Is there contract language or US law that prohibits UPS from promoting pro-contract propaganda?

[brown_trousers]

What’s silly is the fact you claiming both UPS and Teamsters think a strike would be bad yet think a no vote would catapult us 2 stages beyond to nuclear status of a strike? Sounds like a scare tactic. Take it or strike? That’s what you’re saying?

They put that mindset into motion with the strike authorization vote. Which passed with flying colors.

Now add the possibility of a "no" vote, and many people will add the two together.

 

[LagunaBrown]

What part of "voting no does not equal a strike" do you not get? How dense are you, seriously?

And the more I see Marcus Aurelius' quote every time I see your posts, it makes me cringe even more. Have you even read Marcus Aurelius? And of all the quotes of his to put up, you put that one up knowing that you're a sellout? Disgusting.

Your an idiot. Your read my post and come up with a that? How blind are you to see I stated the obvious. The Teamsters negotiated the damn contract and are pushing a yes vote you blockhead. What world do you live in that you can’t figure it out. There is always risk, stop telling people that there is not. Sure it could get better but it could be worse as well. The company and Teamsters are saying loud and clear that a bird in hand is like two in the bush. Vote according for or against it. Period. Your personal attacks show you a a maroon than can’t listen to a point.

 

[lolbr]

News Flash! You do know the Teamsters negotiated it and it was aproved by the two man committee. What in the world would makes you think they would recommend a no vote? You do know we lost volume last strike and had to get it back, you have to realize both the Teamsters and UPS think a strike would be bad. If you want to not listen to them and strike then vote no but some of these threads are just silly.....Obviously they are pushing a yes vote.

The union shouldn't be recommending either (yes or no). They should just be presenting the facts and letting the members decide. Instead they are pushing only selective yes facts, and that members may not be working for a while if they vote no.

 

[LagunaBrown]

The union shouldn't be recommending either (yes or no). They should just be presenting the facts and letting the members decide. Instead they are pushing only selective yes facts, and that members may not be working for a while if they vote no.

They negotiated it why wouldn’t the say to vote yes?

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

 

[KhalDan]

They negotiated it why wouldn’t the say to vote yes?

They've spent several thousand dollars (EXTREMELY conservative estimate) on pro-contract propaganda with thinly-veiled threats of unilateral action if you vote no. I don't see how anyone could look at that as appropriate.

 

[SameRightsForAll]

I imagine the union is pushing hard because ups is going to add 25% staffing with these 22.4 positions.

That's a 25% increase in full time employees contributing to the failing pension

And a 25% increase in cheaper labor for ups.

A win win for both sides. A lose lose for current part timers and future employees.

Wrong again, Reiback. How is filling 22.4 from insiders the same as adding 25% staffing?

 

[SameRightsForAll]

They've spent several thousand dollars (EXTREMELY conservative estimate) on pro-contract propaganda with thinly-veiled threats of unilateral action if you vote no. I don't see how anyone could look at that as appropriate.

They've spent millions on this ad blitz and pre-hiring picket line crossers.

 

[Dr.Brownz]

The most contentious part of the t.a. is a creation of the union.

Think of it as a clock:

The union is pulling up towards the 11, the company is pulling up towards the 1, and us chumps who do the work are pulling towards down to the 6.

What kind of loser talk is this?

 

[Dr.Brownz]

What’s silly is the fact you claiming both UPS and Teamsters think a strike would be bad yet think a no vote would catapult us 2 stages beyond to nuclear status of a strike? Sounds like a scare tactic. Take it or strike? That’s what you’re saying?

That's way to reasonable of an analysis!

 

[Superteeth2478]

Your an idiot. Your read my post and come up with a that? How blind are you to see I stated the obvious. The Teamsters negotiated the damn contract and are pushing a yes vote you blockhead. What world do you live in that you can’t figure it out. There is always risk, stop telling people that there is not. Sure it could get better but it could be worse as well. The company and Teamsters are saying loud and clear that a bird in hand is like two in the bush. Vote according for or against it. Period. Your personal attacks show you a a maroon than can’t listen to a point.

It's you're an idiot. And you are one. Way too many factors going against the possibility of a strike. A republican president. Peak season coming up. UPS being a public company. The damage it would do to both sides. The simple fact that any idiot can see that this isn't the last, best, and final offer. It's a long way from a strike. And no, just because the Teamsters negotiated the contract it doesn't mean they have to push a yes vote, if they were actually fighting for their members and not bought off by the company to say it's the best contract ever. They negotiated the contract in 1997 and still urged the members to vote against it. UPS just knows it's a lot cheaper to buy the leadership than it is to actually put out a fair contract.

 

[SameRightsForAll]

It's you're an idiot. And you are one. Way too many factors going against the possibility of a strike. A republican president. Peak season coming up. UPS being a public company. The damage it would do to both sides. The simple fact that any idiot can see that this isn't the last, best, and final offer. It's a long way from a strike. And no, just because the Teamsters negotiated the contract it doesn't mean they have to push a yes vote, if they were actually fighting for their members and not bought off by the company to say it's the best contract ever. They negotiated the contract in 1997 and still urged the members to vote against it. UPS just knows it's a lot cheaper to buy the leadership than it is to actually put out a fair contract.

So, you're saying that since Hoffa runs the Teamsters now vs. Ron Carey in 1997 that we have no chance and that it's just over from the start and thanks for playing along.

 

[Time for change]

They negotiated it why wouldn’t the say to vote yes?

Recommending a no vote and taking an unprecedented move by shutting down all comments by dues paying members on social media are two different things. A simple recommendation would have been fine, we didn’t want our dues money being used for an all out vote yes propaganda machine.

 

[LagunaBrown]

Recommending a no vote and taking an unprecedented move by shutting down all comments by dues paying members on social media are two different things. A simple recommendation would have been fine, we didn’t want our dues money being used for an all out vote yes propaganda machine.

You do know the Union makes those decisions not you. Just like when you file a grievance the Union is in charge of how it is settled. The Union is the responsible party and have a duty to to what is best for the members. If not you can go to the NLRB, sue or vote them out if they mess up. It prevents members from making bad decisions and makes the Union have accountability. The Union is telling you something loud and clear. If you choose to go rogue because social media told you so then that is on you. If this blows up in the vote no movements face the Union will show you those flyers recommending a yes vote to protect themselves and show how the members chose not to listen.

 

[siouxman]

A short term win for those who are retiring soon. If the next cba brings a fight over funding the ups/ibt pension, especially after CS goes belly up if the BLA doesnt survive and Congress says "sorry" about the pensions failing, you will now have lost the increase win.
Look what they're doing to their own people in management. Figure it out.

The central states pension crisis is not ups fault.there are many factors that have lead to the fund going broke

 

[Kamikaze]

I'm currently shocked stupid as to why the national union has spent so much money on pro-contract fliers while I have seen hardly anything from UPS themselves. I don't understand why the union is fighting so hard to get membership to vote yes while UPS of course would want this to go through, but it doesn't seem like they've done much other than teleconferences and some things on UPSers.

Is there some labor law that prohibits companies involved in collective bargaining from trying to influence workers on how they vote on a contract or what?

God, I hope you never procreate.