In the end, who wins??? And at what cost?

[upschuck]

Better not bigger.

And in my opinion we are neither.

 

[Just A UPS Guy]

And in my opinion we are neither.

It's disgusting how much service doesn't matter anymore.

 

[Pullman Brown]

Yes, exactly. Better not bigger is the single biggest open admission I've seen that UPS leadership had accepted the profitable, not competitive model.

Seeing that we live in a world now that seeks maximum profits vs adequate profits, going the competitive model way was the wrong way. It would have cost the company too much to buy and build what was necessary to be competitive especially when you can’t win against the Federal Government. Blame the government! If they were privatized new ball game!

 

[upschuck]

It's disgusting how much service doesn't matter anymore.

Could tell a story of this that just happened this week. Management does not care maybe less than we do.

 

[Mplayers2006]

You do know when you have an increase of 6%, you multiply by 1.06, and not .06?

That would give those numbers 6.7B, and not your figure of 383.4m.

I am only doing math on the net amount produced from a 6% increase. the formula I used should be fine.

I don’t know where you’re getting 6 billion in profit from.

6% increase on 60 billion
60billion x 1.06= 63 billion. Increase of 3 billion. How are you getting 6 billion?

 

[Mplayers2006]

What are they demanding?

i am mainly referring to the wage increase they are demanding for PTs. Not sure if this is the official number but I am hearing 25 an hour is their demand.

 

[upschuck]

I am only doing math on the net amount produced from a 6% increase. the formula I used should be fine.

I don’t know where you’re getting 6 billion in profit from.

6% increase on 60 billion
60billion x 1.06= 63 billion. Increase of 3 billion. How are you getting 6 billion?

You were doing the increase, while I was doing the total, I suppose.

The number you gave out was 63.9b, so a 6% increase, then multiplied it by your 10% profit margin, giving the net profit of the 6.7b, if I remember correctly.

Those are your numbers.

 

[DELACROIX]

Agreed.
This company was founded with the long term in mind. It was owned by the people that ran it everyday. Now it is more a traditional, publicly traded 'what was your last quarter profit' type company.

That transformation came from a host of factors, but the biggest single moment that made the largest jump in that transformation was '97. I know most people will say going public in '99. But that was largely a symptom of, and caused by, the shift in the business model forced by '97.

The “97” strike was a failed attempt by the Company to take control of all the Monetary Contribution Pension Plans run by the Teamsters and convert them into money saving Defined Benefit Pension Plans.

They actually proposed that language back in “93”… they knew that eventually the “Central” was in trouble after the federal deregulation in the 80’s. The Union was hurting financially and still fighting the Government over corruption when they decided to test Carey and go for the money grab. They finally got their wish when Hoffa gave them the opportunity in 2007, by then their pension withdrawal were close to 7.5 billion counting the creation of the IBT/UPS Pension Plan. Back in “97” I believe it was close to 1.5 billion to leave the Central, they already had control of the Part Timer Pension plan and were paying peanuts into that plan and stuffing their own management plans.

The decision to go public was made years prior, guessing around the time they decided to eliminate their generous “Thrift Plan” in “95”.
This gave the first opportunity for it’s Union folk to purchase UPS stock as a retirement option, the same as their management.

We had several members who were under the UPS Retirement Plan that were booted out by the Company in 1995 under the guise of improving their benefits…bottom line was they did not to share any improvements in their own plans with their “help” even if it cost them nothing.

If the Company wants to test us over the part timers’s starting wage by permitting a strike in today’s market and economic conditions it would be the most stupidest and arrogant decision ever made at UPS. Guess we will find out in a couple of weeks…

If the Company is worried about going bankrupt over paying more for their part timers let them agree to a 3 year contract instead of a 5…seriously you can only cry “wolf” for so long..

 

[Mplayers2006]

You were doing the increase, while I was doing the total, I suppose.

The number you gave out was 63.9b, so a 6% increase, then multiplied it by your 10% profit margin, giving the net profit of the 6.7b, if I remember correctly.

Those are your numbers.

I only used 60 to simplify the math.

But That is partially correct, however my example Did not conclude 6.7 billion profit from a 6% increase.
The increase would create a net profit of 383 million.

 

[upschuck]

I only used 60 to simplify the math.

But That is partially correct, however my example Did not conclude 6.7 billion profit from a 6% increase.
The increase would create a net profit of 383 million.

Mine was total profit, ie gross money coming in- gross money going out.

Yours in an increase in that amount.

 

[Mplayers2006]

If the Company is worried about going bankrupt over paying more for their part timers let them agree to a 3 year contract instead of a 5…seriously you can only cry “wolf” for so long..

I would imagine once you agree to the wage increase, trajectory moves like someone’s age. It only goes up, never down.

But agree to the point on this would be the stupidest strike of there was one. I recall teamster leader saying they worked through 95% of their demands. It would asinine to strike over the 5%.

 

[Just A UPS Guy]

I would imagine once you agree to the wage increase, trajectory moves like someone’s age. It only goes up, never down.

But agree to the point on this would be the stupidest strike of there was one. I recall teamster leader saying they worked through 95% of their demands. It would asinine to strike over the 5%.

Most won't cost them so much money, unless they keep the same attitude towards 9.5, that's why 90% was so easy. Giving FT a significant raise and then PTers $10/hr is a direct hit to the pocketbook. I'm sure they don't care about paying FT, they know we get it done, but I'd bet they have zero respect for the PT, and want that to stay a job that people will sign up for.

 

[brownIEman]

The “97” strike was a failed attempt by the Company to take control of all the Monetary Contribution Pension Plans run by the Teamsters and convert them into money saving Defined Benefit Pension Plans.

They actually proposed that language back in “93”… they knew that eventually the “Central” was in trouble after the federal deregulation in the 80’s. The Union was hurting financially and still fighting the Government over corruption when they decided to test Carey and go for the money grab. They finally got their wish when Hoffa gave them the opportunity in 2007, by then their pension withdrawal were close to 7.5 billion counting the creation of the IBT/UPS Pension Plan. Back in “97” I believe it was close to 1.5 billion to leave the Central, they already had control of the Part Timer Pension plan and were paying peanuts into that plan and stuffing their own management plans.

The decision to go public was made years prior, guessing around the time they decided to eliminate their generous “Thrift Plan” in “95”.
This gave the first opportunity for it’s Union folk to purchase UPS stock as a retirement option, the same as their management.

We had several members who were under the UPS Retirement Plan that were booted out by the Company in 1995 under the guise of improving their benefits…bottom line was they did not to share any improvements in their own plans with their “help” even if it cost them nothing.

If the Company wants to test us over the part timers’s starting wage by permitting a strike in today’s market and economic conditions it would be the most stupidest and arrogant decision ever made at UPS. Guess we will find out in a couple of weeks…

If the Company is worried about going bankrupt over paying more for their part timers let them agree to a 3 year contract instead of a 5…seriously you can only cry “wolf” for so long..

That's the IBT propaganda view.
Trying to get out of the multi employer pension obligation was decried as a money grab as you put it.
The company saw it as trying to get out of an obligation created by dozens of firms that the IBT helped go out of business. The deregulation caused those makets to be much more competitive, and IBT negotiated work rules all but insured the union trucking houses could not turn on a dime and pickup up loads at a moments notice and they were not able to compete with small non union houses or owner operators.
UPS saw that ever growing financial obligation as a bankruptcy waiting to happen, and they might not have been wrong.

The thrift plan was eliminated in '95 due to changing IRS rules that made the way that plan operated no line beneficial, and maybe borderline illegal. It had no connection to the decision to go public. Discussions of going public I have no doubt had occurred for decades. But Jim Kelley and his supporters in leadership I have no doubt were against it up until the strike. After the strike Kelley was weakened in his position due to what was seen as a failure, and quickly replaced as CEO. I have no doubt the final decision to go public was taken after August '97.

As for leaving Central, I think the exit fee was closer to 2B in '97, but yes 1.5 to 2 in that range. It was 6 or 7B in'07 when Hoffa traded it for organizing UPS freight (Cochrane was probably spinning in his grave). The Central States fund managers proceeded to lose pretty much the entire chunk (which UPS borrowed and is still paying off) in the financial crash of 08-09.

You also left out that in '97 UPS offered to put in the contract that any UPSers moved to the UPS-IBT plan they proposed creating could not recieve a lesser benefit than what members under the Central states wound up getting. They were just trying to avoid the proverbial sword of Damacles. The only ones getting totally screwed under that deal would have been the non-UPSers in Central states. They got screwed regardless.
In the end, even when UPS left the Central states fund, it agreed to make up shortfalls to UPSers left in the fund. Which was a stupid thing to agree to, as when the IBT negotiated grants to try to bail the fund out, the tried to give those funds to non UPSer retirees first to basically screw the company.

Funny thing about wolves in industries. They can be hard to identify and years or decades away. They are out there though. Just ask the US Steel industry. They cried wolf for decades. It eventually showed. Same with the US Automakers. They now have largely 2 tier pay structures.
But the wolf for UPS is already on its way, has been since about 97. Maybe longer. And the company holding part timers to low relative wages won't hold off the wolf for long, so for what is worth, I hope the IBT can get much better compensation for part timers so that becomes a decent job for college students and younger folks starting out as it once was.

 

[DELACROIX]

That's the IBT propaganda view.
Trying to get out of the multi employer pension obligation was decried as a money grab as you put it.
The company saw it as trying to get out of an obligation created by dozens of firms that the IBT helped go out of business. The deregulation caused those makets to be much more competitive, and IBT negotiated work rules all but insured the union trucking houses could not turn on a dime and pickup up loads at a moments notice and they were not able to compete with small non union houses or owner operators.
UPS saw that ever growing financial obligation as a bankruptcy waiting to happen, and they might not have been wrong.

I forgot about the creation of the 22.3’s , which the Union won after arbitration. Corporate at that time and probably today fought for more part time positions, they had control over most of their pension funds and again paid peanuts compared to our full timers’ and management’s pension trusts. Granted they knew that the Central and other Teamsters pension plans were in the red or heading that way, particularly after Carey was forced to raise their benefit levels to the level that the Company was offering back in “97”.. 100 ft/50 pt cap at 35 years.. if the Company ever got control over those targeted pension plans, the West would of never seen the possibility of 300 to 400 dollars a service year with no caps.

The thrift plan was eliminated in '95 due to changing IRS rules that made the way that plan operated no line beneficial, and maybe borderline illegal. It had no connection to the decision to go public. Discussions of going public I have no doubt had occurred for decades. But Jim Kelley and his supporters in leadership I have no doubt were against it up until the strike. After the strike Kelley was weakened in his position due to what was seen as a failure, and quickly replaced as CEO. I have no doubt the final decision to go public was taken after August '97.

Probably right on that statement..I do remember something illegal about off shore package insurance charges.

Didn’t Scott replace Kelley..?

As for leaving Central, I think the exit fee was closer to 2B in '97, but yes 1.5 to 2 in that range. It was 6 or 7B in'07 when Hoffa traded it for organizing UPS freight (Cochrane was probably spinning in his grave). The Central States fund managers proceeded to lose pretty much the entire chunk (which UPS borrowed and is still paying off) in the financial crash of 08-09.

Correct

You also left out that in '97 UPS offered to put in the contract that any UPSers moved to the UPS-IBT plan they proposed creating could not recieve a lesser benefit than what members under the Central states wound up getting. They were just trying to avoid the proverbial sword of Damacles. The only ones getting totally screwed under that deal would have been the non-UPSers in Central states. They got screwed regardless.
In the end, even when UPS left the Central states fund, it agreed to make up shortfalls to UPSers left in the fund. Which was a stupid thing to agree to, as when the IBT negotiated grants to try to bail the fund out, the tried to give those funds to non UPSer retirees first to basically screw the company.

Remember that the Central States people are a separate entity, they are not the IBT…it was their decision to penalize UPS more once they started to reduce our retirees’ benefits. The IBT only negotiated monetary increases into our pension and health and welfare plans, the benefit plans then set any increases or changes in benefits.

Funny thing about wolves in industries. They can be hard to identify and years or decades away. They are out there though. Just ask the US Steel industry. They cried wolf for decades. It eventually showed. Same with the US Automakers. They now have largely 2 tier pay structures.
But the wolf for UPS is already on its way, has been since about 97. Maybe longer. And the company holding part timers to low relative wages won't hold off the wolf for long, so for what is worth, I hope the IBT can get much better compensation for part timers so that becomes a decent job for college students and younger folks starting out as it once was.

I said this before, they can raise he part timers wages to 25 bucks an hour and chase them off the clock in 4 or 3.5 hours, 5 days a week and actually save money. Right now the Company is using these part timers as full timers, working them 30 or 40 hours a week, sometimes 6 days a week. It is the same old story…They do not want to create new full time positions, and will do anything to make that happen.

 

[brownIEman]

So UPS in your opinion will be a fraction of itself in thirty years?

Yes. Likely a sort if boutique, niche delivery service. That's the current trajectory it is on a far as I can see. Will still be a very large corporation, but certainly a shadow of what an package delivery company with 80% of the US market would be (there won't be one that dominant again imo)

 

[brownIEman]

I forgot about the creation of the 22.3’s , which the Union won after arbitration. Corporate at that time and probably today fought for more part time positions, they had control over most of their pension funds and again paid peanuts compared to our full timers’ and management’s pension trusts. Granted they knew that the Central and other Teamsters pension plans were in the red or heading that way, particularly after Carey was forced to raise their benefit levels to the level that the Company was offering back in “97”.. 100 ft/50 pt cap at 35 years.. if the Company ever got control over those targeted pension plans, the West would of never seen the possibility of 300 to 400 dollars a service year with no caps.

Casey was not 'forced' to increase the other plans. He could have rejected UPS' offer and explained why the IBT cloud not in that moment match the UPS offer and explain the other downsides of UPS pitch. I've heard many, many times Carey referred to a sort of a victim having been 'forced' to raise the pension obligations and damage those funds because of dastardly attempt of UPS to pay their retirees a higher benefit (to your earlier point, admittedly to the ft retirees, not pt) . I find that line of argument unconvincing to say the least.

Probably right on that statement..I do remember something illegal about off shore package insurance charges.

Didn’t Scott replace Kelley..?

The insurance shenanigans was re- insurance of package values through overseas partners, that was a different deal.
The Thrift Plan as implemented by UPS was not really shenanigans. It was actual a win- win for the company and employees who participated. The Thrift Plan bought real estate. Specifically, UPS sort facilities and the land they were on. The company then leased those buildings from the plan. It essentially allowed UPS to expand operations without paying millions in interest to banks. Those millions instead went to the employee participants in the Thrift Plan. Other companies did exploit the rules that allowed that kind of thing for shenanigans, abs the IRS changed the rules.

Mike Eskew was after Kelly, then Scott. Then Abney I think.

Remember that the Central States people are a separate entity, they are not the IBT…it was their decision to penalize UPS more once they started to reduce our retirees’ benefits. The IBT only negotiated monetary increases into our pension and health and welfare plans, the benefit plans then set any increases or changes in benefits.

Either way gauranteeing a certain level for UPS retirees under the plan was like writing then a blank check and was stupid of UPS to do.

I said this before, they can raise he part timers wages to 25 bucks an hour and chase them off the clock in 4 or 3.5 hours, 5 days a week and actually save money. Right now the Company is using these part timers as full timers, working them 30 or 40 hours a week, sometimes 6 days a week. It is the same old story…They do not want to create new full time positions, and will do anything to make that happen.

I'm guessing you've never managed a preload, night sort, day sort or twilight. 'Chasing them off the clock' as you do breezely put it is not as easy as you imagine. Especially when the employees and stewards are working together to pay shenanigans of their own and avoid it or grieve out of order chasing they themselves orchestrated. Not saying management should not be held accountable for doing it, just pointing out it is not as easy in practice as you seem to believe.
Much like delivering is not nearly as easy in practice as IE pencil pushers think it is.

That said, UPS should create full time jobs where they can, but both sides should recognize most insider operations are part time operations. Part time wages should be raised, and part timers should hit OT after 25 hours double after 40, removing the financial incentive for the Company to use them as ft.

 

[Brown Down]

no one in the teamsters leadership can point where and how would these demands be paid for. It is easy to make demands, but what their demanding is not realistic but absurd.

No what is absurd is this company made a ton of profits off of abusing people both as a classification and everyone during a pandemic and then wants to claim they can only afford a cost neutral contract. And if places like fast food can damn near double their pay without increasing costs or barely increasing prices.
Any way you cut it thisncompany is getting to be insanely greedy and out of touch in the upper reaches of corporate.

 

[brownIEman]

No what is absurd is this company made a ton of profits off of abusing people both as a classification and everyone during a pandemic and then wants to claim they can only afford a cost neutral contract. And if places like fast food can damn near double their pay without increasing costs or barely increasing prices.
Any way you cut it thisncompany is getting to be insanely greedy and out of touch in the upper reaches of corporate.

Just an FYI, in the last couple years at least where I'm at, Average meal price at a fast food joint has gone from around $6-7 to around $11-13. Not quite double, but pretty close. No one doubles one of their biggest expenses and 'barely' raises prices. Also worth noting, fast food joints sell a product, food, UPS sells a service. So, hourly pay is a much larger percentage of operating cost for UPS than it is for a fast food joint.

UPS drivers are still the highest paid in the industry. Just because the company is negotiating hard and not immediately giving in to demands to double the gap between UPS drivers and the rest of the industry, is not immediately a sign of extreme greed on their part, despite what your IBT overlords tell you.

I'm starting to get the impression Sean wants to make a name for himself and a legacy like Carey did. I suspect he may take you out on strike for a week or so just to seem tough then triumphantly celebrate a hard win agreement he could have gotten without a strike.

 

[DELACROIX]

Just an FYI, in the last couple years at least where I'm at, Average meal price at a fast food joint has gone from around $6-7 to around $11-13. Not quite double, but pretty close. No one doubles one of their biggest expenses and 'barely' raises prices. Also worth noting, fast food joints sell a product, food, UPS sells a service. So, hourly pay is a much larger percentage of operating cost for UPS than it is for a fast food joint.

UPS drivers are still the highest paid in the industry. Just because the company is negotiating hard and not immediately giving in to demands to double the gap between UPS drivers and the rest of the industry, is not immediately a sign of extreme greed on their part, despite what your IBT overlords tell you.

I'm starting to get the impression Sean wants to make a name for himself and a legacy like Carey did. I suspect he may take you out on strike for a week or so just to seem tough then triumphantly celebrate a hard win agreement he could have gotten without a strike.

Getting a tentative is the first of many hurdles…It will still take a lot of convincing in order to get it ratified..

Unlike the last one..the final decision will be made by the rank and file..(who vote)…

Carey didn’t get much of a legacy.. he was vilified by Hoffa’s red shirts and promptly ousted. Corporate still spits on the ground when his name is mentioned. He was not perfect but one thing for certain he sure shook some cages and paid the price.

 

[Brown Down]

Just an FYI, in the last couple years at least where I'm at, Average meal price at a fast food joint has gone from around $6-7 to around $11-13. Not quite double, but pretty close. No one doubles one of their biggest expenses and 'barely' raises prices. Also worth noting, fast food joints sell a product, food, UPS sells a service. So, hourly pay is a much larger percentage of operating cost for UPS than it is for a fast food joint.

UPS drivers are still the highest paid in the industry. Just because the company is negotiating hard and not immediately giving in to demands to double the gap between UPS drivers and the rest of the industry, is not immediately a sign of extreme greed on their part, despite what your IBT overlords tell you.

I'm starting to get the impression Sean wants to make a name for himself and a legacy like Carey did. I suspect he may take you out on strike for a week or so just to seem tough then triumphantly celebrate a hard win agreement he could have gotten without a strike.

And they only raised this much with inflation and very recently and highly doubtful that the pay increase didn't almost 2 years later. Nice try though. You still can't explain why every 5 years the company is "broke" and wants a cost neutral contract yet the other 4 do just fine or even excel. A cost neutral contract is fine if a company isn't doing that great or even going downhill. That is not the case by far.