"You guys need to get a union!"

[BigUnionGuy]

Thanks to TDU , who diluted the previous rule by adding the 50% provision.
Before that, it took 2/3 to vote no, no matter how many members voted to reject a contract offer.

The History of the “2/3 Rule” on Teamster Contracts

And 30 years later.... everyone was caught by surprise.




Jesus Christ.... (mother Mary, Joseph, and the wee donkey)

 

[zubenelgenubi]

What ?

The strike authorization vote was passed with 93% of the vote, correct? Whether you applied the 50% 2/3 rule to the strike vote, or used a simple majority rule (you can argue for either), the strike was authorized. You can't just ignore that because only 22% of the members voted. I pointed this out in October 2018 while it was going on.

Under the 50% 2/3 rule we have to fail to reject the offer and authorize a strike in order for the negotiating committee to be required to accept the offer or, and this is key, "such additional provisions as can be negotiated by it." We did not fail to authorize a strike by any stretch of the imagination. But even if we hadn't authorized a strike, the negotiating committee was not required to accept the offer as it was, especially since the company made it clear they were willing to reopen negotiations. This is a clear breach of contract with the members by the union officials.

 

[East coast navy]

They do.


ARTICLE 44. OVER 70 POUND SERVICE PACKAGE HANDLING

"The parties agree that the health and safety of the employees are of the utmost importance. The Employer agrees that UPS management will not insist that any unsafe action be undertaken and the Union agrees to encourage its members to cooperate in effectuating the handling, pick-up and delivery of parcels without exposing themselves to safety hazards."


https://teamster.org/sites/default/files/ups18nationalmaster.pdf


What are you afraid of ?

I used that language (one of many) to tank my route when management was friend&$@ with me! Unfortunately it was every day.

 

[muthatrucka]

You could have politely explained, that it was (and is) an apathetic membership

that continually fails to vote on their own contract....

A large percentage of those members who didn’t vote are part-timers who don’t plan on working for UPS for more than 6 months to a year. Our turnover rate is astounding and these last few contracts were doomed before negotiations ever started.

 

[Whither]

A large percentage of those members who didn’t vote are part-timers who don’t plan on working for UPS for more than 6 months to a year. Our turnover rate is astounding and these last few contracts were doomed before negotiations ever started.

The union 'understands' that, in order to remain competitive, UPS must depend on a young, disposable PT workforce with lower starting pay than Amazon.

 

[Whither]

Thanks to TDU , who diluted the previous rule by adding the 50% provision.
Before that, it took 2/3 to vote no, no matter how many members voted to reject a contract offer.

The History of the “2/3 Rule” on Teamster Contracts

Well, thank god the rank and file has always enjoyed the benefit of having union brass impose contracts rejected by the majority!

 

[BigUnionGuy]

Whether you applied the 50% 2/3 rule to the strike vote, or used a simple majority rule (you can argue for either), the strike was authorized.

No, it wasn't.

It's all spelled out in the IBT constitution.


"When a master agreement negotiated under the provisions of this Article provides for a re-opener and renegotiation, or is voluntarily reopened during its stated term, the above voting procedure shall apply to ratification of the new terms, if any, and Section 2(d) shall apply to strike votes."

https://teamster.org/sites/default/files/73119teamstersconstitution.pdf


Nobody.... could possibly think that with only a 22% turnout, that it was a

mandate by the members to authorize a strike.

This is a clear breach of contract with the members by the union officials.

That's funny.



-Bug-

 

[Whither]

As a general thought re: the direction of our union and our wages/bennies and rights/protections, to sit back and count our blessings is company-thinking.

This is especially the case in a RTW era when unions -- not just the Teamsters -- are by and large quietly fading away, authorizing (hell, even proposing!) concessions, and hamstrung by generations of red-tape intended to divest labor of the power to fight back ...

I have my doubts that the rank and file is capable of self-directed militancy, which is always a gamble ... but it's pretty clear that, historically, rank and file activity is the source of all gains us peasants have ever won, not benevolent 'leadership' ... And I'd rate it a sure bet that if the members don't insist on reversing the tide, then we should expect further concessions.

Final musing. At docks I've already delivered several over-70s on skids out of package cars (I know this has been discussed in other threads.) When receiving helps me unload the bastards by hand, they nearly always shake their heads. I've told them we enjoy the right to call for help. No one's impressed. It's an embarrassment, and not less of an embarrassment because it's been that way for 25 years.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

A large percentage of those members who didn’t vote are part-timers who don’t plan on working for UPS for more than 6 months to a year. Our turnover rate is astounding and these last few contracts were doomed before negotiations ever started.

We're just rehashing the same stuff that was brought up during the voting process. Nothing will convince some people that it's anything but the fault of the members.

No, it wasn't.

It's all spelled out in the IBT constitution.


"When a master agreement negotiated under the provisions of this Article provides for a re-opener and renegotiation, or is voluntarily reopened during its stated term, the above voting procedure shall apply to ratification of the new terms, if any, and Section 2(d) shall apply to strike votes."

https://teamster.org/sites/default/files/73119teamstersconstitution.pdf


Nobody.... could possibly think that with only a 22% turnout, that it was a

mandate by the members to authorize a strike.





That's funny.



-Bug-

Where does it say there is a minimum turn out for a strike vote? Again, you are glossing over the fact that we authorized a strike by a legitimate vote, regardless of whether you apply the 50% 2/3 rule or simple majority.

Even without that, the company clearly stated it's intent to negotiate further.

Denis T said, "naw, it'll be fine".

And there really is nothing funny about the situation. It's actually pretty sad that anyone thinks Denis did the right thing.

 

[Boywondr]

Could have been a good time for you to educate the customer at how good the Teamsters are. They aren't perfect but no one is. When people say to me "UPS takes good care of you guys" I always correct them and say "It's the union who negotiates what we have so they take care of us as well". UPS isn't getting all the credit. If UPS was non-union we would be worse than Amazon.

A union is only as strong as the spine the members portray in enforcing the rights they already won in collective bargaining.

 

[Boywondr]

I guess you missed that the only access to the delivery point was a steep staircase.

The delivery point was the first step if you actually wanted to take it out of the truck without Teamster help and the guy would have to sign my board for me to leave it there.

When the guy told me about his injury it would have nudged my brain to think...."Nah, I'm not going to take a chance on this total stranger not suing me if I somehow aggravate his injury".

Nope. Send me another driver or expect another send again for tomorrow when you can send me help.

 

[Boywondr]

Who doesn't have the "balls" to strike ??

Evidently 78%.

The percentage of upsers that owe more in payments than they can budget.

 

[Bubblehead]

Evidently 78%.

The percentage of upsers that owe more in payments than they can budget.

....and as many as 50% of that 78% were part time, indigent, stop gap, high turnover, disposable employees with no intention of ever vesting.

....so why would they vote???

That makes the two-thirds/50% (1987) rule antiquated and absolutely outdated in the UPS arena for going on 3 decades....

Is it just me that sees this???

 

[Boywondr]

Evidently 78%.

The percentage of upsers that owe more in payments than they can budget.

....and as many as 50% of that 78% were part time, indigent, stop gap, high turnover, disposable employees with no intention of ever vesting.

....so why would they vote???

That makes the two-thirds/50% (1987) rule antiquated and absolutely outdated in the UPS arena for going on 3 decades....

Is it just me that sees this???

It was supposed to be a comical response.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

As a general thought re: the direction of our union and our wages/bennies and rights/protections, to sit back and count our blessings is company-thinking.

This is especially the case in a RTW era when unions -- not just the Teamsters -- are by and large quietly fading away, authorizing (hell, even proposing!) concessions, and hamstrung by generations of red-tape intended to divest labor of the power to fight back ...

I have my doubts that the rank and file is capable of self-directed militancy, which is always a gamble ... but it's pretty clear that, historically, rank and file activity is the source of all gains us peasants have ever won, not benevolent 'leadership' ... And I'd rate it a sure bet that if the members don't insist on reversing the tide, then we should expect further concessions.

Final musing. At docks I've already delivered several over-70s on skids out of package cars (I know this has been discussed in other threads.) When receiving helps me unload the bastards by hand, they nearly always shake their heads. I've told them we enjoy the right to call for help. No one's impressed. It's an embarrassment, and not less of an embarrassment because it's been that way for 25 years.

this is a good post

 

[BigUnionGuy]

Where does it say there is a minimum turn out for a strike vote? Again, you are glossing over the fact that we authorized a strike by a legitimate vote, regardless of whether you apply the 50% 2/3 rule or simple majority.

I guess I'm not making my point clear enough.

With only a 22% turnout for the strike vote.... it wasn't going to happen anyway.

It doesn't matter who is IBT president, with those numbers anyone who would call

for a strike is an idiot. So I'm sure when they saw that pathetic total, all bets

were off and the IBT Executive board, the negotiation committee, and President

were like "oh well.... let's see what we can get, and the members can decide".

It's actually pretty sad that anyone thinks Denis did the right thing.

It wasn't up to him.

And besides, at the 2-man committee they voted (overwhelmingly) to send it

out to the members. Of whom (as we know) less than half could even be bothered.

Don't blame it all on the part-timers.

 

[PT Car Washer]

I guess I'm not making my point clear enough.

With only a 22% turnout for the strike vote.... it wasn't going to happen anyway.

It doesn't matter who is IBT president, with those numbers anyone who would call

for a strike is an idiot. So I'm sure when they saw that pathetic total, all bets

were off and the IBT Executive board, the negotiation committee, and President

were like "oh well.... let's see what we can get, and the members can decide".





It wasn't up to him.

And besides, at the 2-man committee they voted (overwhelmingly) to send it

out to the members. Of whom (as we know) less than half could even be bothered.

Don't blame it all on the part-timers.

Does anyone really think that a FT union employee making almost $40/hr and a $4000+ monthly pension is going to go on strike for someone who has not even gotten the job yet? Too many times have I heard how the latest concession does not effect them so they are voting yes. Or not vote at all.

 

[Jim Rockford]

The big flaw in all this"we caint' strike wit teh 23 percent" is that no union would cross the picket line...which..would bring worldport to a bil ol screeching halt. I work there. It is kept afloat daily by union carpenters..plumbers..steelworkers..construction workers.etc. The IPA pilots aint crossing either.

This notion that "union's hands wuz tied cuz of the constituion" may be the most dishonest load of crap ive ever heard. Our union actually threatened the membership with apocalyptic scenarios if we voted against that steaming pile of horse dung.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

Does anyone really think that a FT union employee making almost $40/hr and a $4000+ monthly pension is going to go on strike for someone who has not even gotten the job yet? Too many times have I heard how the latest concession does not effect them so they are voting yes. Or not vote at all.

Sad to say....

But, that's the reality.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

The big flaw in all this"we caint' strike wit teh 23 percent" is that no union would cross the picket line...which..would bring worldport to a bil ol screeching halt. I work there. It is kept afloat daily by union carpenters..plumbers..steelworkers..construction workers.etc. The IPA pilots aint crossing either.

I get that.... but, are you familiar with their contracts ?

Just say'n dude.

This notion that "union's hands wuz tied cuz of the constituion" may be the most dishonest load of crap ive ever heard. Our union actually threatened the membership with apocalyptic scenarios if we voted against that steaming pile of horse dung.

If you work at UPS Worldport, that would be Local 89 and Fred Z.


And, and an elected TDU Central Region VP.

(who got kicked off the negotiation committee because he couldn't shut up)


BTW @Jim Rockford.... still like the Firebird.