Local 25 Teamsters borderline criminal act?

[Frankie's Friend]

Reversed after the damage was done....and until when, next November???

I seriously doubt that they want to do this all over again.
The bad press that precipitated was embarrassing.

 

[Inthegame]

One has nothing to do with the other and needs to be kept separate.

Two wrongs don't make it right and you can't bring yourself up, by bringing someone else down.

Let's keep our eye on the ball here and avert damaging either Teamsters or UPS brand any further.

I don't for the life of me understand why it's taking so long to clean up this PR nightmare?

And the award for most cliches in the fewest sentences in one post goes to...

 

[Inthegame]

If Local 25 knew UPS was not turning in dues applications and did nothing that would be on them. Not the poor seasonal workers hoping to earn a few Dollars for Christmas.

How would L25 know who UPS hires until UPS tells them?

One has nothing to do with the other and needs to be kept separate.

Ok but you've missed the point.

PT CW states "If Local 25 knew UPS was not turning in dues applications and did nothing that would be on them". My response is clear. The local only becomes aware of new hires after UPS conveys that info. Delaying that process puts employees in arrears and in my experience very few employees pay back dues once peak is over and they're laid off.

In the past few years, UPS is employing this tactic in many locations, costing local unions, and their members, contractual dues obligations.

When grievances are filed, the predicable company response is the laid off employee, not UPS, is responsible for any shortage.

It appears L25 attempted to circumvent UPS's tactic by making needed seasonal employment untenable.

It should be noted this hadn't happened in past peaks when UPS followed the contractual procedure of expeditious notification of hires.

 

[Bubblehead]

Ok but you've missed the point.

PT CW states "If Local 25 knew UPS was not turning in dues applications and did nothing that would be on them". My response is clear. The local only becomes aware of new hires after UPS conveys that info. Delaying that process puts employees in arrears and in my experience very few employees pay back dues once peak is over and they're laid off.

In the past few years, UPS is employing this tactic in many locations, costing local unions, and their members, contractual dues obligations.

When grievances are filed, the predicable company response is the laid off employee, not UPS, is responsible for any shortage.

It appears L25 attempted to circumvent UPS's tactic by making needed seasonal employment untenable.

It should be noted this hadn't happened in past peaks when UPS followed the contractual procedure of expeditious notification of hires.

Yet when the story broke, and even now, "the Union has declined to comment"???

Labor Charges or not, Local 25 needs to get their side of the story out there, if they have one?

Meanwhile innocent bystanders hard earned compensation, the reputation and public opinion of Organized Labor and the Teamsters hang in the balance, as a result of this story going "viral" nationwide.

If this is indeed the reasoning and rational for why Local 25 changed their policy, it was a knee jerk response and the collateral damage to unwitting victims was unwarranted and unjustifiable.

I continue to prod in hopes there is more than this flimsy excuse to the story???

I mean really, how does anyone justify a $500 initiation fee assessed to a seasonal UPS worker, under any circumstances?

 

[Boston25]

If UPS wasn't turning in dues applications that's wrong.

Local 25 taking an entire paycheck from hard working teamsters is also wrong. My union brothers paid local 25 to protect them. Instead local 25 took advantage of them . Shameful and disgusting.

They weren't turning in dues applications. That's where this stems from.

 

[Inthegame]

They weren't turning in dues applications. That's where this stems from.

And L25 isn't the lone ranger here. That's the story that isn't. This scheme isn't limited to seasonals and certainly not limited to L25. UPS is doing this in many locations thereby being complicit in the loss of contractually obligatory dues income to Locals and the IBT.
The drastic step L25 took is wrong but it's a reaction to the intentional actions from UPS. This was no inadvertent error.

 

[Inthegame]

I mean really, how does anyone justify a $500 initiation fee assessed to a seasonal UPS worker, under any circumstances?

Seasonal or not $500 initiation is the highest I've heard of.

I wouldn't be too concerned about the reach of this story. It'll be resolved, most likely with any affected seasonal being reimbursed according to the past practice in place when hired.

You care to wager how many of these fair and unbiased "news" agencies will accurately report that? Or the fact UPS initiated this retaliatory action from L25?

 

[Boston25]

And L25 isn't the lone ranger here. That's the story that isn't. This scheme isn't limited to seasonals and certainly not limited to L25. UPS is doing this in many locations thereby being complicit in the loss of contractually obligatory dues income to Locals and the IBT.
The drastic step L25 took is wrong but it's a reaction to the intentional actions from UPS. This was no inadvertent error.

Your right it has happened at many other UPS facilities not just in Local 25. And not just seasonal employees.

 

[BadIdeaGuy]

Seasonal or not $500 initiation is the highest I've heard of.

I wouldn't be too concerned about the reach of this story. It'll be resolved, most likely with any affected seasonal being reimbursed according to the past practice in place when hired.

You care to wager how many of these fair and unbiased "news" agencies will accurately report that? Or the fact UPS initiated this retaliatory action from L25?

How on earth is cheating a bunch of seasonal guys "retaliation" at UPS for not following the rules?
The only people hurt are people the union should be wanting to protect.

 

[Inthegame]

How on earth is cheating a bunch of seasonal guys "retaliation" at UPS for not following the rules?

You'd have to direct that question to the E-Board of L25, but I'd doubt UPS will attract any peak season employees next year if this practice continues.

 

[Yolo]

So how much will this end up costing Local 25 in legal fees? Multiple NLRB cases against them over this issue .

 

[Yolo]

Just seems like when you add the bad press and legal fees together this ends up being a net loss for 25.

 

[Rick Ross]

Didn't they double dip dues last month that and reimburse with a live check that same week? If they wanted to make this right immediately, they could have.

 

[Boston25]

So how much will this end up costing Local 25 in legal fees? Multiple NLRB cases against them over this issue .

I'm not sure. If you really are a member of local 25 you should have came to the meeting and asked.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

hopefully you won't be smashed in your pretty face for asking!

 

[Frankie's Friend]

So how much will this end up costing Local 25 in legal fees? Multiple NLRB cases against them over this issue .

Just seems like when you add the bad press and legal fees together this ends up being a net loss for 25.

The bad press you keep digging up and posting about that is two months old?

Keep it going. You remind me of an former poster that just posted for political gain not to long ago.

 

[Bubblehead]

The bad press you keep digging up and posting about that is two months old?

Keep it going. You remind me of an former poster that just posted for political gain not to long ago.

Has the situation been resolved?

 

[Frankie's Friend]

Has the situation been resolved?

Sure is.

 

[Yolo]

The bad press you keep digging up and posting about that is two months old?

Keep it going. You remind me of an former poster that just posted for political gain not to long ago.

2 months? No. It's been over 3 months since local 25 stole money from seasonal employees. They have yet to return the money.

If local 25 wants this issue to go away then they return the money.

 

[Yolo]

I'm not sure. If you really are a member of local 25 you should have came to the meeting and asked.

Return the money you stole.