New Contract....who's voting yes or no and why?

[Nitelite]

Voting no.

UPS profits are only going to grow as the economy recovers. In 2-3 years when they are pulling in 2-3 billion in profits a QUARTER I don't want to be stuck with a 70 cent raise that doesn't even cover inflation. Are you kidding me? That alone is enough for me to vote. We got better raises when the company was making a THIRD of what it makes now. How could anyone support this?

 

[iruhnman630]

I am going to vote NO.....because here in Nor Cal they have taken out the 1/2 to 1 hour lunch and replaced it with just 1 hour lunch. No choice......It's a bunch of B.S. Looks like some drivers have pissed off some Sup's here in Nor Cal and they have negotiated to make us take a hour lunch.....I like the option to take a half hour if I choose. I already work late enough w/ the half hour lunch, now it will put me home a half hour later....I guess "FAMILY" time is only for the weekend!! I bet our union rep's get to clock off at 5pm and go home!

If you are voting no in hopes of that changing, I predict a letdown for you.

 

[East coast navy]

people did not see the writing on the wall, did they? first they took away the Christmas turkey. no big deal. then they took away the safe driving rewards thru the catalog. ooh that hurt a little. then they took away safe driving and no injury bbqs. ( for a couple years but we got those back )

now they are trying to nibble away at healthcare and pensions. keeping new jobs away by working everyone 60 hrs a week. increasing subcontractors or the sly and hardly anyone raising a fuss.

you could say it is our fault for not fighting for the turkeys where it all started. it's too NOT to late to draw a line in the sand.

It's funny you say that. The company did audits on how they can save money. Take out coffee in the centers, 5 million a year. They even found if they shut off all the lights in the vending machines they would save 1.5 million a year. They never did it. That would have been funny seeing PTers using flashlights to see in them. You can't make thing sheet up.

 

[sortaisle]

They could offer daily blow jobs, unicorn chit, and as much lube as needed for the daily cardboard humping and I'd still vote no. Need insurance specifics. I have a few scrips, one that is spendy but free if I mail order it through Express Scrips and my kids have their scrips too. I see the doctor 3 times a year to get blood work done to adjust my meds and all that costs me $30 a year. I'm not going to crap on something I haven't seen yet, but I'm not going to vote for it either.

 

[Anonymous 10]

You Must Be A Sup Because If You Were A Steward You Would Know This Contract Sucks For Everyone And I Am A steward

Ok good for you. My dad is bigger than your dad.

 

[OrangeBeltHero]

Voting no.

 

[badpal]

Should pass big at my center. At our union meeting as soon as they mentioned you could split up a second vacation week it was pretty much a done deal.

 

[HBGPreloader]

As a part timer, I have quite a few concerns with this contract, most of which could not be answered by the local...

1) The company is essentially washing its hands of all employee responsibilities and obligations. Sure, in theory, the new benefit plan should be better because. with a larger participant base, the union should be able to negotiate a better deal for all members. However...
a) Health care - As others have noted, will my current medical providers accept the new insurance? Nobody knows.
b) Pension - UPS has a vested interest to insure that my pension is managed in financially responsible and frugal way. The Teamster plan? Who knows.
c) I view the Teamster plan as yet another bailout for a still struggling plan that received $6.1 billion in the last contract. So, when it comes time to retire, will there be any money left for retirees? Probably not.

2) The increase in starting pay and raises are adequate at best. However, the way the contract is worded, if ANYONE determines that the pension or health care funds are inadequately funded, we can lose part, if not all of these raises to insure these plans are adequately funded. And, as I noted above, the company has no obligation or concern about this once this contract is approved.

3) Benefits should be offered to all permanent employees within 3 to 6 months from date of hire. Dependents can be added at a later date - perhaps within 1 year.

4) Surepost - The wording in the new contract does VERY little to insure that we will be delivering more packages than we are now. Judging by my own observations, the size limits noted in the new contract will not have an impact on ~98%+ of the packages currently being forwarded to the Post Office.

5) Technology and Discipline - The way the contract reads now, you can not be terminated based upon technology alone. However, you can still be disciplined - which can lead to termination. There should be no discipline based upon technology alone.

6) Alternative Work (Alcohol/Controlled substance) - We're supposed to be professionals. I feel 1 strike, with 1 year of job reassignment, along with rehab or leave of absence for recovery being more than adequate.

Although the local says the intent of the contract is to address several production issues, the intent conflicts with the way the local supplement is worded. Here are a couple examples...

Meal Period changes are "intended" for "emergency purposes" and these changes allegedly only apply to day shift, full time inside employees. However, the contract does not specify this and ALL full time employees can be required by management to vary their lunch schedule by as much as an hour to meet the daily demands of production.

Freight drivers can start hauling packages from the rail yard to the hub, taking jobs from the feeder drivers. And, the union reps noted that there is no way to verify or prevent this from happening. Their reply was "we hope the freight employees will report to us that this is happening".

In a prior life, I reviewed contracts for more than a dozen local newspapers. In addition, my spouse is in the legal field and is currently earning a living with contract law. And, we both know that what is written in ANY contract will overrule what the parties may or may not have "intended".

This is why I am voting NO.

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

No.........too many give backs!!

 

[DON CUMMINGS]

Your Voice. Your Vote. Your Contract.​

Copies of the changes to the both the National Master Agreement and Central RegionSupplement will be mailed to your home with your ballot. Please take the time to readthese contracts in detail. Below, you’ll find the reasons why your stewards, agents andExecutive Board are recommending a NO vote:​

PROPOSED NATIONAL MASTER AGREEMENTArticle 6 Sec. 1:​

This language may not be broad enough to protectemployees being forced to sign documents.​

Article 6 Sec. 6:​

This change does not provide strong enoughlanguage to protect members against theCompany’s advanced technology.​

Article 8 Sec. 1:​

This language affects small locals and coulddiscourage the pursuit of important grievances.​

Article 14 Sec. 1:​

This article fails to define if an employee would befound dishonest if they do not report a change inmedical status to the Company.​

Article 14 Sec. 3:​

This language is EXTREMELY detrimental to themembership. After three years the Company canfire an employee if they do not return from an on/offthe job injury.​

Article 17:​

​

​

​

​

The increase in shortage thresholds forpayroll errors is concessionary.​

Article 18 Sec. 8.1:​

This article gives UPS sole discretion to not allownon-driving employees to use their cell phones.​

Article 22 Sec. 3:​

​

​

​

​

Full time jobs are not protectedin this language.Further, any newly created full-timepositions can have a 1.5 hour gap within theirshift(s)​

Article 22 Sec. 5:​

​

​

​

​

The wage increases for part-timeworkers are needlessly less than the current2008-2013 agreement. Further, the starting wageamounts to only a $.63 increase over the life of theagreement. This wage increase still subjects UPSpart-time workers to poverty wages.​

Article 26 Sec. 2:​

The change could result in the depletion of Feederwork.​

Article 26 Sec. 4:​

The Surepost language does not go far enough.Surepost will continue be problematic.​

Article 29 Sec. 1:​

This could be problematic for some members. TheCompany can now change the employee’s shift ifthey must miss two days for one day of jury duty.​

Article 34 Sec. 1:​

The pension rates contained in these changes onlyincrease by $5.00 in the last year of the contract.​

Article 34 Sec. 1(k).5/6:​

The Summary Plan Description has not beenprovided, therefore we do not have the fullinformation needed for the membership to make afully informed decision.​

Article 37 Sec. 1:​

This article does nothing to address harassmentissues and will limit a member’s ability to file laborcharges.​

Article 37 Sec. 1(c,d)​

This language does not go far enough to fix 9.5issues. Further, it excludes drivers with less thanfour years of service.​

Article 43 Sec. 2:​

Using Microsoft Streets and Trips could result in lessmilage pay for drivers.​

Article 34 Sec. 4:​

Your entire raise can now be taken from your payand put toward your healthcare.​

Article 41 Sec. 2:​

The four-year wage progression is unreasonable fornew full-time employees.​

PROPOSED CENTRAL REGION SUPPLEMENTArticle 1 Sec. 1:​

This concessionary change is bad for newly-hiredworkers.​

Article 3 Sec. 2:​

This could be very harmful to the membership,resulting in job loss to anyone injured in an on thejob or off the job injury.​

Article 3 Sec. 19:​

This is bad for part-timers. This may not only keepmembers from obtaining full-time, this creates alower wage temporary package car driver.​

Article 5 Sec. 3:​

It is the position of Local 89 that we have a right tostrike when it is legal and necessary. Furthercomplicating this with approval from the IBT isunreasonable when our members’ rights andlivelihoods are in danger.​

Article 16:​

While this language is beneficial to full-timemembers it has not addressed the part-timeemployee’s ability to split vacation weeks.​

Article 17(d):​

This language is beneficial in the Ground System,but very harmful in the Air District. This would result​

in termination for almost any contact with an aircraft.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

You certainly did not need to post this twice.

 

[cachsux]

You certainly did not need to post this twice.

Did he at least spell it correctly?

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Did he at least spell it correctly?

Damn----now I have to go back and proof read it.

Other than words which needed a space between them, I found no misspellings or other errors.

 

[hoopdedoo]

It doesn't matter what anyone votes. This contract was signed, sealed, and delivered months ago. IBT members that were already retired are gonna be the real losers in this mess.

 

[anonymous6]

As a part timer, I have quite a few concerns with this contract, most of which could not be answered by the local...

1) The company is essentially washing its hands of all employee responsibilities and obligations. Sure, in theory, the new benefit plan should be better because. with a larger participant base, the union should be able to negotiate a better deal for all members. However...
a) Health care - As others have noted, will my current medical providers accept the new insurance? Nobody knows.
b) Pension - UPS has a vested interest to insure that my pension is managed in financially responsible and frugal way. The Teamster plan? Who knows.
c) I view the Teamster plan as yet another bailout for a still struggling plan that received $6.1 billion in the last contract. So, when it comes time to retire, will there be any money left for retirees? Probably not.

2) The increase in starting pay and raises are adequate at best. However, the way the contract is worded, if ANYONE determines that the pension or health care funds are inadequately funded, we can lose part, if not all of these raises to insure these plans are adequately funded. And, as I noted above, the company has no obligation or concern about this once this contract is approved.

3) Benefits should be offered to all permanent employees within 3 to 6 months from date of hire. Dependents can be added at a later date - perhaps within 1 year.

4) Surepost - The wording in the new contract does VERY little to insure that we will be delivering more packages than we are now. Judging by my own observations, the size limits noted in the new contract will not have an impact on ~98%+ of the packages currently being forwarded to the Post Office.

5) Technology and Discipline - The way the contract reads now, you can not be terminated based upon technology alone. However, you can still be disciplined - which can lead to termination. There should be no discipline based upon technology alone.

6) Alternative Work (Alcohol/Controlled substance) - We're supposed to be professionals. I feel 1 strike, with 1 year of job reassignment, along with rehab or leave of absence for recovery being more than adequate.

Although the local says the intent of the contract is to address several production issues, the intent conflicts with the way the local supplement is worded. Here are a couple examples...

Meal Period changes are "intended" for "emergency purposes" and these changes allegedly only apply to day shift, full time inside employees. However, the contract does not specify this and ALL full time employees can be required by management to vary their lunch schedule by as much as an hour to meet the daily demands of production.

Freight drivers can start hauling packages from the rail yard to the hub, taking jobs from the feeder drivers. And, the union reps noted that there is no way to verify or prevent this from happening. Their reply was "we hope the freight employees will report to us that this is happening".

In a prior life, I reviewed contracts for more than a dozen local newspapers. In addition, my spouse is in the legal field and is currently earning a living with contract law. And, we both know that what is written in ANY contract will overrule what the parties may or may not have "intended".

This is why I am voting NO.

should be posted in every locker room in America.

 

[Anonymous 10]

Yes

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

Anytime somebody wants to stick something in my behind...I say no...Hell No.....or No..friend&&^%%ng way!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[UPS Preloader]

Look, even 407's voting no.

 

[HULKAMANIA]

No because the 9.5 language is absolute trash! People need to read between the lines on that. IF 9.5 hours was put in place as a safety concern then why is it safe to 9.5 as much as they want the less 4 year people? If you are a cover driver and cover the same route all week then you are entitled for the 9.5 protection....GEE lets give them a reason to build routes for each specific person even more!!!!!!! That's absolutely absurd AND stupid! All management will do now is beg and beg and beg us to run a different route to keep the covers out of 9.5...THUS not proving that we are understaffed! I don't see why people cant see that the whole 9.5 language is a slap in the face joke. When its over 100 degrees I DO NOT want to work continuous 10 hour days! Like I said why would anybody with less than 4 years want to pay union dues if the union isn't going to represent them for the first 4 years of your career? I know I know job protection but you get what Im saying...at least you should.

 

[stink219]

No because the 9.5 language is absolute trash! People need to read between the lines on that. IF 9.5 hours was put in place as a safety concern then why is it safe to 9.5 as much as they want the less 4 year people? If you are a cover driver and cover the same route all week then you are entitled for the 9.5 protection....GEE lets give them a reason to build routes for each specific person even more!!!!!!! That's absolutely absurd AND stupid! All management will do now is beg and beg and beg us to run a different route to keep the covers out of 9.5...THUS not proving that we are understaffed! I don't see why people cant see that the whole 9.5 language is a slap in the face joke. When its over 100 degrees I DO NOT want to work continuous 10 hour days! Like I said why would anybody with less than 4 years want to pay union dues if the union isn't going to represent them for the first 4 years of your career? I know I know job protection but you get what Im saying...at least you should.

There is also protection for the driver if they are scheduled to cover for the week but then are pulled off the remaining days. I suggest you ask on monday which route you are covering for the week. (Part 2 of section)