Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
getting paid for supervisors working?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="PobreCarlos" data-source="post: 622465" data-attributes="member: 16651"><p>altstewie;</p><p> </p><p>One thing in your comment (which overall I appreciated!) I'd dispute would be that "UPS can't ship our jobs overseas" in that, in a way, I think, starting more than 30 years ago now, they already have shipped quite a few. In my career, UPS went from being solely a domestic corporation to one that had an appreciable overseas presence. Since then, the overseas operations have grown exponentially, while domestic operations have essentially treaded water. Today, UPS would be a giant corporation (still one of the biggest) MINUS any Teamster and/or domestic participation at all. Meanwhile, following the '97 strike, many of the (potential, at least) domestic jobs HAVE been passed over to a non-union workforce...both within and without (note FDX Ground). And I'm convinced that if domestic delivery operations become a financial burden, then the company would have no problem "pulling a DHL" and dropping them. Companies simply aren't going to stay in business if they're losing money...nor, for that matter, are they going to even stay in an AREA of business if greater profits are available elsewhere.</p><p> </p><p>Corporations exist for one reason only; to make money for those the corporation consist of (i.e. - shareholders). Call that "greed" if you want....but you're not going to get a corporation, which really knows no country boundaries (UPS, for example, is far from an "American company" today), to act primarily out of single-nation humantiarian concerns, either. So "yes", it DOES come down to money...with the point being that the provider of the jobs HAS to make money in order to pay workers. Beyond that, it's possible for companies/corporations/firms/whatever to make money without employees...but it's pretty much impossible for those that labor for hire to make money without employers.</p><p> </p><p>Unions can bemoan that fact (i.e. - "money" is so important, "greed" exists, etc), but it's like complaining about gravity. The simple fact is that such is the way the world works. Now one can stick one's head in the sand and try to deny that fact and get burned in the process, or one can recognize it as a fact and deal with it POSITIVELY. Far, far too often over the last few decades, unions have tried to deny it..and thus deny economic reality. And look at the results.</p><p> </p><p>I guess one thing I need to emphasize here is that, while it might take two sides to "come together", from managements/shareholders perspective, there's no absolute reason to "come together" at all - especially if the other side is being overly belligerant. By that I mean that companies don't always need their present work force, and could quite handily look elsewhere, or even simply go out of business, without the slightest ethical hindrance whatsoever.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PobreCarlos, post: 622465, member: 16651"] altstewie; One thing in your comment (which overall I appreciated!) I'd dispute would be that "UPS can't ship our jobs overseas" in that, in a way, I think, starting more than 30 years ago now, they already have shipped quite a few. In my career, UPS went from being solely a domestic corporation to one that had an appreciable overseas presence. Since then, the overseas operations have grown exponentially, while domestic operations have essentially treaded water. Today, UPS would be a giant corporation (still one of the biggest) MINUS any Teamster and/or domestic participation at all. Meanwhile, following the '97 strike, many of the (potential, at least) domestic jobs HAVE been passed over to a non-union workforce...both within and without (note FDX Ground). And I'm convinced that if domestic delivery operations become a financial burden, then the company would have no problem "pulling a DHL" and dropping them. Companies simply aren't going to stay in business if they're losing money...nor, for that matter, are they going to even stay in an AREA of business if greater profits are available elsewhere. Corporations exist for one reason only; to make money for those the corporation consist of (i.e. - shareholders). Call that "greed" if you want....but you're not going to get a corporation, which really knows no country boundaries (UPS, for example, is far from an "American company" today), to act primarily out of single-nation humantiarian concerns, either. So "yes", it DOES come down to money...with the point being that the provider of the jobs HAS to make money in order to pay workers. Beyond that, it's possible for companies/corporations/firms/whatever to make money without employees...but it's pretty much impossible for those that labor for hire to make money without employers. Unions can bemoan that fact (i.e. - "money" is so important, "greed" exists, etc), but it's like complaining about gravity. The simple fact is that such is the way the world works. Now one can stick one's head in the sand and try to deny that fact and get burned in the process, or one can recognize it as a fact and deal with it POSITIVELY. Far, far too often over the last few decades, unions have tried to deny it..and thus deny economic reality. And look at the results. I guess one thing I need to emphasize here is that, while it might take two sides to "come together", from managements/shareholders perspective, there's no absolute reason to "come together" at all - especially if the other side is being overly belligerant. By that I mean that companies don't always need their present work force, and could quite handily look elsewhere, or even simply go out of business, without the slightest ethical hindrance whatsoever. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
getting paid for supervisors working?
Top