UPS and Teamsters Discuss Two-Tier Wages, Sunday Deliveries---WSJ

Discussion in 'UPS Union Issues' started by opie, May 9, 2018.

  1. opie

    opie Active Member

  2. Staydryitsraining

    Staydryitsraining Active Member

    Drop the union. Only way to make sure were treated right. They need to wake up.
     
    • Bad Spelling x 4
    • Funny x 2
    • Agree x 1
    • Useful x 1
    • Optimistic x 1
    • List
  3. Inthegame

    Inthegame Well-Known Member

    Yeah, that makes sense (not), until this settles in ..."The company, which has been spending heavily to automate its network to handle the surge in ecommerce parcels, has also been taking steps to curb employee costs, offering early buyouts to managers last month and freezing pension plans for 70,000 nonunion staffers last year."
    How many of these 70,000 do you suppose got to vote on that concession?
     
    • Winner Winner x 6
    • Like Like x 3
    • List
  4. Staydryitsraining

    Staydryitsraining Active Member

    Yea hold on to that hope. 2 things need to be realized, drivers are bringing on our own demise by how much we get paid, the union is selling us down the river with no repercussions.
     
    • Bad Spelling Bad Spelling x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Creative Creative x 1
    • List
  5. Inthegame

    Inthegame Well-Known Member

    Two things I realize; you would prefer to get paid less and give UPS free reign. Glad you're not on any committee anywhere.
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • List
  6. Staydryitsraining

    Staydryitsraining Active Member

    I never said get paid less. Show where i said that anywhere. Also never said give them free reign. What did the union loose for the concessions in 2013? We cant keep getting raises, regardless of their profit. Im well aware of what would happen if we didnt have a union, however im also aware that they cant just keep selling us down the river and telling us to deal with it.
     
  7. I was upset to hear that our local supports this two-tier wage.
    They mentioned they understand that none of us want to work on the weekend, so let the company bring in new people at a lower rate to do it. How is that fair to the new guys?
    I understand there is a need to work Saturdays and Sundays, but we should all be paid the same for doing the same work.
    Hopefully they come up with some strong language to protect the number of m-f jobs at the current pay structure, otherwise it's going to slowly fade away as people retire out of those positions.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  8. Crash-n-Burn

    Crash-n-Burn Finished work

    I don't ever want to hear complaints about class warfare when large corporations use media outlets to discuss hourly pay. Shame on you. This means the socialist will be embolden to question the whole system. Keep this stuff internal or make everyone show their cards (compensation) .
     
  9. Gumby

    Gumby *

    Inferior healthcare for some, longer progression.

    Just keep looking at the hourly wages, that's what UPS wants you to do.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  10. opie

    opie Active Member

    Are you in 177? They said the same thing. Needs to be very restrictive and limits to how many they can hire. Need to be paid ground rate also. Even then, I don't think I could support it.
     
  11. TheBrownFlush

    TheBrownFlush Active Member

    Why should anyone even question if the contract will pass with members posting this kind of :censored2:.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  12. Inthegame

    Inthegame Well-Known Member

    You're arguing both sides. On the one hand you're concerned with wages bringing on our demise so obviously paring wages would strengthen our position vs the competition.
    So you recognize and are sympathetic to UPS's rising costs but yet the IBT is selling you down a river somewhere by addressing those concerns in negotiations.
    Pick your side partner, it can't be both ways.
    Either they have enough coin to pony up or they don't.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  13. Staydryitsraining

    Staydryitsraining Active Member

    Lol do you hear yourselves? It needs to be restrictive, need strong language? Um it shouldn't happen. Thats like saying we should pay alittle for our healthcare. All that is, is a way in that will be exploited one or two contract cycles down the road.
     
  14. Staydryitsraining

    Staydryitsraining Active Member

    Negative. What i was saying was our pay at some point needs to be frozen with a progression. We cant keep getting raises and expecting free healthcare, its unrealistic.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Bad Spelling Bad Spelling x 1
    • Derail Derail x 1
    • List
  15. Staydryitsraining

    Staydryitsraining Active Member

    Paying anything for healthcare and creating a new scale for any kind of delivering will be met with a no vote.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  16. Staydryitsraining

    Staydryitsraining Active Member

    They sealed their fate when they put the polo on.
     
  17. TheBrownFlush

    TheBrownFlush Active Member

    No doubt about it. History proves it. Only way workers get treated right is when they drop the union.
    Not enough of them if drivers have your mindset.
     
  18. PT Car Washer

    PT Car Washer Well-Known Member

    There already is a lower pay scale for delivering packages. Read Art 40.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  19. Staydryitsraining

    Staydryitsraining Active Member

    And what is your proposal for combating concessions and not accepting the jokes leading this union off a cliff?
     
  20. You're right, it shouldn't happen. But I would guess it's likely to happen if the union is backing it telling people to vote Yes. I will vote no and talk to as many people as I can to convince him to vote no, but it doesn't look good.