Contract deal soon?

[nospinzone]

I'm not getting into contract talk, Nospin. Not worth the headache to do so. Its why I sugggested APWA concentrate on the non-union Freight side first. If APWA successfully organized a few Freight buildings and got what the member's wanted, APWA would be substantially better off because it would have...what's that word again??? Ohhhh, that's right...credibility!! I'm sure I'll take a flaming for this. -Rocky

There are pretty much three reasons I can think of to give you a complete answer to this question.

1. The legal reasons I cited above regarding the contract.

2. The timeline in which things have developed and will develop.
The cuts to CS occurred in 2003-4. APWA was put into motion and formed in late 2004. From that moment forward, time, planning, and money were committed to winning a Parcel NLRB vote. UPS didn't announce plans to purchase Overnite until mid-2005. Not soon after that, it became obvious that Teamsters would attempt to organize UPS Freight. This is the window of opportunity for the Freight guys. If they choose to go IBT, it will become more difficult to organize a decert campaign much like APWA is doing with Parcel. You can't just do a test drive with the IBT and plan to drop them if you don't like 'em without expecting a fight; so now is the time to offer the Freight guys a choice between APWA and IBT.

Now is the window of opportunity for Parcel. If a new IBT contract is agreed to and the APWA fails to submit a successful election petition to the NLRB before July 31, 2008, it could be three to even possibly eight years before such a petition could be filed again. UPS Parcel employees would be legally bound to the Teamsters without any recourse for exiting. I personally do not want to hang around to see where the IBT takes our pension money during that time. The next 13 months is the only window of opportunity for the APWA. They knew this and started their campaign two years ago so that the network, legal preparation, and build up of press would be ready.

3. The APWA's purpose for organizing Freight.
Your suggestion is that the APWA focus on organizing Freight so as to gain experience and to show themselves worthy to the Parcel side. If I was a Freight employee, this reasoning would make me feel like a guinea pig and as though I (freight) was second fiddle to Parcel. The Freight guys dont won't this and APWA will not use them for this purpose. APWA only wants to offer a viable alternative to what the IBT is offering the Freight guys, and APWA will only do meetings with Freight if they are invited. No active campaigning. APWA is not in the union business for the purpose of organizing every transportation company possible. Their business is UPS Parcel and/or Freight. No one else. And they wish to represent each division with equal vigor and energy. UPS Freight is not a stepping stone.

Now, should a Freight building go APWA in the next few months by their own choosing, you may get the added benefit of watching the APWA in action at the negotiating table. But that just depends on your co-workers on the Blue side.

 

[RockyRogue]

There are pretty much three reasons I can think of to give you a complete answer to this question.

Good points. I yield. -Rocky

 

[Cole]

Good posts NoSpin!

I do have a question myself though. How were some mechanics and the pilots able to organize if it's a single bargaining unit?

 

[JonFrum]

Just wondering . . .

APWA posters have been saying from day one that they resent being lumped in with all those (heathen) non-UPSers in Freight and elsewhere. They have been especially harsh concerning non-UPS retirees in the Central States region. Then, all of a sudden, UPS buys Overnite Freight and suddenly the APWA embraces these employees as if they are part of the family. I'm trying to understand what changed. The APWA is adamantly opposed to organizing non-UPS groups, but because of a CORPORATE UPS decision, the APWA completely changes its tune and welcomes Overnite employees with open arms. I wonder what would have happened if UPS had bought a different freight company instead. Wouldn't the Overnite people have remained classified as part of the shunned non-UPS masses? Even as part of the family, aren't Overnight employees still our "competition," to a degree? Wasn't part of the arguement that we shouldn't be in the same retirement fund as our competition?

I've always wondered, why is it *bad* to see a non-UPSer retire on the decades of contributions his employers contributed to a Teamsters pension fund, but it is *good* if a fellow UPSer retires from that same fund? Both individuals are almost surely strangers to you, so what's the difference? And what about the spouses of retired UPSers? If a non-UPSer is bad because he is . . . well. . . a NON_UPSER, then isn't the UPSers' spouse bad as well? After all, according to that logic, she never set foot in a UPS building, never worked a day in her life for UPS! Shouldn't we resent her, perhaps even more than the retired non-UPSer, who at least did the work and had the contributions made on his behalf? As you can see, this meanspiritedness has a logic that tends to spread if you appply it consistently. Ultimately, you will be resenting even retirees from your own building, especially if you never met them, or didn't like them.

I've never charged that the APWA is in anyway controlled by UPS, but it does seem strange that they only want the employees that UPS wants; they want UPS to be the sole contributor to their single-employer pension fund; and, yes, they employ that Tom Coleman guy. Why hire a lawyer who specializes in *decertifying* unions through Decertification Elections, and keeping unions out to begin with, when their stated goal is to *replace* the existing union with another union through a Representation Election? My worry is that Coleman is not rooting for the APWA to suceed, but is hoping they will damage the Teamsters and soften them up for whatever lies in the future. Incidentally, I don't believe the statement that Tom Coleman will be gone the moment the APWA is certified. In the unlikely event that the APWA suceeds, the Teamsters will hit them with a blizard of NLRB protests and charges, and lawsuits as well. Ol' Tom will be employed for many years, I predict.

 

[30andout]

Do you (apwa cheerleaders) see how your turning off the members? Members ask serious questions and yet they get redirected questions in return or ignored. You seem to be benefiting the teamsters cause who you hate so much, keep up the great work guys!

Sounds a lot like the Teamsters, I have been asking a lot of questions also. My BA told me he could not help me any more, so I asked him who else I could talk to and he gave me halls address to which I have not heard any response. He also gave me a phone number to call. The person I talked to on the phone said someone would call me back, that was over a week ago. Do you really think I'm gonna get a call???? Poor representation for the high dues we pay.

 

[krash]

AllSpin,
Give me a break. You and I both know it's not required by law to do all or nothing. You cannot and will not get all of UPS at once and UPSF would have nothing to do with that scenario either way. So come clean and tell us the real reason why its all or nothing.
Also, what about the rest of UPS?? Like custom cartage who is Union here. Or UPS logistics? Why not UPS in other countries?

 

[Cole]

Jon,

They have been especially harsh concerning non-UPS retirees in the Central States region.

Now that my friend is plain ridiculous. How has anyone been "harsh" to non-ups retirees" The APWA's beef has not been with anyone other than those who mismanaged the CS funds to that point that we can't retire until 65, and with a minimal pension on top of that, for many yrs of hard work and dedication, to both our employer and the Teamsters!

To try and act like this is an attack on all non-UPSers is totally unfounded, and without merit.

The APWA was started because of that fact. I am glad anyone got out and got a pension, but the fact that we can't because of a very poor setup, that our dues pays for, says to me and I am sure others that the Teamsters are/were the one's who were/are harsh to all those in CS.

The members for yrs. have asked for trustees accountable to them, not appointees, and it was those Teamster appointees that blundered ours while many Teamster officials get multiple pensions.

Either way this about getting a real pension as we should have under our current CBA, but they dropped the ball on us, and the APWA is trying to recover the fumble on about the 50 yard line.

As far as Tom Coleman, what need would the APWA have with him after the election process? Personally I don't like him being involved, but my understanding is he is retained until the election is over

Bottom line the Teamsters could have done things the right way and this wouldn't be an issue, so the blame is not UPSers against anyone other than those who mismanaged/stole our pensions!

Good day sir!

 

[705red]

Jon,



Now that my friend is plain ridiculous. How has anyone been "harsh" to non-ups retirees" The APWA's beef has not been with anyone other than those who mismanaged the CS funds to that point that we can't retire until 65, and with a minimal pension on top of that, for many yrs of hard work and dedication, to both our employer and the Teamsters!

To try and act like this is an attack on all non-UPSers is totally unfounded, and without merit.

The APWA was started because of that fact. I am glad anyone got out and got a pension, but the fact that we can't because of a very poor setup, that our dues pays for, says to me and I am sure others that the Teamsters are/were the one's who were/are harsh to all those in CS.

The members for yrs. have asked for trustees accountable to them, not appointees, and it was those Teamster appointees that blundered ours while many Teamster officials get multiple pensions.

Either way this about getting a real pension as we should have under our current CBA, but they dropped the ball on us, and the APWA is trying to recover the fumble on about the 50 yard line.

As far as Tom Coleman, what need would the APWA have with him after the election process? Personally I don't like him being involved, but my understanding is he is retained until the election is over

Bottom line the Teamsters could have done things the right way and this wouldn't be an issue, so the blame is not UPSers against anyone other than those who mismanaged/stole our pensions!

Good day sir!

Cole my brother, i agree with alot of what you have to say, and look at you as the only credible apwa supporter on here. With that being said the apwa cheerleaders have said repeatly over and over that we (upsers) should not be floating other non-upsers whos companies have closed. Their outlook is all about me,me,me the upser and screw everyone thats not a upser. I feel for the cs pensioners as a whole ups and freight, and if/when we withdraw from the cs fund there will be forgotten retirees who wont be able to receive their monthly checks. One of the reasons the fund is in trouble besides the mismanagement by all involved, ( government, teamsters,and investment firms) is the uphill fight with the nlrb and the government when it comes to organizing. If we could just build the membership up that will affect all funds with more participants. Cole its a hard decision to make do you turn your back on the already retireed non upsers and withdraw and hope this wont happen to us one day in a single-employer fund, or do we stay in this fund thats been under-performing? That is the question that you the upsers in the cs plan might have to vote on in the near future!

 

[nospinzone]

You and I both know it's not required by law to do all or nothing. You cannot and will not get all of UPS at once and UPSF would have nothing to do with that scenario either way. So come clean and tell us the real reason why its all or nothing.

In reply.....

Page 1. First Paragraph. Intro.
National Master United Parcel Service Agreement for the Period: August 1, 2002 through July 31, 2008 covering: operations in, between and over all of the states, territories, and possessions of the United States and operations into and out of all contiguous territory.

Article 2. Scope of the Agreement.
Section 1. Single Bargaining Unit
All employees covered by this Master Agreement and the various supplements, riders and Addenda thereto, shall constitute one (1) bargaining unit.
SOURCE

The following excerpt from the NLRB gives a clear definition of the requirement for petitioning the NLRB for an election.

Sec. 9 (e) [Secret ballot; limitation of elections] (1) Upon the filing with the Board, by 30 per centum or more of the employees in a bargaining unit covered by an agreement between their employer and labor organization made pursuant to section 8(a)(3) [section 158(a)(3) of this title], of a petition alleging they desire that such authorization be rescinded, the Board shall take a secret ballot of the employees in such unit and certify the results thereof to such labor organization and to the employer.
SOURCE

Do I need to connect the dots for you? I've given you concrete sources in black and white to back up my reasoning. So now you can either provide similar verifiable sources to counter my reasoning, or you can attempt to spin the black and white print that I've provided. Your turn.

Also, what about the rest of UPS?? Like custom cartage who is Union here. Or UPS logistics? Why not UPS in other countries?

Those are questions you should ask Van or Danny. I'm not in the position to dictate APWA policy. I have an idea of what their reply would be, but if you need an answer that badly, call or email them yourself. I know my limitations.

Enjoy your Sunday.

 

[sawdusttv]

Cole my brother, i agree with alot of what you have to say, and look at you as the only credible apwa supporter on here. With that being said the apwa cheerleaders have said repeatly over and over that we (upsers) should not be floating other non-upsers whos companies have closed. Their outlook is all about me,me,me the upser and screw everyone thats not a upser. I feel for the cs pensioners as a whole ups and freight, and if/when we withdraw from the cs fund there will be forgotten retirees who wont be able to receive their monthly checks. One of the reasons the fund is in trouble besides the mismanagement by all involved, ( government, teamsters,and investment firms) is the uphill fight with the nlrb and the government when it comes to organizing. If we could just build the membership up that will affect all funds with more participants. Cole its a hard decision to make do you turn your back on the already retireed non upsers and withdraw and hope this wont happen to us one day in a single-employer fund, or do we stay in this fund thats been under-performing? That is the question that you the upsers in the cs plan might have to vote on in the near future!

RED,
Even though Cole is, as you said, the only credible APWA supporter on here, I would like to interject something none the less.
Yes, that is a question that we will have to deal with in the near future, but you need to realize.
The UPSers in the CS plan have pretty much had our pension taken from us, or the majority of it.
"WE HAVE NOTHING TO LOOSE."
So, why not shoot for the stars?

 

[badpas]

Cole my brother, i agree with alot of what you have to say, and look at you as the only credible apwa supporter on here. With that being said the apwa cheerleaders have said repeatly over and over that we (upsers) should not be floating other non-upsers whos companies have closed. Their outlook is all about me,me,me the upser and screw everyone thats not a upser. I feel for the cs pensioners as a whole ups and freight, and if/when we withdraw from the cs fund there will be forgotten retirees who wont be able to receive their monthly checks. One of the reasons the fund is in trouble besides the mismanagement by all involved, ( government, teamsters,and investment firms) is the uphill fight with the nlrb and the government when it comes to organizing. If we could just build the membership up that will affect all funds with more participants. Cole its a hard decision to make do you turn your back on the already retireed non upsers and withdraw and hope this wont happen to us one day in a single-employer fund, or do we stay in this fund thats been under-performing? That is the question that you the upsers in the cs plan might have to vote on in the near future!

Hey Red, I keep seeing your posts about leaving other union brothers and sisters and retirees but what you forget is what Jon Frum has even posted in the past and that is even if we pull out of cs that ups still has to contribute into cs pension funds with their seperate negotiated amounts with the teamsters that covers all the other liabilties of which is part of the multi-employer pension fund. The difference is from that point forward it becomes a figure that ups can put into a budget. Hence a benefit to ups. So nobody is leaving anyone out in the cold because ups still has to pay their portion for being one of the big dogs in the yard. That would still cover everyone from retirees to new hires. Its once we pull out of cs, from that day forward there would be no new entries. Now after saying that my beef with cs is the way they pay and the way they cut our pension. And unless they change that there will always be major issues because its not fair for ups to put in as much as they do and yet we see no more than companies that put in a third of us. Even if we saw alittle more or they changed the payouts to the ratio of who puts in what, that would seem more right than the way it is now.

But as far as getting more members, wouldn't you think it would be alittle more intising if non-union companies could see that it is more about the money invested and the time that would result in your financial future versus which local or which fund you belong too because when it all comes down to it ups puts in enough for us to all be millionaires or multi-millionaires in alot less time if the money was invested individually and I don't mean as a single employer pension fund. Even though this is exactly what the APWA proposes, your money[our money} would be invested with one of the 3 largest investment firms in the world and I have no dought in my mind that they could do at least as good as our favorite trustees could and if you check it out the numbers would shock you. This way it wouldn't matter how many members we had but that the members could see some progression instead of just wait intil the next contract. There are alot of things that need changed except this is just the tip of the ice berg and it will be dealt with. Hopefully it will be benefitial to everyone, but only with hard work not so much numbers.

 

[wildgoose]

Hey Red, I keep seeing your posts about leaving other union brothers and sisters and retirees but what you forget is what Jon Frum has even posted in the past and that is even if we pull out of cs that ups still has to contribute into cs pension funds with their seperate negotiated amounts with the teamsters that covers all the other liabilties of which is part of the multi-employer pension fund. The difference is from that point forward it becomes a figure that ups can put into a budget. Hence a benefit to ups. So nobody is leaving anyone out in the cold because ups still has to pay their portion for being one of the big dogs in the yard. That would still cover everyone from retirees to new hires. Its once we pull out of cs, from that day forward there would be no new entries. Now after saying that my beef with cs is the way they pay and the way they cut our pension. And unless they change that there will always be major issues because its not fair for ups to put in as much as they do and yet we see no more than companies that put in a third of us. Even if we saw alittle more or they changed the payouts to the ratio of who puts in what, that would seem more right than the way it is now.

But as far as getting more members, wouldn't you think it would be alittle more intising if non-union companies could see that it is more about the money invested and the time that would result in your financial future versus which local or which fund you belong too because when it all comes down to it ups puts in enough for us to all be millionaires or multi-millionaires in alot less time if the money was invested individually and I don't mean as a single employer pension fund. Even though this is exactly what the APWA proposes, your money[our money} would be invested with one of the 3 largest investment firms in the world and I have no dought in my mind that they could do at least as good as our favorite trustees could and if you check it out the numbers would shock you. This way it wouldn't matter how many members we had but that the members could see some progression instead of just wait intil the next contract. There are alot of things that need changed except this is just the tip of the ice berg and it will be dealt with. Hopefully it will be benefitial to everyone, but only with hard work not so much numbers.

Very Good Badpas - See Red doesn`t know all !
Just like the teamsters to keep mushrooming ya !

 

[705red]

Hey Red, I keep seeing your posts about leaving other union brothers and sisters and retirees but what you forget is what Jon Frum has even posted in the past and that is even if we pull out of cs that ups still has to contribute into cs pension funds with their seperate negotiated amounts with the teamsters that covers all the other liabilties of which is part of the multi-employer pension fund. The difference is from that point forward it becomes a figure that ups can put into a budget. Hence a benefit to ups. So nobody is leaving anyone out in the cold because ups still has to pay their portion for being one of the big dogs in the yard. That would still cover everyone from retirees to new hires. Its once we pull out of cs, from that day forward there would be no new entries. Now after saying that my beef with cs is the way they pay and the way they cut our pension. And unless they change that there will always be major issues because its not fair for ups to put in as much as they do and yet we see no more than companies that put in a third of us. Even if we saw alittle more or they changed the payouts to the ratio of who puts in what, that would seem more right than the way it is now.

But as far as getting more members, wouldn't you think it would be alittle more intising if non-union companies could see that it is more about the money invested and the time that would result in your financial future versus which local or which fund you belong too because when it all comes down to it ups puts in enough for us to all be millionaires or multi-millionaires in alot less time if the money was invested individually and I don't mean as a single employer pension fund. Even though this is exactly what the APWA proposes, your money[our money} would be invested with one of the 3 largest investment firms in the world and I have no dought in my mind that they could do at least as good as our favorite trustees could and if you check it out the numbers would shock you. This way it wouldn't matter how many members we had but that the members could see some progression instead of just wait intil the next contract. There are alot of things that need changed except this is just the tip of the ice berg and it will be dealt with. Hopefully it will be benefitial to everyone, but only with hard work not so much numbers.

I agree with your outlook against a single employer fund, but no where have i read abuut ups, abf, and yellow having to contribute to the cs fund if they do decide to leave, do you have a link to any of that info for all of our reading pleasures?

 

[HazMatMan]

I think they are far from a deal and I fear the worst case scenario... A strike...

 

[RockyRogue]

I think they are far from a deal and I fear the worst case scenario... A strike...

You're not the only one. I think UPS could be looking at a strike worse than '97. -Rocky

 

[Cole]

I don't see a strike personally. What could the Teamsters come up with to get support for it? They sure couldn't make the pension the issue as they have no credibility in that area imho, there is little at this point to gain, and alot to lose.

 

[JonFrum]

Krash, NoSpin, Brethren: Let Us Consult The Sacred Text . . .

There is a strong presumption by the NLRB that an existing bargaining unit is the appropriate unit in an NLRB election. UPS has one national unit, (the National Master, created in 1979, I believe), and two other Chicago area units that never joined the national effort, (Local 705, and Local 710.) The APWA could start with either of the two local units, or both of them, *if* it wanted to.

Further, when the APWA petitions for an election, it can also petition the NLRB to combine or carve-up the Teamsters/UPSers workforce in any way they want. There is a presumption that the existing order is correct, but the APWA, or any other labor organization on the ballot, can make a case to change the composition of the unit or units. You have to have a strong case, but it can be done. Each seperate unit would have a seperate vote. See . . .
http://www.nlrb.gov

But start here at Chapter 12 first . . .
http://www.nlrb.gov
[Caution: Extensive reading of this NLRB manual may put you in a coma. Proceed at your own risk.]

 

[satellitedriver]

You're not the only one. I think UPS could be looking at a strike worse than '97. -Rocky

My being a scab from the 97' strike makes my opinion less, to some.
Having said that, if a strike is called in '08, it will be worse than '97.
The effects would be many UPS teamsters crossing the line and a severe erosion of our (UPS) customer base. Our competition is poised and planning for such an event to happen.
UPS is also planning for this scenario.
UPS might not exist anymore, at least in it's present form and name, if a strike would occur.
Sadly, the teamsters have only the power of the strike to protect its membership. UPS will have other options.
I learned a long time ago in Boy Scouts, "Be Prepared". So, sock some cash back this year.
I personally do not think a strike will occur. It would only weaken both parties.
IMHO
PAX

 

[705red]

I don't see a strike personally. What could the Teamsters come up with to get support for it? They sure couldn't make the pension the issue as they have no credibility in that area imho, there is little at this point to gain, and alot to lose.

Cole theres many reasons alot of good ups teamsters would strike over besides the pension. The teamsters dont have to come up with any ideas, we the rank and file have shown them the continous contract violations sups working, 8 hour request not being honored, 9.5 enforcement, subcontracting, terminations and suspensions without just cause, these are just a few for example. Now im not giving my blessing for a national work stoppage because i hear what gets said on here and understand how upset people in other areas are and just might cross the picket lines. We just filed more ulps against ups in chicago for come of these contract violations i spoke about making it a possible scenario that we could shut em down in the near future.

Before the bring the heat, understand i dont want a strike but if ups wont change their ways what other means do we have?

 

[sawdusttv]

Cole theres many reasons alot of good ups teamsters would strike over besides the pension. The teamsters dont have to come up with any ideas, we the rank and file have shown them the continous contract violations sups working, 8 hour request not being honored, 9.5 enforcement, subcontracting, terminations and suspensions without just cause, these are just a few for example. Now im not giving my blessing for a national work stoppage because i hear what gets said on here and understand how upset people in other areas are and just might cross the picket lines. We just filed more ulps against ups in chicago for come of these contract violations i spoke about making it a possible scenario that we could shut em down in the near future.

Before the bring the heat, understand i dont want a strike but if ups wont change their ways what other means do we have?

RED,
Since you guys are under a different contract than the rest of the nation. Does your contract run out at the same time as ours, and what happens if the rest of the nation calls a strike and your local doesn't or vise versa?