July Countdown

[brown666]

July is upon us, will we have a contract ready for a vote before July 10th? If we do ,I urge all members to take a serious look at the wage and pensions areas of the contract. It goes without saying that our company is doing well and a strike would not help the employees or the company.If the contract presented is not to your liking, please vote no! A substandard contract is to be avoided. I feel that UPS and the IBT have much to lose if a contract is not presented by the 10th. Volume is down at our center about 2% and volume at others in our region is down 6-7%.The economy is very different than in 1997 and some of the volume decrease is due to this fact! Let's hope for the best for everyone involved!!!

 

[gsx1990]

Unfortunately, I think this thing is going to
go down to the wire. I know there are big
decreases in volume in parts of the mid-Atlantic.

Lets hope cool heads prevail and a settlement is
reached. The other option is fraught with horrible things.

 

[upscustomer]

Here's a customer's perspective. My company ships approximately $3 million annually with UPS. The strike in '97 devastated us. A strike this year will do the same.

Our contract with UPS will expire soon. FedEx has already provided us with pricing comparable to that we currently receive from UPS. Although we have been very happy with the quality of UPS' services and pricing, we plan to move all our business to FedEx.

The sole reason for the move is UPS' labor situation. We no longer want to take the risk every 3 to 5 years that our business operations could be seriously impaired by a strike against UPS. We have already had to expend substantial resources to prepare contingency plans. We have decided not to go through this again.

 

[michael]

Well , there you have it from our real boss, the customer. In no uncertain terms he has told us that he is leaving . How much more of this can the company and the teamsters take before there is nothing left ? THIS IS FOR REAL ! I hope everyone wakes ups to what is already happening and does the right thing.

Michael

 

[deliver_man]

You don't really believe that is a customer, do you? Like a customer who had concerns about service, instead of talking to his account rep, would instead seek out an obscure message board and post something for the 15-20 people that read it. Yup, happens all the time.....

 

[moreluck]

15-20 people???? There were 278 people online when I read your remark.

 

[thedrooler]

Michael

I agree with you. The customer does not want to be held hostage in a labor dispute, and rightly so. Whether the post by UPS CUSTOMER was really posted by a customer, who can say. The point is customers ARE diverting volume so as not to hurt their own business.

Drooler

 

[ok2bclever]

So we should roll over and gladly accept whatever UPS deems we deserve and take a lifetime contract, right?

Either that customer, err ex-customer is new in business or won't last long as a potential strike (one national strike in their lifetime) is not even close to the most important factor, let alone the only factor in considering who to use as a shipper.

When does record profits become enough to share voluntarily? The answer is NEVER.

 

[wkmac]

There is a solution but the question is can the union and the company be smart, creative and far thinking enough to do it? I'm talking, no more strikes or even threat of strikes, ever! How?

Independent Arbitration Board!

Set up a Arbitration system whereby any Contract dispute that goes unresolved is finalized by Arbitration. For union members quick to put this down, some recent big cases were concluded by arbitration including the 2k per year Fulltime deal the company was stonewalling on and all were in the unions favor. Proved to me it can be done. Many upfront stipulations would have to be agreed to by both parties and yes there are risks for both sides but there is also greater opportunity. We can lock UPS into a formula that can translate into $$$$ for us and them and if they profit (usually do) we reap the rewards too. However the reverse is true as well. Again, I think this sytem, if planned and worked by smart people would be great for everyone and eliminate the fear of the customer from having his/her business impacted. The question is, are we far thinking enough to go there?

My guess? I'm talking to a very empty room!

mac

 

[robonono]

mac,

The reverse MUST also apply. If profits fall, the employees must take a hit in pay. They can not receive only increases.

 

[lr1937]

I made a similar post on MF. I agree totally with binding arbitration. It is in everyones best interests and gives our customers a service that could go uninterupted. I would venture a guess that 60 to 70% of ups teamsters would buy it. It also would help teamsters leadership if they would give it a serious look. Lets start a campaign.

 

[michael]

mac,
I like the idea. I think it would even work, which is why it will probably never come to be unfortunately. How many times have we seen the most logical solution to a problem ignored because of some technicality or some other obscure reason? Somehow, I think the teamsters would have a problem with robononos thoughts on taking a hit if profits fall. (Although I am in total agreement with it) The idea sounds very fair to me. I would be interested to hear the thoughts of any teamster members on the board about this.

Michael

 

[thedrooler]

The teamsters don't want their members to share in the success of the company. They want their members to be guaranteed a higher hourly wage every year regardless whether the company is having a successful year or not. This mentality will probably never change, and its too bad for the hourly employees. They will be stuck in the hourly wage rut their entire working life.

Drooler

 

[ok2bclever]

You apparently do not have much experience with Teamster negotiations. UPS is not the only teamster represented company and many of those companies get in financial trouble. It never matters whether it is bad karma, circumstances beyond the companies control or just plain mismanagement, when the company can show true problems the Teamsters invariably are willing to have concessionary contracts. That is verifiable fact. There is no profit for the Teamsters or their members to destroy a company.

I would have no problem with binding arbitration as long as unbiased integrity could be ascertained. However, I don't believe UPS manangement's mindset of "It's our company and we will run it as we see fit" would allow relinguishing that much control of the process.

 

[wkmac]

Robonono,

You said, "The reverse MUST also apply. If profits fall, the employees must take a hit in pay. They can not receive only increases."

I know that and in my post I pointed that out. To quote my post, "We can lock UPS into a formula that can translate into $$$$ for us and them and if they profit (usually do) we reap the rewards too. However the reverse is true as well." The part "However the reverse is true as well" was meant to imply that if profits were down we would take the hit also. I thought that was clear but sorry if it wasn't. I wasn't implying this thing to be all onesided one way or the other. Also an arbitrating board could rule that the decrease in profits were not related to the actions or work habits by the hourlies (poor decision by top UPS management and OPL is shining example of this) just as they could also rule that profits are not higher because of hourlies so again it's a balanced situation. I just feel it's time to start thinking outside the box and explore other options. Sad no one is willing to even discuss it.

mac

 

[michael]

mac
Therein lies the first problem, what is defined as hourly work habits? It would get much worse from there Im sure. The same could be said for what is defined as poor management decisions. Although I like the idea of impartial arbitration I think a lot of work would need to be done to clarify what each side would be responsible for. It may be possible to institute such a document, but I am afraid it would be such a long and complicated document that we would have something equal to what we currently have called a contract. We all know how many ways that can be interpreted and how much gray area there is there. If there were something that could be devised that were much simpler and less complex I believe it would benefit all parties concerned. Any thoughts?


Michael

 

[wkmac]

Mike,
Never said it would be easy or without some pitfalls. Had you told Jim Casey in 1907' that he would have to make the company international and be able to move a package from the US to Europe overnight, I'm sure he would name tons more roadblocks to that goal than what we would face moving to an arbitration based system. Funny thing is, people sat down, faced problems, overcame huge mountains of resistance and look at UPS today. We celebrated the 4th of July yesterday and look at the mountain the folks who signed the Declaration on Independence had to climb! The only way to work out a problem is to sit down and discuss it, otherwise we are destined to live with what we have and we stagnate and die with it. IMO, the current system will produce 1 of 2 outcomes in time. The downfall of UPS from being a global leader or UPS will eventually make a stand, probably suffer short term but many good employees who happen to be Teamsters will be the ones who get hurt. IMO, one of those scenarios will in time happen. If we work together neither will happen and we can all win, profit from the situation and be proud of what we built!
JMO.

 

[michael]

mac

I wish more people thought as positively as you do. There is much truth in your statement The only way to work out a problem is to sit down and discuss it, otherwise we are destined to live with what we have and we stagnate and die with it. I wish that the powers to be would keep this in mind and keep things on a more simplistic level. It seems that the use of common sense is at an all time low. (and thats on both sides) Im sure that there would be some bumps in the road to creating something like that and the only thing I would fear is that we would create another monster. Keeping it as simple as possible would benefit everyone in my opinion. Possible ????????

Michael

 

[wkmac]

Good point Mike. There is the fear of a monster but I fear that monster much less than the monster that IMO will eventually rear it's head if we continue the present course. One thing to ask is "How much is a "No-Strike" clause worth to UPS in the way of economic value?" If you really start thinking about that, it's huge and I mean huge. What is the main selling point FedEx has against us? It's a labor action. They can't sell service because they don't have it and I'm getting that from customers and I'll admit I was very surprised by this. I was under the impression FedEx was as good if not better than UPS but appears I was wrong. Take this one selling point away from FedEx and this totally changes everything. Also some of the craft unions (Electrical workers for example, AFL-CIO) have no strike clauses so it can be done. I think going into the future more unions must explore this option if American companies including unions are going to compete on the international stage. Strikes are actions of the past. In the future unions must become more sophisicated if they and the companies their members work for are to survive and prosper. JMO.

 

[michael]

mac,

Now that idea "The no strike" clause I think has potential. The terms could be kept relatively simple and straight forward. There would, of course, need to be some repercussions for either side dragging their feet on any negotiations which would keep things moving at an acceptable pace. Each side would gain from this. For the company, there would be no service interruptions, for the employees there would be no loss of income. For everyone there would be a secure future. Damn , I think you have hit on something here !