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 Union Issues
What happened in the 2008 contract??
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="PobreCarlos" data-source="post: 653439" data-attributes="member: 16651"><p>Unforttunately, it's not the fund - in and of itself - that's the problem. Rather, the problem lies with the failure of the Teamsters to look out for the welfare of their employers and/or their failure to organize new employers.</p><p></p><p>I'm sure there are others here who recall the often-quoted "Lynch testimony" as to how many Teamster-organized CSPF contributing firms in the LTL industry have gone out of business....during a period in which the industry itself prospered. To wit, once there were close to 3/4s of a million or more Teamsters in LTL (a significant portion of them representing CSPF contributions), with barely a tenth (if that, particularly considering the state YRCW is in) of that left today. Yet all those ONCE-employed Teamsters expect a pension.</p><p></p><p>Meanwhile, the Teamsters haven't wasted any effort worthy the name over the last 35 years to organize the competition of their pension funds main competitors (yes, FDX). Now, with the frightful liability (even with the limited liability available under the 5 year "trial period", so to speak), a firm would have to be crazy to allow itself to be organized by the Teamsters, if such organization involved them with Central States....crazy to the point that it would make more sense to just go out of business from the get-go as opposed to going through the expensive rigamarole of bankruptcy.</p><p></p><p>In short, it's one hell of a problem. Personally, I don't think the Teamsters can prosper unless they (1) get rid of the dead weight of the insolvent pension trusts, which would likely mean laying down some hard - VERY hard! - facts to a lot of past members counting on pensions, and (2) transforming themselves into an entity that actually PROMOTES their employers interests...including making themselves at least as competitive as their non-organized coherts. </p><p></p><p>From that perspective, the only other way they could make it is simply to become welfare queens; i.e. - be highly subsidized and, as an ENTITY (note I am *NOT* including individual hard-working UPSer's here!) be an overall drain on society generally. Reading Hoffa's tirades of late (anti-free trade, no Mexican truckers, national health plan, Teamsters not paying taxes on the benefits they recieve, etc.), I'm convinced that's the direction the Teamsters are going in now.</p><p></p><p>Time will tell.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PobreCarlos, post: 653439, member: 16651"] Unforttunately, it's not the fund - in and of itself - that's the problem. Rather, the problem lies with the failure of the Teamsters to look out for the welfare of their employers and/or their failure to organize new employers. I'm sure there are others here who recall the often-quoted "Lynch testimony" as to how many Teamster-organized CSPF contributing firms in the LTL industry have gone out of business....during a period in which the industry itself prospered. To wit, once there were close to 3/4s of a million or more Teamsters in LTL (a significant portion of them representing CSPF contributions), with barely a tenth (if that, particularly considering the state YRCW is in) of that left today. Yet all those ONCE-employed Teamsters expect a pension. Meanwhile, the Teamsters haven't wasted any effort worthy the name over the last 35 years to organize the competition of their pension funds main competitors (yes, FDX). Now, with the frightful liability (even with the limited liability available under the 5 year "trial period", so to speak), a firm would have to be crazy to allow itself to be organized by the Teamsters, if such organization involved them with Central States....crazy to the point that it would make more sense to just go out of business from the get-go as opposed to going through the expensive rigamarole of bankruptcy. In short, it's one hell of a problem. Personally, I don't think the Teamsters can prosper unless they (1) get rid of the dead weight of the insolvent pension trusts, which would likely mean laying down some hard - VERY hard! - facts to a lot of past members counting on pensions, and (2) transforming themselves into an entity that actually PROMOTES their employers interests...including making themselves at least as competitive as their non-organized coherts. From that perspective, the only other way they could make it is simply to become welfare queens; i.e. - be highly subsidized and, as an ENTITY (note I am *NOT* including individual hard-working UPSer's here!) be an overall drain on society generally. Reading Hoffa's tirades of late (anti-free trade, no Mexican truckers, national health plan, Teamsters not paying taxes on the benefits they recieve, etc.), I'm convinced that's the direction the Teamsters are going in now. Time will tell. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
What happened in the 2008 contract??
Top