What is the UPS end game with the current health care proposal?

Discussion in 'UPS Union Issues' started by jim50321, Feb 13, 2013.

  1. jim50321

    jim50321 New Member

    I have been following the threads and talking with co -workers about the recent company proposal regarding health care. No one I have talked with would vote for a contract containing such a give back.

    I believe that UPS knows that such a proposal will never be in the final offer. The real question is what are they really after and believe they can get from the union? When I think about older contracts "divide and conquer" is one the company's main negotiating tools. So here is my take on what the company really wants to get.

    The elimination of health care benefits for part-time employees. Under Obamacare, an employer does not have to pay a penalty if they do not insure an employee who logs less than 30 hours a week average. Obviously that would include 99% of part-timers. I can see the company offering the union an increase in pay for part-time employees, dropping the new health care premium proposal for all full-time employees, and sweeten the pot for full timers to vote yes with such things as an increase in the pension over the five years of this contract, better raises, better language on 9.5, maybe a signing bonus etc. The company could also go the route of red circling current part-time employees or red circling part-timers with X number of years, eliminating benefits for new hires or part-time workers with less than X years in. What ever it takes to get enough votes to say good bye to company provided health benefits for part-time workers, either all of them, some of them or just future hires.

    UPS would give up quite a bit to the full time ranks to eliminate the health care costs for 70% of the work force. Since a majority of part time union members do not ever cast a vote, I feel UPS sees an opportunity between scare tactics and better than expected proposals to get enough full time (and if needed senior part-time) union members to vote their own self interest.

    When you consider the money UPS would not pay out for part-time health care from here on out they can be very generous in an effort to buy the votes they need. The contract is for 5 years, The savings on eliminating health care is for the life of the company.

    22.3 jobs would also be under more pressure. Every 22.3 job eliminated or not filled by a full time worker would save the company a lot of money since it would be covered by two uninsured part timers.

    Divide and conquer. Threaten someone with a "10 blade so when you stick them with something smaller it does not hurt as bad. Same result, you eventually bleed to death, just not as fast.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
  2. PiedmontSteward

    PiedmontSteward RTW-4-Less

    I've also considered UPS might be gunning for a two-tiered health insurance plan, but I think it's far more likely they're proposing $90/week just to get their foot in the door. Everyone is crying about that figure and it's softening them up to think that maybe just $10/week ain't so bad. That way, they have one more thing demand concessions from each and every future contract.

    I don't see it happening.
  3. reydluap

    reydluap Active Member

    I actually think they threw out the health care premiums as a bait and switch scare tatic ploy. We are all concerned about these cost to our income. But what if this is just a distraction for what's to come. Don't think for a minute TWO-TIER WAGES are not about to be brought up in this contract negotiation. The Company just might be proposing an 'either/or' set up for Teamsters to discuss. I can see the Company saying it now, "We can cover your full timers health care cost, but we will need consessions with new hires". And then the Teamsters stating they saved the world by saving our benefits. It's a com'n, just wait and see.........

    As stated before in this thread, I see Obamacare really influencing P/T employees. (Don't like it, but see it coming). Also, in the State of the Union speech, I believe I heard that President Obama wants to raise mininum wage to $9.00 an hour in a few years. So wages for part timers will have to be addressed.

    With that said. We ALL know that when the mininum wage does increase, YOU and I are actually taking a pay cut when they go into effect. Our individual buying power decreases by the amount the mininum wage goes up.
  4. Brown287

    Brown287 Im not the Mail Man!

    Two tier pay scale is their ultimate goal. Another driver and I were talking this morning about healthcare for part timers being altered. I agree that at this point that is on the front burner. My thought is that they will make it an option to have healthcare. The trade off would be a higher hourly wage perhaps. I don't know what will happen but I agree that ultimately they want the cost of labor to decrease in the long run. Unfortunately that means employees to come will suffer.
  5. Brownslave688

    Brownslave688 You want a toe? I can get you a toe.

    Your union would rather u pay for healthcare than have someone take an hourly wage cut. Remember guys union dues are based on your hourly wage.
  6. PT Stewie

    PT Stewie "Big Fella"

    I hope that is not true .Want to hear it from the horses mouth though. Will be seeing hall anf Jim Hoffa within two weeks. What kind of raise could they (UPS) hope to offer that would offset what is now on the table.
  7. brown_trousers

    brown_trousers Active Member

    That would really suck for the part-timers that have been waiting a decade to get into a FT driving position. And then find out they got the position JUST after the new contract was ratified, so they're stuck making a lower wage.
  8. rudy5150

    rudy5150 Active Member

    Thats why we strike. NO concessions for current teamsters!
  9. stink219

    stink219 Well-Known Member

    Agreed! The health care issue is a walk in the park compared to a 2 tier wage. They would bleed the seniority guys of OT. BUT, not once have I heard Jim Hoffa, hall or Sean O'brian even mention or elude to the 2 tier wage. It goes against the Teamsters Code. Same work, same pay. We already have a 2 tier wage, driving vs 22.3 jobs.
  10. slantnosechevy

    slantnosechevy Active Member

    With retirements coming in large numbers in the next 4-5 years and wage progression they already have their two tier wage scale.
  11. InsideUPS

    InsideUPS Active Member

    I'm not much for politics but I do like having hall negotiating our contract. hall along with Ron Carey humiliated UPS during the 1997 contract negotiations. Even when UPS was giving us their "Last, Best, and Final Offer", hall stood strong and negotiated a fair contract beyond their "LB&FO".

    At the end of the day, the Union is all about full time jobs and rightfully so. With this in mind, I expect that full-time employees will maintain/increase their wages, health benefits, and pension, at some cost to the part-time ranks. It is TOTALLY beyond comprehension how UPS could ever keep part-time wages low and at the same time charge them for their benefits. I definitely believe that retiree health coverage co-payments will increase to some degree.
  12. Brown287

    Brown287 Im not the Mail Man!

    If hall is partly to blame for our strike in 97 then god help is all. We struck over the pension which in the long run mostly went the way UPS wanted. A strike would be horrible for the union. Both on a P.R. front and on a membership level as well. Obviously we want fee medical but it's obvious it's gonna come at a price. The question is what that price is gonna be.
  13. UPS92008

    UPS92008 New Member

    Two tier wont work period...weakens Teamsters down the road. Affordable health care act is our biggest enemy. Think about it...why would UPS offer to cover for health bennies when the federal government will offer them to us? We had BO shoved down our throats during this election year. Sadly, his obamacare will undo what so many teamsters have fought so hard for. The writing is on the wall guys and gals. Besides, $100 a week for family coverage is still cheaper than the bronze plan.
  14. UPS92008

    UPS92008 New Member

    Two tier is a bad option...weakens the Teamsters down the road. Affordable health care act is our biggest enemy. $100 bucks a week is only a 3rd of costs outta pocket. Think about it...why would UPS pay for something we can get from the government?? Not to mention the same administration that teamsters forced down our throats this election. The writing is on the wall. Obamacare screwed us. Sadly, union lines couldn't think outside the box this time around.
  15. beentheredonethat

    beentheredonethat Well-Known Member

    Except that UPS wanted to do it years ago when the pension wasn't in as severe of a financial pain as it was when we got out of Central STates and now New England Pension fund. Also, all the upser's under central states would have had that many more years under the new improved pension vs the one that is underfunded by almost 1/2. That's a lose \lose.
    I'm guessing if you polled the current central states folks, esp those who are in their upper 40's and early 50's if they could have switched to be under the UPS plan effective in 97, or when it was eventually taken over, they would have preferred it to be 97.

    Central staters your opinion?
  16. InsideUPS

    InsideUPS Active Member

    You bring up an interesting point, and one that is not really understood by many UPS Teamsters today. I do believe the 97 strike was primarily over control of the Central States pension fund. Using "part-time" America as the cause was used to gain public support by Carey/hall. This PR "move" worked well for the Union. The strike in all aspects was successful and well received by the public. In regard to your comment "in the long run mostly went the way UPS wanted".........That would be under the leadership of Mr. Hoffa, not Ron Carey...

    There is NO easy answer for us or our Union officials. While we all can criticize, none of us put in hall position could do any better. Like it or not, UPS Teamsters are part of an overall Union that supports many other different companies, trades, etc. As you may know, multi-employer pension funds do not always benefit those that are contributing the most. It's quite easy to see what happens to the Teamsters Union if all of the UPS pension funds stop contributing to the multi-employer fund. That is a time when you really will want to call on God for help.

    Here are the facts:

    1) There are UPS Teamsters that would like to stop contributing to the Teamster pension fund and either have a UPS single employer fund or have their contributions placed in their own 401k, Roth, etc...

    2) There are UPS Teamsters that believe in the strength of a Union and want to continue contributing as is to the multi-employer pension fund.

    Some of the questions we really have to ask ourselves are:

    a) Would you work at UPS if we did not have a Union?
    b) Do you think that we would have the pay and benefits we have today if it were not for the Union?

    If you answered "yes" to BOTH of the questions, you are either delusional or are an excellent candidate to go into management.

    If you answered "no" to either of the questions, you really need to support the Union in some manner. You really don't always have to agree with the Union, but at the end of the day, I would not want to put my livelihood, solely in the hands of greedy Corporate executives like Scott Davis. You and I are strictly LIABILITIES in the eyes of this man.
  17. UPS Preloader

    UPS Preloader Active Member

    a) Would you work at UPS if we did not have a Union?
    b) Do you think that we would have the pay and benefits we have today if it were not for the Union?

    No to both...
  18. Brown287

    Brown287 Im not the Mail Man!

    To answer those questions yes or know is not as easy as you think. I started working at UPS wile I was in college. I had no long term plan of staying. With that said I love my job, but you are correct in the fact that if our compensation mirrored that of our competition I would leave. Not sure my education would guarantee me a job making the same along with the same benefits, but I know it would be a lot less physically demanding.

    I do support the right to a union and I do believe that the idea of a union is under siege at this point in time. Unfortunately we are not fighting facts. We are at war with perception. People's perception is we are over payed, lazy, and unappreciative of what we have. Do I agree with this....no.

    My only worry that this time around the union will act on emotions like in 97. It's unfortunate but like I said UPS is not what we're fighting, it's today's public perception.
  19. rudy5150

    rudy5150 Active Member

    Well the public voted for obama who supports middle class and unions so if thats what your worried about we should be all set :wink2: Unless you are concerned about what republicans think
  20. Ms.PacMan

    Ms.PacMan Well-Known Member

    UPS better be very careful not to become synonymous with Walmart.

    It will play out as a multi billion dollar corporation essentially forcing its' entire part time work force into Obamacare or worse, Medicaid, and letting the gov't pick up the tab. You think Atlanta will realize the mistake when they see UPS and welfare in the same sentence.