Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Retirement Topics
Surrending CS Pension?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="dannyboy" data-source="post: 72563" data-attributes="member: 484"><p>What company you talking about there Ok?</p><p></p><p>If UPS is only 10% of the governing body and the teamsters have 50%, then that leaves 40% that is management of other companies? What about them? What about their responsibility? Are they like ours, and represent companies that are long defunct? Like a board member that was management in a company that went belly up in the late 70’s/early 80's. So what the hell allows them to still sit on the board? D0 the math, the teamsters are five times more liable than UPS. So climb off your high horse.</p><p></p><p>As a practical matter, if one company contributes 80% of the money going into the coffers, they ought to have an 80% share of their 50% seats on the board.</p><p></p><p>In ours, we contribute 60% and until this year had none. We still do not have 60% of the representation, but two is better than none. And we now are seeing a few more decisions being made with UPS employees in mind.</p><p></p><p>As for the company out negotiating the union, “big surprise?” I have met and had negotiations that involved hall. Unless he is hiding something, I am not very impressed. And on several matters, he has proven himself to be a liar. And not to the company either.</p><p></p><p>Well maybe we do need to look at what the union is doing these days. They sure as heck are not interested in promoting getting FEDEX unionized. IF they really wanted it, they would allow the rank and file to help out. Not these little closet operations that they seem to love. Nothing like keeping things so secret no one can be critical of how your project is going.</p><p></p><p>The teamsters have lost the accountability to the rank and file. The no longer represent our interests first, they come second. First is their own well being and status.</p><p></p><p>Many decisions are made on the good ole boy, hell he supported my election, he donated money to me when I needed it, mentality. They are not made with the long term interests of the teamsters in mind. Take the folding up of one of the locals. Instead of allowing a nearby local(less than 20 miles away) that is very active and has a small territory to take in the new area, they allowed another nearly defunct local that is further away (almost 200 miles away) to take them in. One that makes getting real representation for the members much harder. On a side note, the smaller union was trying to get two large hospital systems organized (almost 10,000 employees) and the new local that took over was not interested in pursuing our leads. So instead of growing, this one too will fall by the wayside.</p><p></p><p>d</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="dannyboy, post: 72563, member: 484"] What company you talking about there Ok? If UPS is only 10% of the governing body and the teamsters have 50%, then that leaves 40% that is management of other companies? What about them? What about their responsibility? Are they like ours, and represent companies that are long defunct? Like a board member that was management in a company that went belly up in the late 70’s/early 80's. So what the hell allows them to still sit on the board? D0 the math, the teamsters are five times more liable than UPS. So climb off your high horse. As a practical matter, if one company contributes 80% of the money going into the coffers, they ought to have an 80% share of their 50% seats on the board. In ours, we contribute 60% and until this year had none. We still do not have 60% of the representation, but two is better than none. And we now are seeing a few more decisions being made with UPS employees in mind. As for the company out negotiating the union, “big surprise?” I have met and had negotiations that involved hall. Unless he is hiding something, I am not very impressed. And on several matters, he has proven himself to be a liar. And not to the company either. Well maybe we do need to look at what the union is doing these days. They sure as heck are not interested in promoting getting FEDEX unionized. IF they really wanted it, they would allow the rank and file to help out. Not these little closet operations that they seem to love. Nothing like keeping things so secret no one can be critical of how your project is going. The teamsters have lost the accountability to the rank and file. The no longer represent our interests first, they come second. First is their own well being and status. Many decisions are made on the good ole boy, hell he supported my election, he donated money to me when I needed it, mentality. They are not made with the long term interests of the teamsters in mind. Take the folding up of one of the locals. Instead of allowing a nearby local(less than 20 miles away) that is very active and has a small territory to take in the new area, they allowed another nearly defunct local that is further away (almost 200 miles away) to take them in. One that makes getting real representation for the members much harder. On a side note, the smaller union was trying to get two large hospital systems organized (almost 10,000 employees) and the new local that took over was not interested in pursuing our leads. So instead of growing, this one too will fall by the wayside. d [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Retirement Topics
Surrending CS Pension?
Top