of drivers being harassed it is because they are not producing up to the standards set by the company. Maybe instead of treating those can produce like ship the company should start recognizing those who do produce. Now before some of you guys jump all over me and say that's anti union I agree, equal work for equal compensation.

I like to think of the harassment problem like communism.

In theory communism works but in practice it fails because for it to succeed you need one of two things:
1. Total selfless devotion to the ideals of communism
Or
2. Fear. Fear through intimidation. Fear through inprisonment. Fear through forced labor. Fear through totalitarian rule.

We're not going to get 100% sacrifice from every employee in the company. So the company uses fear to keep production going.

If the company looses its ability to run its operation through fear it will need the cooperation of the union for the bargained work force to accept that there is a standard of production to be met.

If a standard is set then everyone will eventually fall to the lowest acceptable standard either by their own willingness or by the company increasing what it finds as acceptable.

When this happens the company again gets to go back and use fear as a harassment tool. The tool of harassment will be used like it is now to force production.

Those who are harassed will worry for their jobs, and increase production, while those who see the harassment will increase their production to prevent from being harassed.

By addressing harassment in such a way, as Fred has outlined, is a slippery slope because it opens up the door for need for production to be recognized. I feel the company has burned too many bridges and has history of acting in bad faith for there to be positive reenforcement mechanism written into the contract; this is an alternative to what Fred laid out in his letter.

For us as a union to make any strides we need to have the power to enforce the fear of a strike against the company.

If there is fear on both sides it will bring more of an equilibrium to the management-employee relationship.

Lemme help you out the standard was set many years ago

A fare days work for a fare days pay

No need to go anywhere else with this

 

[Union Power]

From my observation of drivers being harassed it is because they are not producing up to the standards set by the company. Maybe instead of treating those can produce like ship the company should start recognizing those who do produce. Now before some of you guys jump all over me and say that's anti union I agree, equal work for equal compensation.

I like to think of the harassment problem like communism.

In theory communism works but in practice it fails because for it to succeed you need one of two things:
1. Total selfless devotion to the ideals of communism
Or
2. Fear. Fear through intimidation. Fear through inprisonment. Fear through forced labor. Fear through totalitarian rule.

We're not going to get 100% sacrifice from every employee in the company. So the company uses fear to keep production going.

If the company looses its ability to run its operation through fear it will need the cooperation of the union for the bargained work force to accept that there is a standard of production to be met.

If a standard is set then everyone will eventually fall to the lowest acceptable standard either by their own willingness or by the company increasing what it finds as acceptable.

When this happens the company again gets to go back and use fear as a harassment tool. The tool of harassment will be used like it is now to force production.

Those who are harassed will worry for their jobs, and increase production, while those who see the harassment will increase their production to prevent from being harassed.

By addressing harassment in such a way, as Fred has outlined, is a slippery slope because it opens up the door for need for production to be recognized. I feel the company has burned too many bridges and has history of acting in bad faith for there to be positive reenforcement mechanism written into the contract; this is an alternative to what Fred laid out in his letter.

For us as a union to make any strides we need to have the power to enforce the fear of a strike against the company.

If there is fear on both sides it will bring more of an equilibrium to the management-employee relationship.

 

[Dragon]

From my observation of drivers being harassed it is because they are not producing up to the standards set by the company. Maybe instead of treating those can produce like ship the company should start recognizing those who do produce. Now before some of you guys jump all over me and say that's anti union I agree, equal work for equal compensation.

I like to think of the harassment problem like communism.

In theory communism works but in practice it fails because for it to succeed you need one of two things:
1. Total selfless devotion to the ideals of communism
Or
2. Fear. Fear through intimidation. Fear through inprisonment. Fear through forced labor. Fear through totalitarian rule.

We're not going to get 100% sacrifice from every employee in the company. So the company uses fear to keep production going.

If the company looses its ability to run its operation through fear it will need the cooperation of the union for the bargained work force to accept that there is a standard of production to be met.

If a standard is set then everyone will eventually fall to the lowest acceptable standard either by their own willingness or by the company increasing what it finds as acceptable.

When this happens the company again gets to go back and use fear as a harassment tool. The tool of harassment will be used like it is now to force production.

Those who are harassed will worry for their jobs, and increase production, while those who see the harassment will increase their production to prevent from being harassed.

By addressing harassment in such a way, as Fred has outlined, is a slippery slope because it opens up the door for need for production to be recognized. I feel the company has burned too many bridges and has history of acting in bad faith for there to be positive reenforcement mechanism written into the contract; this is an alternative to what Fred laid out in his letter.

For us as a union to make any strides we need to have the power to enforce the fear of a strike against the company.

If there is fear on both sides it will bring more of an equilibrium to the management-employee relationship.

Wow, great post! Great read keep it up.