Local 89 fighting back

Discussion in 'UPS Union Issues' started by Brokedownandbrown, Jun 25, 2013.

  1. Brokedownandbrown

    Brokedownandbrown New Member

    Good to see a local represent its people and stand firm against IBT and UPS. Zuckerman and officers have from the start directed a no vote and continue to fight for a fair contract for the next 5 years. This is representation at its best. The IBT needs more leaders like 89 and less boot lickers.
  2. The Other Side

    The Other Side Well-Known Troll Troll

  3. norcal10

    norcal10 Member

    I was very impressed to see that the 1000$ bribe did not sway these brothers and sisters. Good for them!
  4. Anonymous 10

    Anonymous 10 Guest

    Fred Z was at the two man and he didn't have the balls to stand up there. He's a boot licker and a window licker from where I see. He ran against Hoffa and lost and now he's trying to stick it to him by screwing his members.
  5. hyena

    hyena Well-Known Member

    Im proud of all the locals that stood strong and voted their supplements down. Im really proud of my local also, I figured wed end up with more yes votes but we didn't, we stood strong, and in the upcoming days we must stand even stronger.
  6. hyena

    hyena Well-Known Member

  7. kingOFchester

    kingOFchester Well-Known Member

    Local boards are elected officials, like Senators. The board is their to represent their members, just as Senators are their to represent their constituents.

    Senators vote for Presidential appointments. Lets say a Senator is asked by the President to support an appointment and he/she says they will back the President and vote yea. The Senator goes back to their constituents and finds out most do not agree with the appointment and so the Senator returns to Washington and votes Nay. Does that make the Senator "Ball-less"? I would argue that this is a Senator I want. A Senator that listens to their constituents, and acts accordingly.

    My local supported the TA and supplement because they felt that most of us would be happy with it. Once they returned and got feedback that the majority of their members were not happy, they changed their support for the agreements. I do not see why that is bad. I am a little upset that they thought we would be happy with the TA and supplement, but I am glad that their support went with the majority.

    In the end, it is all politics.
  8. The Other Side

    The Other Side Well-Known Troll Troll

    And this coming from a guy who is complaining about other people calling you a boot licker?'

    Here's what youre not understanding 407. YES, Fred Z voted in the two man meeting to approve the contract, then "HE" and his executive board met with his members in a general membership meeting. HIS members overwhelmingly told Zuckerman that they did not like the terms of the new contract. Zuckerman listened to his members and called for a vote of his executive board.

    The Eboard of local 89 unanimously voted to reject the contract after listening to the members concerns and then recommended a NO VOTE.

    Thats how you run business in a local. TWO meetings 407. ONE with the IBT and the other with the MEMBERS.

    The MEMBERS should always come first before the interests of the IBT.

    AS usual, you speak from your ash on this subject. Zuckerman is only doing what he is paid to do by the members, and that is to represent them. They are his employers, not the IBT.

    This is how all locals should be run. I applaud Fred and I have sent him a giant thank you email for his actions and strong stance against this contract.

    But heck, you and your 600 person local know better than the rest of the country, I forgot.


  9. TapeGunslinger

    TapeGunslinger New Member

  10. The Other Side

    The Other Side Well-Known Troll Troll

    I find it terrible, that our local leaders who voted "unanimously" to approve this contract are now being used in statements by UPS spokespeople against us. The company is begining its PR campaign against us by using the "unanimous" vote to put the blame on the disagreement on the employees.

    Here is the first story where it was used. UPS, Teamsters At Odds Over New Contract

    excerpt: "A UPS spokesman says the fact that Teamsters 89 is fighting the contract is interesting becuase they participated in a national Teamsters conference earlier this year where the contract being offered by UPS was unanamously approved."

    In other statements by UPS, they make the same claim, "the contract was unanimously approved" and then go on to say that "We" were gaining a $3.90 cent an hour increase, a full health and welfare package that contains health insurance and a pension. It further goes on to say the company doesnt understand why if there was an agreement, the employees would reject the offer in todays business climate.

    The two man meeting should have had 11 NAY votes, from Andy M, Ron H to Randy C.

    Instead, they voted to approve the taking away of our health care and extending progression for our part timers, along with concessions on smaller issues knowing full well that we would lose our minds once we realized what they have done. They simply didnt care. They never thought this contract would be held up by the rejection of 17 supplementals.

    They were wrong.


  11. Inthegame

    Inthegame Well-Known Member

    TOS you may find UPS's statement "terrible" but they're dead on accurate. I find it more than curious that Zuckerman chose to keep quiet at the two man. Zuckerman has a political agenda. He proved that at the IBT 2011 Convention when he DIDN'T keep quiet and actually showed some nerve when he faced overwhelming Hoffa supporters and mocked them (deservedly because they showed no respect for the process) from the mic. That two man was kindergarten class compared to the Convention and had Zuck went to the mic he could have (possibly) stopped this TA in it's tracks. Others there would have joined in had one opposition "leader" with guts stood up. Had L89, L804, L705 and even your L396 stood up in protest, that deal was off the tracks. To keep quiet then and go home to your local and then find your nerve is weak. Zuck didn't show any leadership when he had the chance. He's a politically motivated charlatan looking to save his job, and jeopardizing his members livelihood for his survival.
  12. The Other Side

    The Other Side Well-Known Troll Troll

    I didnt claim it was inaccurate, and I also didnt slam the company for it. The company in its PR campaign that is now launched, will use the very actions of the Teamsters against us, the members.

    As to Fred Z, why do you keep harping on the past with Fred? We are dealing with the NOW, not yesterday.

    Fred has shown what an objective thinker does for his members. He has proven that he isnt just one of the sheep playing big shot in DC doing whatever K hall or J Hoffa tells him to do, unlike the following:

    1) R.
    2) J.
    3) R.
    4) A.

    These guys should have taken a lesson from FRED. Stand up for your people or stand down from leadership.


    Lasted edited by : Jun 28, 2013
  13. Inthegame

    Inthegame Well-Known Member

    The two man was less than two months ago. Now he's the leader? Don't use reasoning like this in your campaign, you'll get squashed.
  14. 89Percenter

    89Percenter New Member

    Charlatan? And what is your motivation "In the Game"? Save whose job?

    I think the numbers in the ballot count show Fred Z's leadership is very solid. As far as jeopardizing the members' livelihoods...this coming from the supporter of these concessionary, job-killing proposals?! What a joke! President Fred Z's motivations had everything to do with IMPROVING the livelihoods of the members. I think 89% of UPS Local 89 Teamsters would agree with me. But again, feel free to call Local 89 and ask to speak with the President...let him know your concerns. Maybe you can give some valuable input on Air Supplement and Central Region when they are sent back to the negotiating table to avoid another NO vote against your precious Company.

    But let me remind you about those numbers at Local 89:

    Air District----National Master-483 yes; 3388 NO
    Central Region-465 yes; 3594 NO
    Air Supplement-441 yes; 3520 NO
    UPS Ground---National Master-126 yes; 768 NO
    Central Region-111 yes; 787 NO
    UPS Freight--5 yes; 89 NO (89! what a magic number!)

    And way to side with UPS over the membership "In the Game"! You should have volunteered your time to help UPS in its intimidation campaign to secure a yes vote in the Air District. Maybe they wouldn't have got the stomping they got at the count. On second thought...it would have probably been worse.
  15. Monkey Butt

    Monkey Butt Dark Prince of Double Standards Staff Member

    ​I guess UPS should have stated "as published by the Teamsters" but then the loss of the meaning "factual" would have been lost.
  16. co-chair

    co-chair New Member

    Lets all keep one thing in mind if local 89 strikes the pilots will not cross the picket line things will get ugly real fast I hope 89 gets there way or it will not be pretty. thanks to our IPA PILOTS WHO HONORED OUR PICKET LINES IN 1997 GOD BLESS THEM AND LOCAL 89 AN COUNT ON THEM IN 2013 GOOD LUCK LOCAL 89 STAND UP. BY THE WAY TELL FRED Z AWESOME AND REQUEST 1000 DOLLARS SHUTTLE BONUS EVERY YEAR SO FUTURE EMPLOYEES WILL GET THERE FAIR SHARE. PAYABLE AUGUST 1ST EVERY YEAR TILL 2018 GOOD LUCK AND STAY UNITED YOU WILL PREVAIL. ( GOOD WAITERS MAKE GOOD TIPS)
  17. Anonymous 10

    Anonymous 10 Guest

    Lol you know he will.
  18. stink219

    stink219 Well-Known Member

    This is what I don't get. Suckerman of 89 and Jabba Sylvester of 804 should know the Teamster constitution. This is why I think they are playing politics. The bylaws state: "If any Local Union believes that a master agreement proposal will deprive its involved members of better existing conditions of general application to all such involved members of the Local Union, it may appeal to the General Executive Board, which must give an answer to the appeal before the contract approval votes are sent out to the involved members."
    They didn't do that? Bunch of scam artists.
  19. kingOFchester

    kingOFchester Well-Known Member

    Stink, What I have an issue with is the fact that Hoffa/hall and the majority of the Teamsters believe that we have been overpaid for the work we do.

    Fact is, my purchasing power five years from now will be less then what it is today. If my salary goes up less then inflation, then I will have less purchasing power by the end of the five years. Are you saying we deserve less then what we got last contract? Are we overpaid?
  20. stink219

    stink219 Well-Known Member

    I understand where your coming from but, If hall thought we were overpaid, would we get 3.90? I don't think we are overpaid. But when I compare income with close friends that have masters degrees, we are still ahead of the game at least in RI and MA. I'll be 20k higher because of it. I don't think inflation will be that extreme.