Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Other Side" data-source="post: 1149746" data-attributes="member: 17969">I also agree with this assessment.  I find it unfortunate that the international put brother Marshall into this situation, but i maintain that the six month "find a better plan" is still political cover.  The talk in our yards, is that "our" 396 leadership has let us down.  There is already talk amongst the members of voting out our secretary treasurer and his officers over this contract should it pass.  This can be expected.  Even brother Marshall himself said at "our" meeting ( while H hid in the back) that this contract could jeopardize some local leaders.He knows the ramifications of a contract passing that members in the west hate.  Brother Marshall is no idiot.  He knows that RON  and others in so. cal and arizona could be in political trouble.  Unfortunately, the math isnt in brother Marshalls favor when it comes to establishing a new administrator to oversee a health plan.  The cost of creating an agency would take  too much of the allocated monies intended to purchase the plans.We really dont need to be accountants to figure that one out.  This six month plan was designed ( imo ) to fake us out, and if you listen to what Brother Marshall said at the meeting, he held up the C6 page and said "this is what your voting for"...No need to read between the lines.  He was communicating it loud and clear.  I too, would like to see a better plan, even if it means I have to pay a little towards it.  What I dont want to see, is to pay for an inferior plan that i have no control over.  The real issue for me Brother 104 is contained in the MOU relating to the wests carve out.It states "NOTHING IN THIS AGREEMENT SHALL PRECLUDE THE CSH&W FROM CHANGING EMPLOYEE BENEFIT LEVELS".Now, the trustees of the central states have total control of the C6 plan.  If the trustees motion a vote to decrease benefit levels for the southwest region, all it takes is a majority vote of the trustees and its done.  THEY do not have to consult with UPS, the TEAMSTERS, the locals or the employees.By ratifying this agreement, we give them EXCLUSIVE control over our health care for the rest of our careers.  For whatever reason, those trustees could continue to increase the out of pocket costs to the employees without any interference from UPS, the Teamsters, the locals or US.This is not a safe bet.  Its like playing craps.  The point is 8, and you have to hope you dont roll a 7 before an 8 or you will lose.   I am guessing, and predicting, that the trustees of the central states will modify our enhanced coverage within the first two years of the new agreement and place us in the normal C6 schedule of benefits.Brother 104, I too am voting NO, and not because a gang of posters makes the world go round.  Its because I can see long term effects today, that most people are choosing to ignore.One last point to close my case.   There are some here, who think this is a great deal, and the issue of progression doesnt mean anything to them.  Well , lets examine that a little closer.First, in order for us senior drivers to see a pension, there has to be money in the pot.  That money is then invested and interest earned.  In order to be successful, for every one dollar out, you would like to see 5 dollars coming in.  So far, in the west, investments and income are steady.  However, when the progression was extended to three years in the last contract, contributions to the fund slowed and part timers began quitting and never seeing seniority.  Currently, 3 years is a long time to wait and some part timers cant make it that long and quit.Now, they want to extend that another year to 4 years.  To a full timer, that may not mean much, until you realize that all those part timers who are quitting are not going to contribute to the pension fund, and every time a part timer quits, another starts behind him/her and the 4 years starts again.  Thats 8 years before the second part timer begins to contribute if he/she stays long enough.  If that person quits before 4 years, then the third in line takes over and starts another 4 years.  That will take it to 4 years before pension contributions begin.The companys goal is simple.  Extend the progression to the point where part timers turn into a revolving door.  This has two effects.  First, it limits the output of money into an employee who never sees seniority. Secondly, it chips away at the pension fund.You see , on the other end, retirees are taking money out of the pot and that number will only INCREASE over time and on the part time end, contributions will be DECREASING.  It doesnt take a math major to figure out that eventually, down the road, the pension pot will be short of money.Then what?  the Teamsters going to dump our pensions into the PBGC where they pay .25 cents on the dollar?This is the strategy of UPS.  Kill us one piece at a time.  They are clearly targeting the part timers because thats where they have the most control over.  Full timers dont quit as rapidly as part timers.  If they can make it as hard as possible for part timers, they will surely quit, and as they quit, they stop contributing to the pension pool.As for voting people out of office, yes, in some cases there will be people in office by default, because the members will punish encumbents for this contract, and they could possibly end up with some yahoos who dont know what they are doing, but on the other hand, there are those in the wings who are qualified, been there before, and just waiting for the right opportunity to make a move.This contract is providing just that opportunity.  time will tell.PeaceTOS</blockquote>

Verification