Strike Rumors

[blue efficacy]

Fact is, the company cannot afford to give more to those who have the least (PTers) without taking from those who have the most (FT Drivers.)
And that's all well and good, they paid their dues, blah blah. Fine. I can live with that.

But when the membership has no problem voting through a contract that takes even more from those who already have the least, that's what keeps me up at night. When you factor in inflation, the pay cut for new PT employees has been simply astronomical. But that's not good enough; let's take away their bennies, too.

The fact is, between the stagnant starting wage, four year wage progression with smaller raises, and now a year for medical and 1.5 years for family, UPS and the Teamsters threw out the lube and are using sandpaper instead. Let's not forget the "guaranteed" combo jobs that seem to be evaporating into thin air.

Also, good luck if you want more than 3.5 hours, LOL. Some shifts they go out of their way to make you feel unwelcome if you want more than 3 hours. "Are you sure you want your 3.5 hours?" "Yes, my mind hasn't changed from the last five times you've asked me tonight." "We really don't have anything for you to do..."

But what can you expect when the PT workforce is composed of 20-something year old potheads and hotshot college kids who love to work fast and risk injury so they can leave in 2.5 hours or less? So many kids have gotten injured in my building (In very avoidable ways it appears) that they are actually taking safety seriously now!

Granted I have worked for UPS for long enough that I make a decent wage, and I am very thankful for MY benefits. That doesn't mean I feel any better about the new PTers getting the shaft. I am worried that in a future contract they may try to jack with ALL PTer's medical. I would strike over that in a heartbeat. Too bad the FTers would throw us under the bus if that comes up.

 

[JonFrum]

And while that part-time progression is made to look like four years, it's actually five!!!

 

[brett636]

ARTICLE 8. NATIONAL GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
Section 2.Work Stoppages
All grievances and/or questions of interpretation arising under the provisions of this National Master Agreement shall be submitted to the grievance procedure for determination.

Accordingly, no work stoppage, slowdown, walkout or lockout over such grievances and/or questions of interpretation shall be deemed to be permitted or authorized by this Agreement except:

(a) failure to comply with a duly adopted majority decision of the National Grievance Committee;

(b) failure to make health & welfare and pension contributions in the manner required by the applicable Supplemental Agreements, Riders and/or Addenda; and,

(c) nonpayment of established wage rates provided for in this Agreement, Supplements, Riders and/or Addenda.

Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this Section, strikes, work stoppages, slowdowns, walkouts or lockouts over disputes, which do not arise under provisions of this National Master Agreement, shall be permitted or prohibited as provided in the applicable Supplement, Rider and/or Addendum. The Local Union shall give the Employer a seventy-two (72) hour prior written notice of the Local Union’s authorization of strike action, which notice shall specify the majority National Grievance Committee decision or deadlocked National Grievance Committee decision providing the basis for such authorization. The Local Union shall comply with the provisions of the applicable Supplemental Agreement, Rider and Addendum relating to strike action resulting from delinquencies in the payment of health and welfare or pension contributions.

If the national grievance committee has not made any decisions regarding these issues would a strike still be allowed? Last I checked they keep ignoring the 22,3 layoff grievances, and the 9.5 grievances have not faired much better. I would not support such a strike, nor do I believe its anything remotely possible, but I see it that the international has put itself into a position that it can't call for a strike since its failed to allow decisions to be made on these issues.

 

[beentheredonethat]

Contractually negotiated wage rates are minimums to allow for the payment of time-and-one-half (and maybe double time)..........UPS can pay higher wages if they want to, just as they can give us a holiday turkey, safety awards, years of service awards, stock purchase discounts and tuition reimbursement etc. if they want to.

Also check your Maintainence of Standards clause in your Supplement.

And finally, there's . . .
ARTICLE 22. PART-TIME EMPLOYEES
Sections 5.Wages
The wage rates and increases provided in (a) and (b) shall be a minimum.

It's funny we can give higher then the minimum if we want to per you, we can also give a turkey if we want to, but if we do, and then stop doing it, then airbusfxr and others will grieve we took away something we never promised to begin with. It's no secret that when UPS goes to the bargaining table that there is a target total dollar pkg they are willing to spend, the teamsters for the most part, determine where the money goes, weather it's to H&W, Pension, pay rates for FT, or for PT etc.

 

[UPSSOCKS]

I'd say they care equally about all the employees. The goal of any business is to get as much work done for as little as possible. It's the rank and file that control how the money gets divy'd up. The greed of the full timers decided the fate of the part timers way back in the 80's. More for the majority of the voters and less for the minority. Tables will turn when the part time voting mass outnumbers the full time voters. When they can take $10 per hour off the table for every new full timer in exchange for a dollar or two per hour for every part timers there will be a shift in pay scales.

Nicely put.... What the new teamsters don't realize is the guys that are getting ready to retire are the ones that set the low starting wage in stone. They lined their pockets at the expense of their children and grandchildren.... No such thing as a brotherhood anymore folks... Just a bunch of union officers trying to figure out how to make more money off an uneducated union...

 

[deleted9]

I hope you mean this in the sense that you dont believe that unions are in it for the working man anymore and not that unions are no longer needed. Just imagine being at UPS right now with no contract whatsoever. If your good with that thought then ok, but I for one am not

The unions have become a business like everything else

 

[UPSSOCKS]

I have a great story for everyone.. Tonight I heard a grievance for a supervisor working for 4 hours.. After hashing it out for a good 15 minutes the union steward looked at me and said... "Do you remember when I asked to change my vacation to Thanksgiving week?" I replied yes, he then said "make that happen and I will make this greivance go away." Astonished I agreed but I asked him to tell the other union employee while I was present.

This is what he said:
"******, this is one of those gray areas in the contract, I understand that the supervisor was in the wrong but at the same time he was making customers happy that keep us employed. I think it would be best if we let this one go."

He should of said, thanks for your dues I'm going away with the family for Thanksgiving!!!!!

 

[JonFrum]

It's funny we can give higher then the minimum if we want to per you, we can also give a turkey if we want to, but if we do, and then stop doing it, then airbusfxr and others will grieve we took away something we never promised to begin with. It's no secret that when UPS goes to the bargaining table that there is a target total dollar pkg they are willing to spend, the teamsters for the most part, determine where the money goes, weather it's to H&W, Pension, pay rates for FT, or for PT etc.

A case can be made based on the Maintenance of Standards clause and Past Practice Doctrine that UPS should continue giving us Holiday Turkeys and Safety and Years-of-Service Awards, however the strength of the case is debatable.

Airbusfxr is under a different Contract, and in his contract, such perks are specifically guaranteed in writing. Of course UPS took them away anyway. But the Arbitrator ruled UPS had no right to, and so they are restored. But only for those under Airbusfxr's local Contract.

See:
https://web.archive.org/web/20101221042509/http://tdu.org/node/4209

 

[JonFrum]

If the national grievance committee has not made any decisions regarding these issues would a strike still be allowed? Last I checked they keep ignoring the 22,3 layoff grievances, and the 9.5 grievances have not faired much better. I would not support such a strike, nor do I believe its anything remotely possible, but I see it that the international has put itself into a position that it can't call for a strike since its failed to allow decisions to be made on these issues.

The National Grievance Committee has made 9.5 decisions. They will presumably be making more 9.5 decisions, and 22.3 decisions in four weeks.

Click on "UPS National Grievance Panel Decisions"
http://www.tdu.org/view/ups

 

[JonFrum]

BrownIEman, UPS has created all sorts of problems for itself as a result of so dramatically underpaying its part-time workers all these years. These problems cost UPS a huge amount of money and cause customers to leave. Paying higher wages would save UPS money and make UPS money. There would be no need to cut expenses somewhere else. It's a sign of the times at UPS that investing in your people is considered silly and out of the question.

 

[brownIEman]

BrownIEman, UPS has created all sorts of problems for itself as a result of so dramatically underpaying its part-time workers all these years. These problems cost UPS a huge amount of money and cause customers to leave. Paying higher wages would save UPS money and make UPS money. There would be no need to cut expenses somewhere else. It's a sign of the times at UPS that investing in your people is considered silly and out of the question.

It is easy to say it costs UPS money to pay insiders so little and raising the wage would pay for itself. You state this like it is some sort of axiom. It is not. If this is your position, give me some sort of argument to support it.

You seem to suggest that UPS is increasing costs and losing customers due to the low wage. UPS service levels are as good or better than they have ever been. Visibility to our customers is much better than it was back in the 80's when the wage was locked down, and we have tons of more service products available to customers than we did back then. How is that we are losing customers due to the wage?

If that is your argument, it would be natural to infer that you are suggesting UPS would make up the cost of the increased wages by retaining more customers, and therefore more volume, and through increase production. What would make you believe that?

Would a higher paid work force work faster and with fewer mistakes? As I asked in an earlier post, if UPS paid insiders more, would the union accept higher production and service standards from them? Or are you suggesting they would naturally start working harder for the higher wage?

I can tell you my experience. I work in an inside operation that has not hired in over 2 years. We have some employees with more than 25yrs. The average wage is somewhere around $20.00. It is not the highest paid workers who are the hardest working with the least mistakes and best service. So I do not see where the return on investment would come from.

 

[UPSSOCKS]

I agree you can pay these people anything, and get the same results. If you give a lazy man a dollar raise, he still is lazy. It's too bad people didn't get paid for what they earn. I used to help a roofer in the summer when I was a kid. He would pay us a dollar extra for every bundle of shingles we would carry up the ladders. Some guys walked out of there with an extra 50 bucks (back then 50 bucks was big) and some walked out with just their paychecks. It's too bad the teamsters ruin stuff for the few good people they have.

 

[JonFrum]

It is easy to say it costs UPS money to pay insiders so little and raising the wage would pay for itself. You state this like it is some sort of axiom. It is not. If this is your position, give me some sort of argument to support it.

You seem to suggest that UPS is increasing costs and losing customers due to the low wage. UPS service levels are as good or better than they have ever been. Visibility to our customers is much better than it was back in the 80's when the wage was locked down, and we have tons of more service products available to customers than we did back then. How is that we are losing customers due to the wage?

If that is your argument, it would be natural to infer that you are suggesting UPS would make up the cost of the increased wages by retaining more customers, and therefore more volume, and through increase production. What would make you believe that?

Would a higher paid work force work faster and with fewer mistakes? As I asked in an earlier post, if UPS paid insiders more, would the union accept higher production and service standards from them? Or are you suggesting they would naturally start working harder for the higher wage?

I can tell you my experience. I work in an inside operation that has not hired in over 2 years. We have some employees with more than 25yrs. The average wage is somewhere around $20.00. It is not the highest paid workers who are the hardest working with the least mistakes and best service. So I do not see where the return on investment would come from.

I'm afraid UPS is run by an army of people who think like you.

You should easily be able to come up with a long list of problems that would be solved by raising part-time wages. Just think of all the endless hireing and training costs, and replacement costs due to the high turnover, the missorts, inefficiencies and injuries that result from endless New Hires. The constant absences and tardiness. The costs are astronomical!!!!

 

[JonFrum]

I have a great story for everyone.. Tonight I heard a grievance for a supervisor working for 4 hours.. After hashing it out for a good 15 minutes the union steward looked at me and said... "Do you remember when I asked to change my vacation to Thanksgiving week?" I replied yes, he then said "make that happen and I will make this greivance go away." Astonished I agreed but I asked him to tell the other union employee while I was present.

This is what he said:
"******, this is one of those gray areas in the contract, I understand that the supervisor was in the wrong but at the same time he was making customers happy that keep us employed. I think it would be best if we let this one go."

He should of said, thanks for your dues I'm going away with the family for Thanksgiving!!!!!

Tell us about the Top Secret Classified Documents, the weapons-grade uranium, the beautiful seductress, and the one-armed man.

 

[JonFrum]

i think you interpreted part of my posting wrong, Nobody said get rid of them after graduation, it was assumed that there would be turnover because of college degrees in different fields of professions and skills, and yes there is and was lot of opportunities to stay at ups, but again p/t is p/t not friend/t.

Good point except there was no massive retaliation campaign, if you know anything about ups you know that they are not going to add hours and cost into operations for the same amount of work being done without cutting cost somewhere...... its called business..... am i correct in assuming that seniority is a union thing, set up by the union on how it is determined. If true that would mean that the union approved the 22.3 leap-frogging over the longer employed p/t. Also as far as more hours years ago for p/t, no p/t employee could work over five hours or they would have to be paid a guaranteed 8 hrs for that day, now its overtime after 5 at least where i am.

Maybe you advocated a milder version of THE SCHEME than others at the time.

Did you believe that is was OK to not hire women because they were female, and not hire middle-aged older people because they were not in their teens and twenties, and not hire non-students, even though the job doesn't require any College at all?
- - - -
You didn't notice there has been a massive 22.3 retaliation campaign???? We must work for different companies!!!!
- - - -
Back then, part-timers worked long hours, with some of those hours at time-and-a-half. The jobs would have been considered full-time if performed at any other company, even if they wern't a full 40 hours per week. They were "part-time" at UPS because they were called "part-time" by UPS and Teamster negotiators and carried part-time benefits and seniority.

 

[brownIEman]

I'm afraid UPS is run by an army of people who think like you.

You should easily be able to come up with a long list of problems that would be solved by raising part-time wages. Just think of all the endless hireing and training costs, and replacement costs due to the high turnover, the missorts, inefficiencies and injuries that result from endless New Hires. The constant absences and tardiness. The costs are astronomical!!!!

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?

 

[deleted9]

Maybe you advocated a milder version of THE SCHEME than others at the time.

Did you believe that is was OK to not hire women because they were female, and not hire middle-aged older people because they were not in their teens and twenties, and not hire non-students, even though the job doesn't require any College at all?
- - - -
You didn't notice there has been a massive 22.3 retaliation campaign???? We must work for different companies!!!!
- - - -
Back then, part-timers worked long hours, with some of those hours at time-and-a-half. The jobs would have been considered full-time if performed at any other company, even if they wern't a full 40 hours per week. They were "part-time" at UPS because they were called "part-time" by UPS and Teamster negotiators and carried part-time benefits and seniority.

everything with you is retaliation, scheme, conspiracy, give it a rest....... as the saying goes "if you don't like the job quit" or go into management and make a difference.....

 

[Catatonic]

BrownIEman, UPS has created all sorts of problems for itself as a result of so dramatically underpaying its part-time workers all these years. These problems cost UPS a huge amount of money and (1) cause customers to leave. Paying higher wages would save UPS money and make UPS money. There would be no need to cut expenses somewhere else. It's a sign of the times at UPS that (2) investing in your people is considered silly and out of the question.

(1) The #1 reason customers leave UPS, by a long shot, is because of the "Cost to Serve". Raising wages would cause more customers to leave.

(2) Inside P/T jobs have been de-skilled to such a large extent that the concept of Intellectual Capital really does not apply like it does for the driver positions. The remaining skilled jobs are typically filled by higher paid P/T employees and the investment does take place there.

 

[trickpony1]

I don't know how long some of you have been around but........
I was a prelaoder in 1978, 1979, and part of 1980, I was making either 12 something or 15 something an hour when I went to pkg cars.
What happened? other than our famous union screwd the PT'er.

 

[hellfire]

I don't know how long some of you have been around but........
I was a prelaoder in 1978, 1979, and part of 1980, I was making either 12 something or 15 something an hour when I went to pkg cars.
What happened? other than our famous union screwd the PT'er.

yup,,the new people seem to forget all the negative and greed about the union the oldtimers have seen