Contract Boogieman

[TheFigurehead]

Have you ever tried to get elected?

No thanks.

Regardless, the suggestion to take the word of one elected official, who may or may not have your best interests at heart, over what is in black and white, right in front of your eyes, is among the most insane I've ever heard.

If you want to talk to your BA, fine. There is nothing wrong with that. To suggest that someone directly involved with the organization that brought us this awful contract is to be trusted implicitly is simply irresponsible.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

I like having business agents who were middle-school drop outs who cannot spell basic words we learned in 3rd grade. Elect that person.

 

[542thruNthru]

I’m not any different then you. You say we are trying to scare people into voting no. You are doing the same thing trying to get them to vote yes. You are childish and foolish just like you say we are. You won’t listen to anyone’s reason, all you say is talked to business agent and tell people they haven’t read it, you are a ing troll and a horrible one. Iv talked to my business agent plenty of times he tells me to vote no, say that it’s a contract. What do you say about that? I never tell anyone to vote yes or no. Everyone has a brain, they can read and decide for them self. Also it’s you’re*

I agree, there are plenty of reason for every vote. Some will vote yes some will vote no. Just ticks me off that he comes with the contract buggy man bull saying we are trying to get people to vote no when he is hypocritical and doing the same .

Sweet sarsaparilla!! I'm really starting to like this kid!

@LagunaBrown comes in here every so often. Usually only during elections or contracts. He's a Shop Steward and very loyal to his local and the IBT.

I'm sure he's already been informed that he needs to start spreading the good word about this contract just as my Stewards have been told.

He will tell you that 22.4 are going to get FT pension contributions and all that but he won't tell you why they deserve to make less then a RPCD and how they don't deserve any 9.5 protection or 8 hour days even though they are FT. How their scheduled start times could change by hours every other week. How they can be forced to wait 90 min between jobs and have that counted towards their lunch before starting their shift again.

Oh let me save you the time. Yes I have talked with my BA.

 

[542thruNthru]

Just because I’m a Yankees fan, I find it to be racist you consider me from New York.....

Shut up you dirty New Yorker. Go back to your own country!

 

[Superteeth2478]

Forgot to quote. @LagunaBrown, the same way that the master language has changed to include the verbage "as long as work is available", the same thing could have happened to the supplemental language for ANY of the supplements. What you have now under the 2013-2018 contract for your supplement could have been changed and you won't know until the supplements are all revealed. The business agent probably isn't allowed to speak on the subject of supplemental language changes until all the supplements are revealed, the same way negotiators weren't allowed to speak on the subject of master language changes.

And even if the supplemental agreement is good and addresses issues in the master, we get two votes, one for each. I can still vote "yes" on the supplemental and "no" on the master.

Oh, and if my wordiness is hard for you to comprehend, tough.

If what 542thruNthru said about you is true, you're the kind of trash steward/business agent I despise. Losing sight of what stewards and business agents are supposed to be doing, which is working in the interests of the membership in accordance with the contract, and instead speaking on behalf of the union leadership even if they don't have the interests of the members at heart because of blind loyalty or to climb the ladder to power. You sicken me.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Why is anyone even seriously engaging this guy about the contract. From what he says it seems like he doesn't realize we vote on the parts of the contract individually. Why should I wait to see if the supplements are good to make up my mind on the master? My BA says to vote no, and he has all the same concerns I do, and in fact I had to point out some potential issues to him.

My main concern about the master all along has been the devaluation of ground delivery labor. While trying to verify my understanding before writing this post, I found that, according to Article 41section 2a, the master does not override the supplements in regards to 22.4 progression or top rate. 22.4 progression is in section 4, which is not mentioned in section 2a. As such, in theory, supplements could adjust the pay for 22.4 so that it is in line with RPCD pay.

The problem is with everything else about the 22.4 language, which can't be fixed in the supplements. So the argument that we should read the "whole contract" before deciding to vote no on the master has zero basis in reality. Sorry if that fact is upsetting to some people, but denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

It also seems to me that they are trying to siphon money away from everyone else to prop up failing pensions. If that's the case, I would be more understanding if they were just honest about it, but that would mean they would have to owe us one if we went along with it.

I want the rpcd progression wages to go up, but only enough to match inflation, not put new drivers 20-30k ahead of the most recent crop of drivers, that extra money can go to prop up failing pensions. I don't think we should deal with new part timer pay any more, let the company do whatever they please with that. But let's give a boost to part timers who've put in some time. Fix the 22.4 language, or just eliminate it and hire more rpcd's. The contractual wage increases aren't terrible, but they aren't great. We can get a good contract, just need to try again. What's the big deal?

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Forgot to quote. @LagunaBrown, the same way that the master language has changed to include the verbage "as long as work is available", the same thing could have happened to the supplemental language for ANY of the supplements. What you have now under the 2013-2018 contract for your supplement could have been changed and you won't know until the supplements are all revealed. The business agent probably isn't allowed to speak on the subject of supplemental language changes until all the supplements are revealed, the same way negotiators weren't allowed to speak on the subject of master language changes.

Oh, and if my wordiness is hard for you to comprehend, tough.

If what 542thruNthru said about you is true, you're the kind of trash steward/business agent I despise. Losing sight of what stewards and business agents are supposed to be doing, which is working in the interests of the membership in accordance with the contract, and instead speaking on behalf of the union leadership even if they don't have the interests of the members at heart because of blind loyalty or to climb the ladder to power. You sicken me.

Why is there even language in Article 22 Section 4 (which is supposed to strictly be about the new combo drivers) that governs rpcd's at all? That is just sloppy contract wrting plain and simple.

 

[LagunaBrown]

Forgot to quote. @LagunaBrown, the same way that the master language has changed to include the verbage "as long as work is available", the same thing could have happened to the supplemental language for ANY of the supplements. What you have now under the 2013-2018 contract for your supplement could have been changed and you won't know until the supplements are all revealed. The business agent probably isn't allowed to speak on the subject of supplemental language changes until all the supplements are revealed, the same way negotiators weren't allowed to speak on the subject of master language changes.

And even if the supplemental agreement is good and addresses issues in the master, we get two votes, one for each. I can still vote "yes" on the supplemental and "no" on the master.

Oh, and if my wordiness is hard for you to comprehend, tough.

If what 542thruNthru said about you is true, you're the kind of trash steward/business agent I despise. Losing sight of what stewards and business agents are supposed to be doing, which is working in the interests of the membership in accordance with the contract, and instead speaking on behalf of the union leadership even if they don't have the interests of the members at heart because of blind loyalty or to climb the ladder to power. You sicken me.

FYI. Some things in your supplements and riders can change if you vote no on the master and yes on the supplements. Why don’t one of you show me where I told you how to vote.... It’s funny because you can’t but yet you villainize because you don’t like my points. Just like I said a lot depends on your region supplements and riders and that’s why you need to know the difference.

 

[LagunaBrown]

Forgot to quote. @LagunaBrown, the same way that the master language has changed to include the verbage "as long as work is available", the same thing could have happened to the supplemental language for ANY of the supplements. What you have now under the 2013-2018 contract for your supplement could have been changed and you won't know until the supplements are all revealed. The business agent probably isn't allowed to speak on the subject of supplemental language changes until all the supplements are revealed, the same way negotiators weren't allowed to speak on the subject of master language changes.

And even if the supplemental agreement is good and addresses issues in the master, we get two votes, one for each. I can still vote "yes" on the supplemental and "no" on the master.

Oh, and if my wordiness is hard for you to comprehend, tough.

If what 542thruNthru said about you is true, you're the kind of trash steward/business agent I despise. Losing sight of what stewards and business agents are supposed to be doing, which is working in the interests of the membership in accordance with the contract, and instead speaking on behalf of the union leadership even if they don't have the interests of the members at heart because of blind loyalty or to climb the ladder to power. You sicken me.

FYI. Some things in your supplements and riders can change if you vote no on the master and yes on the supplements. Why don’t one of you show me where I told you how to vote.... It’s funny because you can’t but yet you villainize because you dont like my points. Just like I said a lot depends on your region supplements and riders and that’s why you need to know the difference.

 

[Wontmake9.5]

Crap

 

[LagunaBrown]

Crap

Just look up on here all the false crap about last contract. What a bunch of know it alls.

 

[542thruNthru]

View attachment 204521

​

Why don’t one of you show me where I told you how to vote.... It’s funny because you can’t but yet you villainize because you don’t like my points. Just like I said a lot depends on your region supplements and riders and that’s why you need to know the difference.

Yep you don't villainize people for their point of view at all.

 

[Wontmake9.5]

Just look up on here all the false crap about last contract. What a bunch of know it alls.

Look at you! I said crap and you just come rushing in like someone called your name. Says a lot about you.

 

[Superteeth2478]

FYI. Some things in your supplements and riders can change if you vote no on the master and yes on the supplements. Why don’t one of you show me where I told you how to vote.... It’s funny because you can’t but yet you villainize because you dont like my points. Just like I said a lot depends on your region supplements and riders and that’s why you need to know the difference.

And like another poster pointed out, you're doing much the same thing that you're accusing others of doing. You're acting like a "no" vote on the basis of a concessionary master agreement that has been fully released is somehow a bad thing, and yet you want us to "ask the business agent" about everything including which hand to wipe our asses with when NO supplemental agreements have been released and the business agents are probably prohibited from releasing those details until after August 9th. If you're going to vote on the basis of what you read in the proposed contracts, then great, that's the only way to really do it right. But you seem to be interested in sucking off your business agent and doing whatever he says to do, even if he's lying about what is in the contract that you can plainly read yourself.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

FYI. Some things in your supplements and riders can change if you vote no on the master and yes on the supplements. Why don’t one of you show me where I told you how to vote.... It’s funny because you can’t but yet you villainize because you don’t like my points. Just like I said a lot depends on your region supplements and riders and that’s why you need to know the difference.

That's right, and is why you should vote no on all parts if you vote no on any. If you vote yes on a supplement, and they change the supplement later, your yes vote still stands. How's that for crooked?

 

[LagunaBrown]

Sweet sarsaparilla!! I'm really starting to like this kid!

@LagunaBrown comes in here every so often. Usually only during elections or contracts. He's a Shop Steward and very loyal to his local and the IBT.

I'm sure he's already been informed that he needs to start spreading the good word about this contract just as my Stewards have been told.

He will tell you that 22.4 are going to get FT pension contributions and all that but he won't tell you why they deserve to make less then a RPCD and how they don't deserve any 9.5 protection or 8 hour days even though they are FT. How their scheduled start times could change by hours every other week. How they can be forced to wait 90 min between jobs and have that counted towards their lunch before starting their shift again.

Oh let me save you the time. Yes I have talked with my BA.

So why did everyone complain in the surveys about working T-S, excessive overtime and 6 day punches. Now they make it so full timeers got what they wanted and you guys are asking for is exactly what we had in the first place.

 

[Slug Life]

@LagunaBrown is a troll don’t feed him. Let him vote whatever he wants it’s his right. It’s a great contract for him, the rest of the country that might get it in the rear end. It’s all instant gratification now a days especially with the younger generation.

Dude don’t act like it is just the younger generation. We have a 40 year driver willing to vote yes on this crap contract.
Simply due to the fact they plan on being gone before it ends. Knowing it is bad for the unborn. So don’t act like the old school isn’t just as bad chico.

 

[Superteeth2478]

So why did everyone complain in the surveys about working T-S, excessive overtime and 6 day punches. Now they make it so full timeers got what they wanted and you guys are asking for is exactly what we had in the first place.

Then address the points 542thruNthru made about 22.4s. Why wouldn't they just create more full-time positions instead of an underclass of drivers?

 

[542thruNthru]

So why did everyone complain in the surveys about working T-S, excessive overtime and 6 day punches. Now they make it so full timeers got what they wanted and you guys are asking for is exactly what we had in the first place.

Oh so 22.4 are not FT?

Please show me where we also asked for them to pay them less and not allow them on 9.5 or 8 hour days? I'd love to see the proposal that said.

"Dear union, I would like to stop working long hours and weekends but I demand the people that do, make less then me and have no Art. 37 protection."

 

[LagunaBrown]

And like another poster pointed out, you're doing much the same thing that you're accusing others of doing. You're acting like a "no" vote on the basis of a concessionary master agreement that has been fully released is somehow a bad thing, and yet you want us to "ask the business agent" about everything including which hand to wipe our asses with when NO supplemental agreements have been released and the business agents are probably prohibited from releasing those details until after August 9th. If you're going to vote on the basis of what you read in the proposed contracts, then great, that's the only way to really do it right. But you seem to be interested in sucking off your business agent and doing whatever he says to do, even if he's lying about what is in the contract that you can plainly read yourself.

You have no idea of what or why I will vote. It’s just easier for you to attack and make crap up to discredit someone tather than hear the hard truths.