Yes, just a majority. The 2/3 stipulation only applies to a last and final offer.
I think that two thirds will reject this contract. This contract will be convincingly be voted down in my opinion.Well, the Teamster Constitution mentions final offer over and over, but I wouldnt be surprised if they dont interpret it that way.
I would say 50% +1 or it has to be 2/3 below 50%
Don't know if that is correct. Was on the no vote teleconference and they said otherwiseYes, just a majority. The 2/3 stipulation only applies to a last and final offer.
It'll be 2/3rds you can bank on that.Is the vote on the tentative agreement a strict 50% plus one majority ratification?
Or are there stipulations like 50% of all eligible voters must vote otherwise 2/3 need to vote it down to kill the agreement?
Sorry for my ignorance.
How will amazon do that? Amazon is less than 10% of our volume.It'll be 2/3rds you can bank on that.
Amazon is set to take UPS on & UPS/IBT won't allow it.
Also, Amazon needs to have and House their own products in addition to supply a service. UPS, FedEx, DHL and the like only need to offer a service. I don’t care if he is the richest nerd in the world but d you really think Besos can just cut a check to buy UPS? Not happening.It'll be 2/3rds you can bank on that.
Amazon is set to take UPS on & UPS/IBT won't allow it.
I was honestly surprised they didn't throw in one of those trendy tax cut type bonuses to convince people to accept the concessionary language.
Guess they're saving that for round two....
If this scenario plays out we should just impose the contract but we won’t. We will let the members call the shots. You can bank on this statement. You wanted a strike and if what balloon 2013 and 2014 plays out we will strike UPS.Art. XII, Sec. 2
When in the judgment of the negotiating committee
the involved employer has made a final offer of settlement,
such negotiating committee shall have the authority,
with the approval of the General Executive Board, to
conduct agreement ratification votes and strike votes on
such area, multi-area, multi-employer, national, company-
wide, industry-wide, or Local Union basis as the committee
shall determine, except that no such final offer
shall be considered to be a contract offer subject to ratifi-
cation by the membership until it has been reviewed by
the Local Unions which are the bargaining representatives
of the involved members. In the event a strike is
authorized, the said committee shall have the authority,
with the approval of the General Executive Board, to direct
that the strike be conducted on such area, multi-area,
multi-employer, national, company-wide, industry-wide,
Local Union, or such other selective basis as the committee
shall determine. Results of ratification or rejection
votes with respect to master agreements shall be determined
by all involved voting members on a cumulative
basis of all votes cast as follows:
(1) If at least one half of the members eligible to vote
cast valid ballots then a cumulative majority of
those voting in favor of the final offer shall result
in acceptance of such offer; and a cumulative majority
of those voting against acceptance of the final
offer shall authorize a strike without any additional
vote being necessary for such strike
authorization. A tie vote shall be resolved as provided
in Section 1(b)(l) of this Article.
(2) If less than half of the eligible members cast valid
ballots, then a two-thirds (2/3) vote of those voting
shall be required to reject such final offer and to
authorize a strike. The failure of such membership
to reject the final offer and to authorize a strike as
herein provided shall require the negotiating committee
to accept such final offer or such additional
provisions as can be negotiated by it.
Has anybody heard the Negotiating Commitee, or any General Executive Board member, state that this offer for ratification is a "final offer"???
All of the "talking heads" for the IBT, that claim to be "in the know" here on BC, dummy up when this question is posed....so I guess we will have to see if a contract will once again be forced down our throats due ridiculous Article 12 language that clearly circumvents the democratic process.
Buying Fedex is the viable option. Bezos is no dummy. He ain’t taking on Pension liability.Also, Amazon needs to have and House their own products in addition to supply a service. UPS, FedEx, DHL and the like only need to offer a service. I don’t care if he is the richest nerd in the world but d you really think Besos can just cut a check to buy UPS? Not happening.
He might be very soon. Unless your help him out be talking his employees out of it. Since you’ll be retiring and not giving mad friend’s yo!Buying Fedex is the viable option. Bezos is no dummy. He ain’t taking on Pension liability.
No way in friend Fred S is selling his company to amazon....Buying Fedex is the viable option. Bezos is no dummy. He ain’t taking on Pension liability.
What happen with you guys unionizing FedEx???? Wtf??? Thought you had a couple barns signing up...Buying Fedex is the viable option. Bezos is no dummy. He ain’t taking on Pension liability.
I challenge you to quote one of my posts where I stated I "want a strike"?If this scenario plays out we should just impose the contract but we won’t. We will let the members call the shots. You can bank on this statement. You wanted a strike and if what balloon 2013 and 2014 plays out we will strike UPS.