Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
New Contract....who's voting yes or no and why?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HBGPreloader" data-source="post: 1144049" data-attributes="member: 19782"><p>As a part timer, I have quite a few concerns with this contract, most of which could not be answered by the local...</p><p></p><p>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... </p><p> a) Health care - As others have noted, will my current medical providers accept the new insurance? Nobody knows.</p><p> 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.</p><p> 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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>3) Benefits should be offered to all <u>permanent</u> employees within 3 to 6 months from date of hire. Dependents can be added at a later date - perhaps within 1 year.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>5) Technology and Discipline - The way the contract reads now, you can not be <u>terminated</u> based upon technology alone. However, you can still be <u>disciplined</u> - which can lead to termination. There should be no <u>discipline</u> based upon technology alone.</p><p></p><p>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. </p><p></p><p>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...</p><p></p><p> 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 <u>daily</u> demands of production. </p><p></p><p>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".</p><p></p><p>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".</p><p></p><p>This is why I am voting NO.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HBGPreloader, post: 1144049, member: 19782"] 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 [U]permanent[/U] 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 [U]terminated[/U] based upon technology alone. However, you can still be [U]disciplined[/U] - which can lead to termination. There should be no [U]discipline[/U] 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 [U]daily[/U] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
New Contract....who's voting yes or no and why?
Top