Contract proposals for 2018

[burrheadd]

I have no idea what you're talking about. An uniformed retiree thinks all the IBT cares about is dues, I point out instances that defeats his ridiculous position, you agree with him, and then post this inanity.
You do understand locals and the IBT need additional revenue each year just to match the negotiated raises and benefit pkgs, not to mention utilities and numerous other cost increases.
Losing $56K isn't a drop in any bucket in my book.

Especially with their money management skills

 

[thisjobaintforeverybody]

It doesn't help.... when 22.3 people don't work their entire shift, and go home everyday.

Winner!

 

[Bubblehead]

I have no idea what you're talking about.

I'll make it simple, I'm saying the IBT prioritizes raises over all other language, in order to maximize dues.

You do understand locals and the IBT need additional revenue each year just to match the negotiated raises and benefit pkgs, not to mention utilities and numerous other cost increases.
Losing $56K isn't a drop in any bucket in my book.

Again, to make it simple, I am asserting that the IBT mandated this so-called "waiver" in order to smooth over a huge crap storm.

If this weren't true, why wasn't it up to each local?

BTW, what "negotiated" wage and benefit packages are you referring to???....for local officials???

Who "negotiated" those increases???

 

[wide load]

Where can these employees reference this "list"???....

....and if it actually exists, how do you suppose they cross reference this "list" with other locals when a 22.3 job is supposedly "moved"???

Seeing that this is a national issue, governed by national language, shouldn't it be policed by the International?
Don't we have enough to do locally, while paying ample dues, to have this national issue policed by the IBT?

After all, these jobs are assigned a number???

Help me understand???

I can only speak of the history of local 251 but every bid year since the creation of the 22.3 jobs, the stewards and BA would ensure the correct number of assigned jobs in our building. The company can change the structure of 22.3's but they are required to maintain a minimum number.

 

[Bubblehead]

There is no contract violation for moving a vacated 22.3 job to another local.

It is a violation if the original work, in the original location, is now being preformed by a part time employee(s)???

Article 22.2

 

[wide load]

I'll make it simple, I'm saying the IBT prioritizes raises over all other language, in order to maximize dues.

But didn't the Health and Pension increases outweighed the raises this contract.

 

[Bubblehead]

But didn't the Health and Pension increases outweighed the raises this contract.

How do marry up "Health and Pension", when comparing dollar figures to "raises"????

Shouldn't they be individual entities?

 

[BigUnionGuy]

It is a violation if the original work, in the original location, is now being preformed by a part time employee(s)???

Article 22.2

The lines are so blurred now.

How many 22.3 people.... even work their bid job ?


Do you remember when the company was trying to discipline 22.3 people for not

reporting for the second half of their job.... when they were cut on the first half ?


Sometimes, we are our own worst enemy.



-Bug-

 

[10 Pt]

Where can these employees reference this "list"???....

....and if it actually exists, how do you suppose they cross reference this "list" with other locals when a 22.3 job is supposedly "moved"???

Seeing that this is a national issue, governed by national language, shouldn't it be policed by the International?
Don't we have enough to do locally, while paying ample dues, to have this national issue policed by the IBT?

After all, these jobs are assigned a number???

Help me understand???

Nah.

Was just trying to draw a parallel.





Where do you get that information from ?





There is no contract violation for changing a 22.3 job content.

There is no contract violation for moving a vacated 22.3 job to another local.

So I'm not sure of your point.

It doesn't help.... when 22.3 people don't work their entire shift, and go home everyday.



-Bug-

Our 22.3 employees have asked the ba numerous times what their specific job number is.
"I'll get back to you" is all they ever hear.

Aren't they supposed to be on a spread sheet?
What is so hard about getting back to the affected members about this valid question?

 

[Bubblehead]

Our 22.3 employees have asked the ba numerous times what their specific job number is.
"I'll get back to you" is all they ever hear.

Aren't they supposed to be on a spread sheet?
What is so hard about getting back to the affected members about this valid question?

Why isn't it a keystroke away?

Isn't it time for the Teamsters to join the 21st Century???

 

[Inthegame]

I'll make it simple, I'm saying the IBT prioritizes raises over all other language, in order to maximize dues.

How do marry up "Health and Pension", when comparing dollar figures to "raises"????

Shouldn't they be individual entities?

That's the point you're missing. The IBT negotiated more money into H&W and Pension contributions than they did into raises. No dues impact whatsoever on benefit contributions. If their priority was dues income as you allege, that's an odd way to operate.

BTW, what "negotiated" wage and benefit packages are you referring to???....for local officials???

Who "negotiated" those increases???

News Flash, local officials get paid and they have benefits!Most UPS locals base their BA wage and benefit package on the UPS negotiated CBA.
Without additional revenue how can that be accomplished? Just matching the Pension and H&W contribution increases costs a local over $30K per agent during this CBA. That's without any wage increase.

 

[anHOURover]

Your local and employees should be enforcing the contract. There should be a list on file.

Brother I'm sure that's how it works in locals such as yours where your leadership has the members interests first. Ask anyone about the leadership of local 623. The whole joint council can't stand the ball less bafoons running the local. We got a few that honestly can't file a grievance. It's like going to the boss when you contact the local. Same outcome. 623 tells on members to their bosses. I been the target quite a few times. It's unbelievable these sellouts are still in office.

 

[anHOURover]

The lines are so blurred now.

How many 22.3 people.... even work their bid job ?


Do you remember when the company was trying to discipline 22.3 people for not

reporting for the second half of their job.... when they were cut on the first half ?


Sometimes, we are our own worst enemy.



-Bug-

Stop making excuses bug
These are legitimate concerns that members are bringing up. Stop saying wrong and Tdu. The locals don't want to show the numbers because they are hiding thousands of jobs.
FACT

 

[anHOURover]

Nah.

Was just trying to draw a parallel.





Where do you get that information from ?





There is no contract violation for changing a 22.3 job content.

There is no contract violation for moving a vacated 22.3 job to another local.

So I'm not sure of your point.

It doesn't help.... when 22.3 people don't work their entire shift, and go home everyday.



-Bug-

I work every shift brother
Always have always will
Are you jealous that I only have to come to work 4 days a week?
I'm just doing what my bid said.
My bid is one of the first article 22 jobs created. I have the best and everyone knows it. There are very few of us left !
4 tens is great bug. I understand it's hard for you to drive to work 5 days a week and play grab but with the boss.
Listen to the members.
Legitimate concerns !!
FACT

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I have no idea what you're talking about. An uniformed retiree thinks all the IBT cares about is dues, I point out instances that defeats his ridiculous position, you agree with him, and then post this inanity.
You do understand locals and the IBT need additional revenue each year just to match the negotiated raises and benefit pkgs, not to mention utilities and numerous other cost increases.
Losing $56K isn't a drop in any bucket in my book.

What kind of uniform does a retiree wear?

 

[Bubblehead]

That's the point you're missing. The IBT negotiated more money into H&W and Pension contributions than they did into raises. No dues impact whatsoever on benefit contributions. If their priority was dues income as you allege, that's an odd way to operate.

....and the point you're missing is there are three categories that you are trying to discuss as two?

Why is it you talk about raises as a single entity, while H&W and Pension is somehow lumped together as one to make your point?

News Flash, local officials get paid and they have benefits!Most UPS locals base their BA wage and benefit package on the UPS negotiated CBA.
Without additional revenue how can that be accomplished? Just matching the Pension and H&W contribution increases costs a local over $30K per agent during this CBA. That's without any wage increase.

....and those raises are at the discretion of these local eboards, with no contingency of them being retroactive to the UPS contract ratification.

If some locals gave their officers and agents retro checks in conjunction with our last contract, I'm betting their membership didn't approve, if they were even informed.

Any local who gave their officers and agents retroactive raises, when no retro dues were collected, should be ashamed of their selves.

 

[bottomups]

What kind of uniform does a retiree wear?

 

[Coldworld]

View attachment 129566

Top shelf gangster...or @UpstateNYUPSer when he heads to the Hamptons for a weekend getaway...

 

[Inthegame]

....and the point you're missing is there are three categories that you are trying to discuss as two?

Why is it you talk about raises as a single entity, while H&W and Pension is somehow lumped together as one to make your point?

....and those raises are at the discretion of these local eboards, with no contingency of them being retroactive to the UPS contract ratification.

If some locals gave their officers and agents retro checks in conjunction with our last contract, I'm betting their membership didn't approve, if they were even informed.

Any local who gave their officers and agents retroactive raises, when no retro dues were collected, should be ashamed of their selves.

And you are officially "round the bend".

Raises are a single entity and the basis of dues. H&W and Pension are benefits, not wages, hence anyone with a modicum of common sense understands why I "lumped" them together.

The point being you (and a few others) have convinced themselves (without any factual basis) the IBT prioritizes wage increases for their members as a method of increasing the IBT's revenue, while ignoring the unmistakable fact that non-dues related benefit contribution were greater than wages in the last (2) CBA's. If their goal was as you allege, they'd eagerly screw the benny pkg and accept higher wages and UPS would gladly comply.
You might want to quit while you're behind.

If some locals gave their officers and agents retro checks in conjunction with our last contract, I'm betting their membership didn't approve, if they were even informed.

Any local who gave their officers and agents retroactive raises, when no retro dues were collected, should be ashamed of their selves.

No one suggested anything such as you alleged. Your point is destroyed yet you fluff up some "if" scenarios attacking local e-boards. You really need to stick to the issue and not let your imagination run wild.

The fact is costs go up for everyone, you, your local and the IBT. Unless revenue goes up, cuts have to be made to remain solvent. Responsible entities know this and act accordingly.

How are locals able to attract future competent BA's if the wage/benefit disparity between a UPS employee and a local union BA widens? That's a real issue facing locals, not an imagined one. Get back to me on that.

All this discussion over dues yet the true costs of dues per full timer is around $.50 an hour for a $55 an hour job. BTW, local officers/agents pay dues but unlike some members, they understand it's the best money ever spent.

 

[Bubblehead]

And you are officially "round the bend".

Raises are a single entity and the basis of dues. H&W and Pension are benefits, not wages, hence anyone with a modicum of common sense understands why I "lumped" them together.

The point being you (and a few others) have convinced themselves (without any factual basis) the IBT prioritizes wage increases for their members as a method of increasing the IBT's revenue, while ignoring the unmistakable fact that non-dues related benefit contribution were greater than wages in the last (2) CBA's. If their goal was as you allege, they'd eagerly screw the benny pkg and accept higher wages and UPS would gladly comply.
You might want to quit while you're behind.

No one suggested anything such as you alleged. Your point is destroyed yet you fluff up some "if" scenarios attacking local e-boards. You really need to stick to the issue and not let your imagination run wild.

The fact is costs go up for everyone, you, your local and the IBT. Unless revenue goes up, cuts have to be made to remain solvent. Responsible entities know this and act accordingly.

How are locals able to attract future competent BA's if the wage/benefit disparity between a UPS employee and a local union BA widens? That's a real issue facing locals, not an imagined one. Get back to me on that.

All this discussion over dues yet the true costs of dues per full timer is around $.50 an hour for a $55 an hour job. BTW, local officers/agents pay dues but unlike some members, they understand it's the best money ever spent.

Everything I "if'd" up was suggested in your previous posts.

As far as our "cash grab" theories, they are simply an attempt to figure out why so many concessions have been made in the previous contracts in other facets of the negotiated language.

Been my experience, that if you want to find the truth, follow the money.

As far as attracting the best and brightest for Local office, that's another instance where the International dropped the ball in the Central Region.
UPSer's were put in a lose/lose situation when UPS was permitted to buy their way out of Central States.

Neat