Discussion in 'UPS Union Issues' started by Utahloader, Feb 5, 2019.
I believe they are.
No, they aren't!!!
They are barely keeping the majority of the membership (part timers) above poverty level wages, in order to negotiate industry leading wages and benefits for the minority (full timers)....all the while throwing their hands up in the air, in a faux disbelief, as to why less than half of the members vote.
It's no mystery, and nothing is being done to effectuate any change in that culture....and if truth be told, it's getting worse.
When I started part time in 1986, my rate of pay was almost two and a half that of minimum wage and I received full benefits after 30 days.
Fast forward 30 years and starting pay struggles to stay ahead of minimum wage and it takes a year for benefits.
So no @BigUnionGuy, the Union is absolutely not negotiating the best deal for all.
I personally believe they are doing the best they can with what they have to work with.
You're silly. Elections are terrible accountability mechanisms.
You broke a rule? Well, let's wait three years to see if enough people are off about it to fire you. Oh, you're running unopposed? Well you get a free pass.
I'd laugh if it weren't so sad that people are so feeble-minded that they find something like this acceptable.
Can you link to the forms I need to download and fill out to file internal charges and get that "accountability mechanism" rolling?
"Unthinking respect for authority, is the greatest enemy of truth." -Albert Einstein
"...my convictions led me to adhere to the sufficiency of the light within us, resting on truth as authority, rather than taking authority for truth." -Lucretia Mott
Lets see, you need to ask of an anonymous poster that isn't in your local how to file internal charges and I'm the silly one?
Read your bylaws Albert.
Made the request for my bylaws. You can probably guess how shocked I was to find out they didn't have a copy available. But the question wasn't just in regards to local level accountability. Article XIX of the IBT constitution simply says charges must be filed in writing and in duplicate. So you write a letter? I figured there would be an official form, like a grievance form. That's what I was asking about. I was hoping that some anonymous posters might have had experience with it, and could share how the process works. I don't really see how that's an unreasonable request.
Also, from Article XIX section 2:
"(d) Failure of any interested party in any case to ap‑ pear before any trial or appellate body at the time and place designated in the notice shall constitute a waiver of appearance and the trial shall proceed or the appeal be heard regardless of the absence of such party
If the charging party fails to appear in person before any trial or appellate body on the date set for trial or hear‑ ing, the charges shall be dismissed Failure of the charging party to present evidence in support of the charges shall require dismissal of the charges In either event, such dismissal shall constitute a fnal adjudication from which there can be no appeal, and after such dis‑ missal the accused may not be retried on the same charges"
What this means is that only someone who is in a position to perform an investigation to collect evidence of the charges can even hope to file charges that might go anywhere. Also, the person filing the charges has to appear at the trial, or all charges will be dismissed and the accused cannot be retried on the same offense. So the person filing charges would have to be able to get time off work and pay to travel to the trial. Based on those facts, what is the likelihood an average member could successfully file charges against an elected official of the IBT? Approaching zero?
What are you wanting to file charges on another member for ?
I find it hard to believe they don't have any copies.
Did you drive to the Union hall and ask in person, or how soon they would
be available ? In my Local, you have to show up in person and sign a sheet
affirming you have received a copy.
You.... as the charging party, are required to submit your charge(s) and provide
evidence, witnesses, or notarized statements. There is no investigative team.
After that, you appear in front of your Local Executive Board to present your case.
At that time, the respondent has the opportunity to address your charge.
I mean really.... what happened ?
Did another Teamster beat the crap out of you in the parking lot ?
Filing charges against another member is serious .
BUG beat me to the punch but here goes...
Your local unions principal officer is required to provide any requesting member a copy of the locals bylaws.
Some locals are making copies available either on websites or electronically.
The IBT Constitution is a big blanket. Local unions can and do have internal procedures which could be as simple as writing a letter. That should be specified in the bylaws.
Calling someone "silly for providing procedural information is the unreasonable part.
You might be impatient and think elections aren't the answer but they do work to correct questionable leadership.
Just to further expound on that....
Local Union bylaws are going to be specific, as to the Local procedure and the
the "chain of command" relating to the appeal process.
And, all Local Union bylaws (or changes) must be approved by the IBT.
Why wouldn't "the procedure" be uniformed across all Locals, under this "big blanket".....considering they are subject to "IBT approval"???
Seems like another potential example of unnecessary Local autonomy.
What did I say that made you think I wanted to file charges against someone?
Asked at the Union Meeting.
You were providing procedural information? It seemed an awful lot like you were trying to change the subject by answering a question I wasn't asking. Bringing up elections when discussing accountability mechanisms struck me as extremely silly. Imagine if those rules applied to us, steal a package, or steal packages on a regular basis, wait three years, put it to a vote as to whether or not you will be replaced... see, silly. But, if my word choice seems unreasonable to you, I apologize. I will strive to find a more reasonable word to use in the future.
My point in my line of questions was to support @Bubblehead's description that the union is run more like a:
One sign of a totalitarian government is either the lack of accountability of the rulers to the citizenry, or the presence of a nominal accountibility process. As @BigUnionGuy pointed out in his answer to my question about the process:
This simple fact demonstrates the inaccessibility for the average member to file charges against an elected official. Only if everything lined up perfectly would a member even stand a chance of filing any sort of charges. Unless I am mistaken, we have no authority to access systems that would make it posssible to gather evidence of wrong-doing. We would have to go through the courts, seemingly, to do so. But since we have to exhaust internal mechanisms first before going to a court, the whole thing becomes a farce.
Add that to the 50% 2/3 rule, I think that makes a strong argument that the union is very much like a dictatorship or monarchy.
All that they are asking for is your unconditional love and trust....every three to five years???
....while pimping a system that discourages membership participation.
Why do you think it’s like this?
Really---nobody is going to comment on that?
Sounds like some "Old School" Teamster language, designed to squelch/intimidate the truth???
Separate names with a comma.