brownIEman
Well-Known Member
Nothing happened.
No, I literally mean NOTHING happened. Starting wage for PT insiders has been pretty much flat since about that time...
Strike Rumors
- Thread starter Ptrunner
- Start date
Nothing happened.
No, I literally mean NOTHING happened. Starting wage for PT insiders has been pretty much flat since about that time...
Hmmm, how could this happen? The part-timers outnumber the full-timers 3 to 1, maybe 4 to 1. How could those contracts have passed??
Oh yeah, they don't go to Union meetings or vote.
The part-timers could OWN the union and the contract if they only participated.
great story there Socks,,, you think that one up all by yourself? or did your mommie help?
brownIEman
Well-Known Member
As I stated in my first post on this thread, I will never understand it...
iowa boy
Well-Known Member
I have to disagree. If we were run by an army of people who see things as they are as I try to do, we would be in much better shape, IMHO.
Hiring and and training costs? For high turnover? What turnover? Did you miss the part about not hiring new people in 2 years? No one is leaving, so we are not hiring, as volume is down.
Absences and tardiness are certainly a problem, but they are just as bad with many of my veterans making more like double the starting wage. I fail to see how raising the wage will fix that.
Missorts, injuries and inefficiencies from constant new hires? Once again, I point out that we currently have a low starting wage, and have NO new hires in the past 2 years. That problem does not exist, so how do I recoup the cost of higher wages by fixing a problem that does not exist?
BTW, If you read my earlier post, I did offer a number of ideas to recoup the cost of a higher insider wage. Such as higher acceptable production standards and lower acceptable error standards. Are you suggesting the union would agree to those?
Consider yourself lucky that you haven't had to to hire P/t'ers in 2 years. Was chatting with a part time sup 2 weeks ago, and he told me that our center has hired over 30 p/t'ers since the end of May. They either hate the job, (the whole physically having to work thing,) low pay, no benefits, etc. Then again, this is the next generation of young adults who can't quite comprehend the concept of doing actual 'work' for a paycheck.
Edit: Oh, and the part-time work force in our center can't attend the meetings our local has be cause they are held at 7 or 8 at night on one Tuesday a month. Hell, we have drivers that can't attend the meetings as they don't get done til 7 or 8 at night now.
Every possible incentive is in place to discourage part-timers from taking an interest in union affairs and attending union meetings.
Only a handful of full-timers attend!!!
It's like expecting people to follow the Supreme Court, or County Government, or the United Nations, or the Federal Reserve, or the International Monetary Fund, or . . .
bigblu 2 you
Well-Known Member
most of our pt'ers are young kids who live with mom&[email protected] want enough money to keep a car and weekend cash,laugh and look at you like your crazy when you ask them to enforce the contract or stick up for each other when mngmnt harasses them.and they couldnt tell you where the union hall is or even the local#.they dont have time to vote,but when they feel violated you have to part their mustaches and bottle feed them.i hope they dont all vote because most would sell out for a pizza.
The best thing is these relatively new union folk still want to fight for a union that is screwing them in the meantime. I feel bad for the part time work force, I really do. They get screwed by me and then the union takes them for whatever they have left.
You just think you are screwing them because it makes you feel like a big boy. When daddy lets you fire someone, they simply move on with life to the next low paying job with a lot less grief from boys like you with a chip on their shoulder
Catatonic
Nine Lives
Either way they are getting screwed due to a weak IBT. It's too bad you guys couldn't find a more powerful union with a set of you know what on them.
EAT MY OVERALLOWED
Veteran
Hoffa and Hall need to go and have needed to go for awhile now. Managers have no clue about the union or the contract -- they are clueless. Granted most hourly workers have no clue about the IBT either. You have to be the one with the pair, you have to hold everyone accountable on both sides of the fence (both your local union and management). Unions aren't to simply fly in with a cape through a skylight whenever there is a problem, you have to be the squeaky wheel to get the oil. You have to know your rights, you have to file grievances, you have to be a visible and active member and you have to do your job like the CEO is watching you on a camera for all 12 hours of your day. That's the reality of this job in 2010 and if you become an active and visible member in your union I promise you that you will see a difference in the way you are treated. At the end of the day everyone can be sued and your local and the IBT are no different -- the last thing they want is a class action lawsuit for failure to represent members.
Most teamsters do not have what it takes to get what they deserve out of the IBT because they don't have a pair. They carry a card in their wallet, pay the dues and expect the world to be handed to them. Start talking to your business agents, stewards, even stewards from other centers in your building -- get active in the union, even if it's not in the front row.
Most teamsters do not have what it takes to get what they deserve out of the IBT because they don't have a pair. They carry a card in their wallet, pay the dues and expect the world to be handed to them. Start talking to your business agents, stewards, even stewards from other centers in your building -- get active in the union, even if it's not in the front row.
Some Management posters contend that during Contract negotiations, UPS determines the amount of money it is willing to give, and the Teamsters divide it up amongst full-timers, part-timers, Pension funds, and Health & Welfare funds as they alone see fit.
This has long been an article of faith in Management's elaborate mythology, but it can't be right, because the Law requires both sides to actively bargain in good faith. Both sides submit proposals, and then both sides submit counter proposals. Neither side is required to give in, but they both must seriously consider the other side's proposals and react constructively to them. Ultimately, the Contract that results is, taken as a whole, agreed to by both sides. Indeed, usually highly recommended by both sides.
The idea of UPS unilaterally dictating the wage package, take it or leave it, would trigger an Unfair Labor Practice charge, and UPS would be found guilty of failing to "bargain in good faith."
If the allegation is that the part-time wage rates are kept low because the Teamsters never try to raise them, then would someone who makes that charge please post the Union and Management wage proposals and counter-proposals for the Contracts going back to 1982 so we can all know what you claim to know.
From the Union perspective, the Law treats an ULP strike much more favorably than a monetary strike, so there is a limit to how hard a Union can push to get higher wages. If UPS negotiators are insistant that the part-timers are to be paid "minimum wage" or something close to it year after year, the Teamsters may have to accept that if UPS has given in somewhere else. Or take us out on a monetary strike.
The only decision the Teamsters have about dividing up the money is how much of the annual raise in Pension and H & W contributions will be allocated to Pension, and how much to H & W. So instead of a 50/50 split, they might split the dollar or so 60/40 or 40/60 or whatever.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
I'll show you the offers when you show me your law degree.
The financial package is offered by the company based on current profits and projected volumes, product mix and competitive analysis.
The Union is the entity that defines how the financial package will be divided up.
I'm sure that there ways to circumvent " the Law requires both sides to actively bargain in good faith" if your interpretation is even valid ... these are lawyers actually drawing up the contract and they write the laws with the thought in mind to be able to circumvent and litigate them. Law is a self-perpetuation system that lawyers control.
av8torntn
Well-Known Member
I do not have a law degree but I'd like to see. I know UPS has paid in places over what the contract has called for in the form of hiring bonuses, tuition, attendance bonuses, etc. but I've always been curious who gains anything from keeping the part time wages so low. From the companies standpoint they seem to be getting a very weak labor pool in the larger cities and from the union standpoint you'd think that since the dues are calculated on the hourly wage they'd want to get the wage up.
Cute. But not a valid response.
If you or others assert that UPS and the Teamsters made certain proposals, the burden of proof is on you to back up your assertions with evidence.
EAT MY OVERALLOWED
Veteran
You don't need a law degree (or any degree) to figure out that the company will try to screw everyone, everything and everybody out of 1 red cent.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
No, the burden of proof is on you. I already know this to be true so if you want to change my mind ... hop to it!
Nice try at circumventing the truth though.The company makes specific wage proposals during negotiations. In 1997 for example the "last best and final offer" included 70 cent raise every other year. This notion that the company hands the union a big bag of money and says "Here, you figure it out" is just what John said, a convenient mythology.No, the burden of proof is on you. I already know this to be true so if you want to change my mind ... hop to it!
Catatonic
Nine Lives
Whatever ... I am tiring of this thread.
I have discussed this with certain people involved in the process. They have/had no reason to to deceive me.
The negotiations are behind the scenes, never exposed to the public ... UPS announces it and the Union presents to the members.
UPS plays along with the game because the Union officials have to be elected (political process) and they need to be able to save face and flow with the reaction from the members. Carey was one exception to this way of doing business. He did not bargain in good faith and lied to the UPS negotiators (at least from what I was told).
These discussions are going nowhere, people can use their own analysis to believe what they believe.
One thing is certain, nobody on BC has any idea how these negotiations actually work (including me) but I do tend to believe what I was told by actual people involved.
I guess we can agree to disagree.
