Some people are waking up but.....

[Pollocknbrown]

Some people think its a good enough contract (usually those who aren't that educated on the contract). Here is the point, even if the contract is good enough, you don't ever accept a contract when theres gonna be 8+ months left before the ending of the current contract, send them back to the table and work a better deal. Do u accept the first offer a car salesman gives you when u walk into the dealership or do you bargain your trade value up and the price of the vehicle below sticker?

 

[chevyman]

I'm going to vote but comparing that to buying a car is not a good analogy. I also don't take their first offer. I too may go to another dealer and take their offer which, if it's better than the first one I may say see what they did and... The contract to me is different. I don't know about you and what fund you're under, but we in the Central States (CS) are looking at1) taking the offer as it stands with the company trying to help us out by assuming liability, say as in my case, I have 20 years now, and if this passes, I'd have 10 under the new plan. I could retire with 30 years @ 3000 a month with 200 dollars a month insurance where as retirees with CS presently pay 1000 dollars or more now. I'd retire at 60 years of age and the company would pay my retirement until I'd reach 65 and at that point I'd receive two checks. Under the new contract I'd receive split raises, yeah it might be nice to get it all at once but I am willing to give in, so I'll have to wait a little longer.
(2) Scenario #2 January 1, 2008 rolls around and we pass the point where the company can't help us or won't help with our pension and so the pension goes to Erisa or government appointed entity and they tell us for all your years of service, and people before you, all your going to get is $12,800 dollars a year with no medical insurance. Some of you other guys in other funds, maybe you have your pension and insurance through the company or maybe your teamster pension is fully funded. Well thats great and more power to you which ever way you decide to vote. But, before you make any decision and don't let me sway you, don't cut off the hand that feeds you. Your fund may not be in as great a shape as you think and maybe in the same position as ours in the future. We at CS are in the titanic. It was bound to happen at some and time and now is that time. For me, there isn't enough negative things about the contract to miss out on an opportunity to secure my pension. If for all my hard work I've done up until now, all I might get for 20 years under some government appointed plan might be ($1085 @ month), well I'm not willing to take the chance to see what will happen if this doesn't pass.
Before you pencil in the little oval shaped circle, take a look at what you have, how long and hard you've worked to get it, how other sectors across the board have been hit ( ie., airlines, and automotive), just to name a few. We are lucky we're in a successful GLOBAL company that has positioned itself to compete with other companies that pay its employees less and in some cases no insurance. I am a Teamster and proud of it, but they don't butter my bread.
Sorry if that was a little long and rambling on but I had to vent. Has anybody received their ballot yet? Some of the guys at work did.

 

[chevyman]

I meant to say ,comparing accepting the first contract offer to buying a car, but you knew what I mean.

 

[Damok]

I'm going to vote but comparing that to buying a car is not a good analogy. I also don't take their first offer. I too may go to another dealer and take their offer which, if it's better than the first one I may say see what they did and... The contract to me is different. I don't know about you and what fund you're under, but we in the Central States (CS) are looking at1) taking the offer as it stands with the company trying to help us out by assuming liability, say as in my case, I have 20 years now, and if this passes, I'd have 10 under the new plan. I could retire with 30 years @ 3000 a month with 200 dollars a month insurance where as retirees with CS presently pay 1000 dollars or more now. I'd retire at 60 years of age and the company would pay my retirement until I'd reach 65 and at that point I'd receive two checks. Under the new contract I'd receive split raises, yeah it might be nice to get it all at once but I am willing to give in, so I'll have to wait a little longer.
(2) Scenario #2 January 1, 2008 rolls around and we pass the point where the company can't help us or won't help with our pension and so the pension goes to Erisa or government appointed entity and they tell us for all your years of service, and people before you, all your going to get is $12,800 dollars a year with no medical insurance. Some of you other guys in other funds, maybe you have your pension and insurance through the company or maybe your teamster pension is fully funded. Well thats great and more power to you which ever way you decide to vote. But, before you make any decision and don't let me sway you, don't cut off the hand that feeds you. Your fund may not be in as great a shape as you think and maybe in the same position as ours in the future. We at CS are in the titanic. It was bound to happen at some and time and now is that time. For me, there isn't enough negative things about the contract to miss out on an opportunity to secure my pension. If for all my hard work I've done up until now, all I might get for 20 years under some government appointed plan might be ($1085 @ month), well I'm not willing to take the chance to see what will happen if this doesn't pass.
Before you pencil in the little oval shaped circle, take a look at what you have, how long and hard you've worked to get it, how other sectors across the board have been hit ( ie., airlines, and automotive), just to name a few. We are lucky we're in a successful GLOBAL company that has positioned itself to compete with other companies that pay its employees less and in some cases no insurance. I am a Teamster and proud of it, but they don't butter my bread.
Sorry if that was a little long and rambling on but I had to vent. Has anybody received their ballot yet? Some of the guys at work did.

Some people like the OP like to make broad generalizations about the intelligence of yes voters. It's interesting because they question the understanding we have of the contract but I wonder if they take the situations of people like yourself into account. I would imagine some don't.

I got my ballot in the mail 2 days ago by the way

 

[browned_out]

The Facts About the Pension Protection Act

October 17, 2007: Rumors are flying about the Pension Protection Act, the pension legislation that starts to take effect on Jan. 1.
Does the UPS contract have to be settled by Jan. 1 to head off benefit cuts and win pension improvements? Is a new round of pension cuts on the way? The answer is NO.
TDU consulted with actuaries, attorneys and fund managers to cut through the rumors and provide members with the facts.
January 1: A Kickoff, Not a Deadline
Some provisions of the Pension Protection Act go into effect on Jan. 1. This date is the kickoff of a long-term timeline for strengthening funds over 10 to 15 years.
It is not a deadline by which the UPS contract needs to be ratified for UPS Teamsters to avoid pension cuts or win pension improvements. It also is not a date on which Teamster pension funds will change their benefits.
What Happens on January 1?
On Jan. 1, 2008, the funding portions of the Pension Protection Act go into effect.
As a result, Teamster pension funds will have to certify their funding levels (Green Zone, Yellow Zone or Red Zone) and inform participants and the government of their status. This process does not occur immediately on Jan. 1, but can take up to 90 days.
On April 1, 2008, fund actuaries have to certify the status of the plan. If a plan is under-funded, then it must notify participants, the union, the company, and the government by May 1, 2008—120 days after Jan. 1.
Yellow Zone and Red Zone
If a pension plan is under-funded, it will be certified by the fund actuary as in the “Yellow Zone” or the “Red Zone.”
The Yellow Zone means the fund is less than 80 percent funded.
The Red Zone means that the fund is seriously under-funded and also has a short-term credit balance deficiency (a technical calculation that indicates a more short-term problem than the funding level). Being under 65 percent funded will not automatically place a pension plan in the Red Zone.
Few, if any, Teamster plans will fall in the Red Zone. But some major Teamster funds, including the Central States Fund and the New England Fund, are expected to be in the Yellow Zone.
December 31, 2008: Deadline for Plans
If a plan is in the Yellow Zone or Red Zone, the plan’s actuary will then come up with at least two options to get the funding level up toward 80 percent over the next ten or 15 years.
These options include increasing employer contributions, and/or decreasing future pension accruals.
For any plan under 80 percent funded, the trustees will adopt a Funding Improvement Plan, based on the options prepared by their actuaries, to present to the union and the company. If the trustees deadlock (company vs. union trustees), the matter goes to expedited arbitration.
By Dec. 1, 2008 a pension plan must announce their improvement plan, unless there is an impasse.
That plan must go into effect by December 2009, two years from now.
The Central States Fund has already adopted its plan. They require contracts signed this year to have pension contributions go up at least eight percent a year. And they cut back benefits, by eliminating unreduced 25- and 30-and-out pension accruals.
Under the law, Teamster pension funds must adjust their funding plans based on any new pension money that is negotiated in contract bargaining. A new contract does not have to be ratified by Jan. 1.
When major contracts are settled, fund actuaries and trustees will adjust their Funding Improvement Plans based on the new money projected in the contract.
The Bottom Line
The goal of the Pension Protection Act is to get multi-employer plans to move their funding levels up to 80 percent over the next ten to fifteen years.
It is a long-term process. No plan needs to be adopted until Dec. 1, 2008, over a year from now, and none needs to be put into effect until a year after that.
Any contract improvements that are won—at any time—will be taken into account. The UPS contract does not need to be settled by Jan. 1 for us to prevent cuts or win pension improvements.


This is what I found concerning the pension, if this is not true please submit other info. I know some of you will say this is from TDU and doesn't mean anything, but you have to question the people trying to push the vote before Jan 1st.

 

[VTBrown]

Some people like the OP like to make broad generalizations about the intelligence of yes voters. It's interesting because they question the understanding we have of the contract but I wonder if they take the situations of people like yourself into account. I would imagine some don't.

I got my ballot in the mail 2 days ago by the way

Do the CS people take into account our situations? We should pass a crappy contract to save them?

 

[RTS-wornout]

Where is your big speech on solidarity? The CS people have gotten no pension help from the past 2 or 3 contracts. How about a level playing field? This contract is all about veterans and what we've earned. The company writes the checks and the company must be profitable. Ask autoworkers who walk out for job security from companies that can't sell their cars because their paying too much for wages and benefits. Big money is great but we've reached a point where it's got to level off. Why do you think we can't close sales leads? We are no longer the cheapest, in fact the most expensive shipper. Knowing that, you have to realize that we're not going to be paid $100,000 a yr to shuffle boxes. We work hard,long with much sacrifice, but it's not brain surgery. If you don't like it here, check your local classifieds this weekend and try to find something that comes remotely close to what we have,requiring only a high school education. Good luck.

 

[Braveheart]

Do the CS people take into account our situations? We should pass a crappy contract to save them?

No I am in CS and I beg you to vote NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!

 

[Braveheart]

Please read the back bottom of the fancy brochures they sent out about the pension!

It states "Although UPS and the IBT intend to maintain the plan indefinitely, UPS and the IBT trustees reserve the right to amend or discontinue any employee benefits or plans at any time for any reason." What in the hell is that doing in their!!!!!I thought this was a contract!!!!!!

All the YES voters are saying WOW what a great pension? They told us it was a great pension last time in 2002 too did they not!!!!!!

Then only 1 year into the 2002 contract they said oh damn we were wrong and did not get enough pension money, did not pay enough attention to escalating health insurance costs, had amnesia about the whole 9/11 thing that happened 10 MONTHS prior, excuses excuses and we got the shaft!!!!

They will do it again, unless we vote NO and fix it for real this time!!!!

 

[Cole]

I have 20 years now, and if this passes, I'd have 10 under the new plan. I could retire with 30 years @ 3000 a month with 200 dollars a month insurance where as retirees with CS presently pay 1000 dollars or more now.

Where in the contract does it state the $200.00 a month cap?

Think long term how little that $3,000 a month will be, and that it can be amended by the parties. I think they can do us much better in pension than that, and yes I am in CS. Some think UPS will be able to write about half off in taxes that they put into CS.

 

[1989]

I don't see much problem with the contract. I'm not a dishonest employee so I don't have a problem with the language. I'm not sure about the CS pension though. (The CS doesn't affect me) Is it a good or bad deal? Too many people are saying it's a bad deal. But I do know It's better to have a pension verses not. What if we voted yes on the pension this contract, then improved the payout on future contracts? I want to vote yes because I will probably transfer in March. Will somebody give me a good reason to vote no. A reason besides "because I said so."

 

[satellitedriver]

I'm going to vote but comparing that to buying a car is not a good analogy. I also don't take their first offer. I too may go to another dealer and take their offer which, if it's better than the first one I may say see what they did and... The contract to me is different. I don't know about you and what fund you're under, but we in the Central States (CS) are looking at1) taking the offer as it stands with the company trying to help us out by assuming liability, say as in my case, I have 20 years now, and if this passes, I'd have 10 under the new plan. I could retire with 30 years @ 3000 a month with 200 dollars a month insurance where as retirees with CS presently pay 1000 dollars or more now. I'd retire at 60 years of age and the company would pay my retirement until I'd reach 65 and at that point I'd receive two checks. Under the new contract I'd receive split raises, yeah it might be nice to get it all at once but I am willing to give in, so I'll have to wait a little longer.
(2) Scenario #2 January 1, 2008 rolls around and we pass the point where the company can't help us or won't help with our pension and so the pension goes to Erisa or government appointed entity and they tell us for all your years of service, and people before you, all your going to get is $12,800 dollars a year with no medical insurance. Some of you other guys in other funds, maybe you have your pension and insurance through the company or maybe your teamster pension is fully funded. Well thats great and more power to you which ever way you decide to vote. But, before you make any decision and don't let me sway you, don't cut off the hand that feeds you. Your fund may not be in as great a shape as you think and maybe in the same position as ours in the future. We at CS are in the titanic. It was bound to happen at some and time and now is that time. For me, there isn't enough negative things about the contract to miss out on an opportunity to secure my pension. If for all my hard work I've done up until now, all I might get for 20 years under some government appointed plan might be ($1085 @ month), well I'm not willing to take the chance to see what will happen if this doesn't pass.
Before you pencil in the little oval shaped circle, take a look at what you have, how long and hard you've worked to get it, how other sectors across the board have been hit ( ie., airlines, and automotive), just to name a few. We are lucky we're in a successful GLOBAL company that has positioned itself to compete with other companies that pay its employees less and in some cases no insurance. I am a Teamster and proud of it, but they don't butter my bread.
Sorry if that was a little long and rambling on but I had to vent. Has anybody received their ballot yet? Some of the guys at work did.

You are right Chevy. We in CS are on the Titanic and can only hope that the rest of the voters are willing to throw a life ring.
If not, well then I hope we can tread water until the next ship passes by.
PAX

 

[satellitedriver]

Do the CS people take into account our situations? We should pass a crappy contract to save them?

Yes, they do.
Yes, you should.

 

[Cole]

I don't see much problem with the contract. I'm not a dishonest employee so I don't have a problem with the language.

Under this contract it's not your opinion on your own honesty that matters, as it will largely be the company's discretion, and I have seen plenty of people that were honest vigorously accused of being dishonest, and simply couldn't afford to sit out 3 plus mnths to prove it, so they accept a deal of suspension, just to get back to work, but now they have a bogus dishonest charge in their file!

Had they fought it they would have won and won back pay. Sometimes you have to be patient with justice.