Union haters welcomed

Its_a_me

Well-Known Member
What about union dues paying members that want to know why when the last contract voting was announced and UPS put out a press release about going back to bargaining table the union right afterward announced they were ramming the contract through anyways using a never previously used loophole?

Can you educate me on how great the union was doing that? Because I believe the union has done shady things and are now starting to have to pay for those actions and old-timers (particularly top-rate 22.3's with high seniority) concerned with only themselves will be the death spiral of the union and are disporpotionaly catered to because of voting patterns.
 
What about union dues paying members that want to know why when the last contract voting was announced and UPS put out a press release about going back to bargaining table the union right afterward announced they were ramming the contract through anyways using a never previously used loophole?

Can you educate me on how great the union was doing that? Because I believe the union has done shady things and are now starting to have to pay for those actions and old-timers (particularly top-rate 22.3's with high seniority) concerned with only themselves will be the death spiral of the union and are disporpotionaly catered to because of voting patterns.
The union cannot pull that this time.
That bylaw was taken out of the Constitution
 

Its_a_me

Well-Known Member
The union cannot pull that this time.
That bylaw was taken out of the Constitution
Do I get my money back for the last 5 years then? Best contract ever. Or was there an issue that went unsolved for years that aided RTW laws. Something union lackeys need to ponder and think about.

So I can educate "to how they are clearly wrong and hopefully given something to think about."

and BTW the part about catering only to high seniority voting members being the death spiral of the union was the most import part that went unaddressed.
 

Thebrownblob

Well-Known Member
What about union dues paying members that want to know why when the last contract voting was announced and UPS put out a press release about going back to bargaining table the union right afterward announced they were ramming the contract through anyways using a never previously used loophole?

Can you educate me on how great the union was doing that? Because I believe the union has done shady things and are now starting to have to pay for those actions and old-timers (particularly top-rate 22.3's with high seniority) concerned with only themselves will be the death spiral of the union and are disporpotionaly catered to because of voting patterns.
It wasn’t shady, and it has been used another national contracts so it’s not something that hasn’t been done ever. Now we can agree that the provision of the 2/3 rule was a crap by law in the constitution. But you do not get to say it was shady because it was legitimately in the constitution. I was a delegate I voted to get rid of it. So clearly I disagreed with the decision. I believe the previous administration did it because they did not think they had support for any kind of work action or strike. Naturally I think they were wrong but I’m telling you what I believe they thought.
 

Thebrownblob

Well-Known Member
Do I get my money back for the last 5 years then? Best contract ever. Or was there an issue that went unsolved for years that aided RTW laws. Something union lackeys need to ponder and think about.

So I can educate "to how they are clearly wrong and hopefully given something to think about."

and BTW the part about catering only to high seniority voting members being the death spiral of the union was the most import part that went unaddressed.
I’m really not sure what you’re trying to say right here. right to work laws?
 

Its_a_me

Well-Known Member
It wasn’t shady, and it has been used another national contracts so it’s not something that hasn’t been done ever. Now we can agree that the provision of the 2/3 rule was a crap by law in the constitution. But you do not get to say it was shady because it was legitimately in the constitution. I was a delegate I voted to get rid of it. So clearly I disagreed with the decision. I believe the previous administration did it because they did not think they had support for any kind of work action or strike. Naturally I think they were wrong but I’m telling you what I believe they thought.
...and the result was the company on their own decided to pay more than the union negotiated wages for part-timers through use of a market rate adjustment.

Best contract ever.

Which again adds to how the union is shooting themselves in the foot and aiding RTW legislation across the nation that old timers (particularly full time 22.3's with high seniority) don't seem to comprehend. There is example #2 of a legitimate issue to educate "to how they are clearly wrong (the union lackeys are) and hopefully given something to think about."
 

Thebrownblob

Well-Known Member
...and the result was the company on their own decided to pay more than the union negotiated wages for part-timers through use of a market rate adjustment.

Best contract ever.

Which again adds to how the union is shooting themselves in the foot and aiding RTW legislation across the nation that old timers (particularly full time 22.3's with high seniority) don't seem to comprehend. There is example #2 of a legitimate issue to educate "to how they are clearly wrong (the union lackeys are) and hopefully given something to think about."
I think you might be mistaken, about the “Union lackeys” and right to work legislation, in my local alone we spent over $200,000 to defeat right to work. And we were successful.

I do agree with you the contract was not one of the best contacts ever.
 

Its_a_me

Well-Known Member
I’m really not sure what you’re trying to say right here. right to work laws?
No. RTW laws are the remedy being proposed from the outside to the idea of the union ignoring new and younger workers.

The union must address its failings of representing its entire membership (whether they vote in large numbers or not) and structure the contract to avoid pitfalls like the company deciding they need to be paying more than union negotiated labor or get used to scabs. Next up is vehicle automation that will decimate labor rates of pay--and a good reason why younger workers don't see a future in driving for the company. Which will affect pension contributions, retiree health care, and contract obligations.

That is the education that high seniority members need to think about. Oh and that is before the idea of a two tiered labor force doing the same job for different total pay (22.3 vs 22.4) when they get to the same seniority level--talk about anti-union and they let that into the contract and actually pushed for it...issue #3....and so on to continue the union's death spiral.
 
No. RTW laws are the remedy being proposed from the outside to the idea of the union ignoring new and younger workers.

The union must address its failings of representing its entire membership (whether they vote in large numbers or not) and structure the contract to avoid pitfalls like the company deciding they need to be paying more than union negotiated labor or get used to scabs. Next up is vehicle automation that will decimate labor rates of pay--and a good reason why younger workers don't see a future in driving for the company. Which will affect pension contributions, retiree health care, and contract obligations.

That is the education that high seniority members need to think about. Oh and that is before the idea of a two tiered labor force doing the same job for different total pay (22.3 vs 22.4) when they get to the same seniority level--talk about anti-union and they let that into the contract and actually pushed for it...issue #3....and so on to continue the union's death spiral.
22.3and 22.4 are completely different job classifications you're comparing apples to oranges

Now comparing a 22.4 driver to regular package car driver yes that is wrong.
We are doing the same job for less money
 

Its_a_me

Well-Known Member
22.3and 22.4 are completely different job classifications you're comparing apples to oranges

Now comparing a 22.4 driver to regular package car driver yes that is wrong.
We are doing the same job for less money
sorry RPCD vs 22.4 ....but the example holds

again union not representing younger less seniority membership which then don't see the point of having the union.

So there are 3 solid examples of where the union is failing. And areas where the lackeys

"can be educated to how they are clearly wrong and hopefully given something to think about."
 
sorry RPCD vs 22.4 ....but the example holds

again union not representing younger less seniority membership which then don't see the point of having the union.

So there are 3 solid examples of where the union is failing. And areas where the lackeys

"can be educated to how they are clearly wrong and hopefully given something to think about."
Hopefully everyone votes their conscience next year
 

Thebrownblob

Well-Known Member
No. RTW laws are the remedy being proposed from the outside to the idea of the union ignoring new and younger workers.

The union must address its failings of representing its entire membership (whether they vote in large numbers or not) and structure the contract to avoid pitfalls like the company deciding they need to be paying more than union negotiated labor or get used to scabs. Next up is vehicle automation that will decimate labor rates of pay--and a good reason why younger workers don't see a future in driving for the company. Which will affect pension contributions, retiree health care, and contract obligations.

That is the education that high seniority members need to think about. Oh and that is before the idea of a two tiered labor force doing the same job for different total pay (22.3 vs 22.4) when they get to the same seniority level--talk about anti-union and they let that into the contract and actually pushed for it...issue #3....and so on to continue the union's death spiral.
 

Trailer monkey

Well-Known Member
What about union dues paying members that want to know why when the last contract voting was announced and UPS put out a press release about going back to bargaining table the union right afterward announced they were ramming the contract through anyways using a never previously used loophole?

Can you educate me on how great the union was doing that? Because I believe the union has done shady things and are now starting to have to pay for those actions and old-timers (particularly top-rate 22.3's with high seniority) concerned with only themselves will be the death spiral of the union and are disporpotionaly catered to because of voting patterns.
I never said the union, or the contract, was by any means perfect and they need a lot of improvements. If you are a 22.3 oldtimer like me you know that we did not always even have 22.3s, we didn't always have 25-30 any age pension and retirement benefits. My point is we are a hell of a lot better off (even new hires) with a union and a contract than without them. Discouraging people from joining the union because of "this issue or that issue" serves no purpose but to further weaken the union's bargaining power and play right into the hands of the company. I was a P/Timer for 10 years because that's how long it took at the time to get any fulltime bid (at least in my building) so I know how tough it can be for parttimers, I have always supported improvements for parttimers and have always encouraged them to participate in the union and the contract campaigns
 

allahuakbar

"الحَمْد لله"
The Union knows they’re powerless vs UPS. That’s why the real issues some how aren’t a problem anymore so they’ll just try to get Air Conditioning in trucks that are going to come with it regardless.
 

Thebrownblob

Well-Known Member
The Union knows they’re powerless vs UPS. That’s why the real issues some how aren’t a problem anymore so they’ll just try to get Air Conditioning in trucks that are going to come with it regardless.
Powerless? I don’t know about that. There’s lots of issues that are a problem and are being addressed. Will it be sufficient? will find out. It will come down to our resolve this time. There is no 2/3 rule to “save” us so they’ll be no one to blame.
 
Top