Part time poverty

Box Ox

Well-Known Member

If you’re counting on a UPS PT gig to survive, you’re doing it wrong. Should PTers get a raise? Absolutely. But UPS PT is a ladder, an exercise program, and a great benefits provider for PTers who have second jobs and large families. Not a breadwinner.

It’s not UPS’s problem if your cost of living is extremely high. If you’re having to work 3 jobs to survive, you should find a way to move. The UPSers who’ve posted on here about trying to transfer out of California have the right idea.
 

sandwich

The resident gearhead
I did it...... gas was almost 6 bucks a gallon when I was making 7.50 at ups. Rent was always through the roof in so cal. But I always looked long term.
 

sandwich

The resident gearhead
I just want you guys to look long term. It would be great if part timers got a raise to 15 an hour. But I've been here long enough to know that's going to come with a heavy price.
 

wilberforce15

Well-Known Member
If you’re counting on a UPS PT gig to survive, you’re doing it wrong. Should PTers get a raise? Absolutely. But UPS PT is a ladder, an exercise program, and a great benefits provider for PTers who have second jobs and large families. Not a breadwinner.

The point is that it's usually the senior people who lecture about how it's not meant to be a living wage.

But for them, it was. A guy who has been here 30 years started at $20/hr in today's money. He has no right whatsoever to talk about that.

I've been here 12 years, and I'm just now getting what a 33 year guy got on his first day on the job. They just don't have any room to talk.
 

sandwich

The resident gearhead
The point is that it's usually the senior people who lecture about how it's not meant to be a living wage.

But for them, it was. A guy who has been here 30 years started at $20/hr in today's money. He has no right whatsoever to talk about that.

I've been here 12 years, and I'm just now getting what a 33 year guy got on his first day on the job. They just don't have any room to talk.
Yes. I agree they had it easy. But it's not 1970 anymore brother. I don't know what to tell you.
 

wilberforce15

Well-Known Member
Yes. I agree they had it easy. But it's not 1970 anymore brother. I don't know what to tell you.
I'm talking about the mid-80s, meaning guys who are still working here.

The only thing I'm looking for is for some old-timer to face facts and admit them. They can say something like "Yes, I know I started at twice the pay you got, but...." and then make their case in recognition of that fact.

They can argue for anything they want, but they can't pretend that they did the same job we're doing in remotely the same conditions.
 

Box Ox

Well-Known Member
The point is that it's usually the senior people who lecture about how it's not meant to be a living wage.

Oh sure. I hopped on board within the last decade. I’m just saying that there should be an eyes wide open management of expectations given UPS’s pay level history and value of included benefits at the 1 year mark.

If you applied to the job on UPSers which says you might pull in $150 a week and took the job based on the premise that it’d pay the bills, you’re just doing it wrong.
 

Box Ox

Well-Known Member
The only thing I'm looking for is for some old-timer to face facts and admit them. They can say something like "Yes, I know I started at twice the pay you got, but...." and then make their case in recognition of that fact.

I don’t think the fact that pay in 2018 dollars isn’t nearly what it used to be is being contested at all. What is debatable is how far you should expect your paycheck to go based on that shortcoming when you should probably be doing something else that pays better if you can’t wait to climb the union ladder and need more hours and better pay right now.
 

wilberforce15

Well-Known Member
I don’t think that the fact that pay in 2018 dollars isn’t nearly what it used to be is being contested at all. What is debatable is how far you should expect your paycheck to go based on that shortcoming when you should probably be doing something else that pays better if you can’t wait to climb the union ladder and need more hours and better pay right now.

Care to find a thirty-year guy who begins a sentence, "Yes, I know I started at twice the pay rate you did, but...."?

I've never seen it.
 

sandwich

The resident gearhead
All new hires and current part time employees get bumped up to a starting wage of 15 an hour. New top rate driver pay is 29.75 for all drivers hired after 7/1/2018. Would you guys vote for that?
 

Box Ox

Well-Known Member
All new hires and current part time employees get bumped up to a starting wage of 15 an hour. New top rate driver pay is 29.75 for all drivers hired after 7/1/2018. Would you guys vote for that?

I think the Company might very well be counting on it!

Edit: Would probably be for drivers hired after 7/31/18
 

wilberforce15

Well-Known Member
All new hires and current part time employees get bumped up to a starting wage of 15 an hour. New top rate driver pay is 29.75 for all drivers hired after 7/1/2018. Would you guys vote for that?

Almost certainly not. Maybe if there were a permanent, binding 9.5 list with triple-pay penalties that required no opting in, and you couldn't opt-out. All routes are 9.5 or under every day with no exception outside of peak. And every driver's dream language with ridiculous penalties for all kinds of harassment and every other complaint addressed with strong language.

I probably wouldn't vote for it anyway, but it's not ridiculous. The contract used to have much more parity in FT and PT wages. That pay cut (including the loss of overtime) would piss some people off, but on the bright side it would probably prevent a few thousand divorces per year. :)
 

Box Ox

Well-Known Member
Almost certainly not. Maybe if there were a permanent, binding 9.5 list with triple-pay penalties that required no opting in, and you couldn't opt-out. All routes are 9.5 or under every day with no exception outside of peak. And every driver's dream language with ridiculous penalties for all kinds of harassment and every other complaint addressed with strong language.

I probably wouldn't vote for it anyway, but it's not ridiculous. The contract used to have much more parity in FT and PT wages. That pay cut (including the loss of overtime) would piss some people off, but on the bright side it would probably prevent a few thousand divorces per year. :)

Think a lotta PTers would vote for it though. When I was a preloader I saw guys go PT sup just because they’d make a few bucks an hour more than a starting preloader and they wanted those few extra bucks right now.
 

eats packages

Deranged lunatic
$8.50 in 2004 has the same buying power as $11.50 in 2018. That's still meaningfully better than getting hired today.

$8.50 in 1985 has the same buying power as $20.27 in 2018.

So, any guy hired in 1985 can be quiet if I want the starting rate to go to $20.27. That's what he got. CPI Inflation Calculator
There is a caveat to simply raising the minimums in our current setting. I would argue raises definitely are "better than nothing" but there is still a larger issue at hand:

The big two: Housing and pharmaceutical groups, who together can take away a huge chunk or all of a persons paycheck, can and will raise rent and medicine prices in-line with minimum wage increases.
They would not even suffer from a wage increase, checking on rental homes and patenting pills requires an extremely small workforce to manage.

So limiting the gains of these two groups with publicly invested, non-profit housing and medicine groups (*cough* single payer) might solve much more of our poverty issues in the US than simply raising the minimum.
 

wilberforce15

Well-Known Member
The big two: Housing and pharmaceutical groups, who together can take away a huge chunk or all of a persons paycheck, can and will raise rent and medicine prices in-line with minimum wage increases.
They would not even suffer from a wage increase, checking on rental homes and patenting pills requires an extremely small workforce to manage.

So limiting the gains of these two groups with publicly invested, non-profit housing and medicine groups (*cough* single payer) might solve much more of our poverty issues in the US than simply raising the minimum.

We're not talking about the minimum wage or any public policy.

This is about the starting rate at UPS that should be negotiated with the union.
 

brown_trousers

Well-Known Member
Really........ those are dead end jobs with no chance of going full time to a high paying job. See the difference. The same crying about part time wages now will be the same ones crying about not making enough as full timers if they get their wish. Which you probably will via 2 tiered wage.
wrong again. these union jobs pay well and provide a good career. Kroger, Cocacola, Costco. and they dont pay poverty level wages to new employees.
 

sandwich

The resident gearhead
wrong again. these union jobs pay well and provide a good career. Kroger, Cocacola, Costco. and they dont pay poverty level wages to new employees.
Coca-Cola and pepsi fulltime top out at at around 25 an hour. Kroger doesn't promote anybody to full time anymore. And Costco starts at 11 an hour and they don't come close to what we make fulltime. My wife just applied to Costco and it was 11 an hour. 2 drivers I currently work with. One used to work for pepsi the other for coke. Both jumped ship at the chance to work here as full time drivers because the pay sucked at the other places. My neighbor works for the food services union. The largest union in Washington. He told me they do not promote people to full time at Kroger anymore. Notice a trend. All these places have better starting wages for part timers and junk for full time.
 

sandwich

The resident gearhead
wrong again. these union jobs pay well and provide a good career. Kroger, Cocacola, Costco. and they dont pay poverty level wages to new employees.
You realize that ups would most likely offer a signing bonus and a raise to current full timers to vote in a lower top rate for you guys. In trade for a higher starting wage. You can argue all you want. But that's how negotiation works. Current top rate full timers will not be affected. In fact there will probably be incentives to vote in a 2 tier wage. You guys will be shooting yourselves in the foot. We are trying to stop you from that. Stop looking short term. UNLESS ups willingly offers up and increased starting wage without concessions. But do you really think that's going to happen.
 

Hannah-banana

Well-Known Member
Oh sure. I hopped on board within the last decade. I’m just saying that there should be an eyes wide open management of expectations given UPS’s pay level history and value of included benefits at the 1 year mark.

If you applied to the job on UPSers which says you might pull in $150 a week and took the job based on the premise that it’d pay the bills, you’re just doing it wrong.

How is one supposed to get to the career part without surviving the beginning?
 
Top