Rank-and-File Hurt Most in UPS Strike


I started this.
Staff member
An article I found in the archives:

From: National Center for Policy Analysis


Rank-and-File Hurt Most in UPS Strike

Economic analysis shows that the recently settled United Parcel Service strike hurt rank-and-file workers the most -- even though they appear to have won.
  • Drivers lost up to $3,000 in pay -- money they will never get back.
  • Profit-sharing bonuses UPS originally offered were lost, valued at $1,500 to $3,000 per worker.
  • UPS estimates about 15,000 workers will lose their jobs through layoffs because of a permanent 5 percent reduction in business.
The strike did not reduce the number of part-time workers:
  • UPS's pledge to add 10,000 more full-time jobs was conditioned on volume increases -- while the strike decreased volume.
  • Even if these jobs were added, the number of part-time workers would decrease by only 2 percent, from 57 to 55 percent.
  • Forty percent of UPS's part-time workers are college students, and a number are parents with young kids.
  • The bulk of the part-time workers actually prefer the flexibility in hours over the time restraints of a full-time job.
Matthew Miller (syndicated columnist), "Paradox in the UPS Fine Print," Washington Times, August 28, 1997.


Well-Known Member
I have never understodd the position that UPS part-timers have flexibility in hours. Of all the part-time jobs that I have had in my entire lifetime, I have never had less flexibility as a part-timer than with UPS. I would assume that this is a play on words. I take this to mean that the company offers many different shifts at larger hubs, but I have never seen flexibility once you are on a shift, other than transfers to another shift once every 6 months.

I have had much more flexibility with every other job that I have ever had, be it full-time or part-time.


I'd like to read the entire Matthew Miller's column from the Washington Times that they are quoting. Do you have a copy of that?