AlwaysChafed
Well-Known Member
For instance was something lost, like a benefit, or a rule and brought back in later contracts? I ask because of the healthcare.
Are you really asking if UPS gives anything back, ever?
Benben wasent around then.1997
For instance was something lost, like a benefit, or a rule and brought back in later contracts? I ask because of the healthcare.
I have no clue why I'm paying dues.
I have no clue why I'm paying dues.
Because you would have been able to negotiate a $36.16 per hour wage with no medical premium, a pension and job protection on your own?I have no clue why I'm paying dues.
RTM State!I have no clue why I'm paying dues.
A number of drivers in my center have been saying the same thing....kind of scary in a Right To Work state.
By the time I retire they'll be obsolete.Because you would have been able to negotiate a $36.16 per hour wage with no medical premium, a pension and job protection on your own?
By the time I retire they'll be obsolete.
RTM State!
Right To Mooch!
The only thing I can see as a sacrifice for my area is that peak was extended by 2 weeks and a 4 year progression. What we gained for that was that 1) our casuals will come from the inside instead of outside. 2) the time spent working will reduce their progressing once FT. 3) They will use these casuals to also cover for full weeks when excessive book offs occur during the year so sups will not pull routes.RTM State!
Right To Mooch!
You seem to beat this TA drum pretty hard.
What exactly did you sacrifice in this TA?
The only thing I can see as a sacrifice for my area is that peak was extended by 2 weeks and a 4 year progression. What we gained for that was that 1) our casuals will come from the inside instead of outside. 2) the time spent working will reduce their progressing once FT. 3) They will use these casuals to also cover for full weeks when excessive book offs occur during the year so sups will not pull routes.
Beyond that, I really see no concessions. People say that certain language on 9.5 or technology got worse. But comparing the language, I do not see it as such. I deal with contract issues everyday.
There was a time when a new contract meant IMPROVEMENTS not CONCESSIONS.For instance was something lost, like a benefit, or a rule and brought back in later contracts? I ask because of the healthcare.
You do know their are 2 parties involved right? You do know what happens when only one side takes right?There was a time when a new contract meant IMPROVEMENTS not CONCESSIONS.For instance was something lost, like a benefit, or a rule and brought back in later contracts? I ask because of the healthcare.