Discussion in 'UPS Union Issues' started by DONMEGA, Jan 4, 2012.
Would fellow teamster vote a contract that has a 2 tier pay scale?
How about a 2 tier system with a $5000 signing bonus?
they can keep their signing bonus I'm talking about 30+ an hour vs. perhaps 25. We would all be doing the same job
???? Already have 2 tier wage scale.
A permant two tier or a much longer progression two tier pay scale?
I assume you mean full/time, and in a heartbeat.
i am talking about ground not air
hembone let me ask you this would you vote a contract that said all drivers should take a pay cut? or are you just thinking bout yourself
I'm not saying that I would vote for it. I'm saying it would pass.
I expect UPS to ask for a longer progression, 4-5 years, and possibly a two-tier pay scale for new hires(FT Drivers). They will probably offer a large signing bonus 5-10K to bribe current drivers. Part-timers will continue to receive what they usually get, not much of anything.
If a two-tier pkg driver system passes you can count your days because they will be numbered. Harassment and terminations will go through the roof. You will be lucky to limp into retirement. No sense in paying a driver $33+ when UPS can pay a rookie $15-$20 for 5 years and have him max out @ $25.
All just speculation at this point. I look for some rumors to start soon and talk of a new contract finished early like the last one.
I would say that you are pretty close to what will happen.
I will take the $10,000 bribe.
NO NO NO! I will not vote in favor of a contract that punishes future employees. I will not vote for a contract that extends the progression for new drivers, no drivers are being hired on now as it is, cant expect someone to wait 10 years for a FT job to wait 4 to 5 more to hit top scale! IMO
I will not vote for a contract that does not increase starting pay for part timers and I will not vote for a contract that reduces our current medical benefit plan!
Helper pay HAS to go up. $8 an hour to do what they do for 2 months is immoral!!
IMO there should be no helpers at all, all they do is allow the company to keep full time drivers from being hired. Imagine how many more routes would be built if we all didn't have a helper during peak. There are many inside people willing to get the chance to become full-time, if only for a few months. Then when they had a chance to bid a permanent driver opening, they'de know what it takes and would have a better chance to quailify after waiting years for the chance to do so.
Our center has 24-28 routes depending upon volume. They only add a couple of runs for Peak and most, if not all of us, had a helper---are you saying they should double the number of routes in my center based upon a one month bump in volume? The use of helpers during Peak is a smart business decision---the use of helpers beyond Peak is not what the Teamsters agreed to.
Just curious, how would you fill the vacancies created by the PTers who drive during Peak? I sure as hell would not want a temp hire loading my pkg car at Peak. I would much rather have a temp hire jumping for me.
Thought helpers made 10.50.
You did say it is your opinion and you are entitled to that. UpState responded very well with a logical response.
I understand your point of view and desire but UPS is a business and what you suggest is not a viable business decision.
UPS would suspend all guarantees or even refused customer's packages before they would do what you suggest.
I don't see why it isn't viable, because it's similar to what many operations do with back up feeder drivers now. Feeder drivers rotate between Package and Feeders as necessary to fill Feeder needs. In my area, Package had to absorb the loss of about a hundred drivers just as Peak hit. It's the same thing as Package drivers being bumped to Hub when the volume shrank. Sure, it requires Management to actually perform which is probably asking too much. Might cut into their micro-managing allowance.
Guarantees should be suspended during the month of December anyway IMO (with concessions to our biggest shippers like Amazon of course due to the success of their Prime program). It's generally cumbersome and unnecessary. This year they were jumping loads early in some locations and letting loads sit in others. Showing it can be done better than guaranteed in some areas just means we need to work on the ones that couldn't seem to rise to the challenge.
What we need to do is improve our time in transit across the board by taking loads off the rail and putting in more sleepers. FDXG is beating us by a day in most markets. Perhaps a combination of rail and layovers might be a viable option too.
Separate names with a comma.