Local 243

[BrownMonk]

It would appear that it is required for the union to give in to all demands. Lol.

N


No way. The Union has to decide what are the important things and go after those. We all know the consequences if there is disagreement, but neither side is required to agree with the other.

 

[Bubblehead]

N


No way. The Union has to decide what are the important things and go after those. We all know the consequences if there is disagreement, but neither side is required to agree with the other.

They do if there is ever to be a "LAST AND FINAL OFFER" to impose....

 

[browned out]

Seems like you are asking the rest of the country to stall because of your in fighting. If they are pieces of crap "incompetent", you are the ones that put them in so it is a Local issue. If it has been ongoing for 18 years, it sounds like the members are incompetent for leaving them there. If it really bad representation, run against them and win. Then, you can negotiate.
Your opinion of some of the needs being a requirement of negotiations is only an opinion. It is also not required that the Company give in to all demands. Negotiations are done by 2 sides that have differing opinions. Although I don't like the language for 22.4, it has passed and part of the national language.

243 targets any and all opposition. You want to lose your UPS job, challenge 243. It has happened more than once. Bribery was effective until they came up with a better method. Collude with UPS to get opponents discharged. Believe what you will. It has happened in 243.

Holding the whole country up for better language is beneficial to all. Something to build on in the next CBA negotiations.

We are just asking for answers and they will not give them to us. Even if they are answers we don't like, just give us the answers.

NorCal has solid language that protects the rights of regular package car drivers by allowing them to bump 22.4s or to work four 10-hour days.

 

[browned out]

Yes.... I do.

Please enlighten us.

 

[browned out]

Guess it's time to "nut up.... or shut up".

The incompetent and/or colluding morons at 243 are recommending a NO vote on the exact same supplement that 243 first recommended a YES vote on. The supplement 243 drafted. Idiots.

Putting 40% of many RPCDs income in doubt is a serious issue. Any rational negotiator would have had the sense to address this.

243 was asked over and over. by the members in every barn. 243s go to answer. "We don't know"

Arse Clowns. That's your friend N job. To answer the members questions regarding changes in wages, terms and conditions of emolyment,,

"The Trump administration has directed NLRB agents to focus on going after unions."

Come on 243, you were required to fulfill your DFR. Now you put us in Trump's sights. Great Job.

 

[Slinging Packages]

Doesn’t sound like much of a negotiation to me

The company refused to

Does anyone have a clue why the supplement would be sent out for a vote before the conclusion of 243 Unfair Labor Practice action?

It makes no sense. I would think if the NLRB had ruled already; 243 would let us know? What happens if the NLRB rules in 243s favor after this is voted on?

We will vote it down again.

It will be forced thru.

Damn Shame.

It most likely would have passed the 1st time if the 243 did their due diligence in crafting language that was in the best interest of all 243 UPSers. Or even answering our questions regarding losing up to 40% of our income. Or get the friend'n answers from the company.

Incompetent and Negligent at best. Collusion at worst. Pieces of absolute garbage....at best. Pieces of S*#t is more accurate.

It's the company who goes to the IBT and asks for a vote. Local 243 has no say on the matter!

 

[Slinging Packages]

The incompetent and/or colluding morons at 243 are recommending a NO vote on the exact same supplement that 243 first recommended a YES vote on. The supplement 243 drafted. Idiots.

Putting 40% of many RPCDs income in doubt is a serious issue. Any rational negotiator would have had the sense to address this.

243 was asked over and over. by the members in every barn. 243s go to answer. "We don't know"

Arse Clowns. That's your friend N job. To answer the members questions regarding changes in wages, terms and conditions of emolyment,,

"The Trump administration has directed NLRB agents to focus on going after unions."

Come on 243, you were required to fulfill your DFR. Now you put us in Trump's sights. Great Job.

WRONG AGIAN !! The new vote will be on several things the company agreed to and signed off on.
I question if you ever have been to a meeting!!

 

[Slinging Packages]

243 targets any and all opposition. You want to lose your UPS job, challenge 243. It has happened more than once. Bribery was effective until they came up with a better method. Collude with UPS to get opponents discharged. Believe what you will. It has happened in 243.

Holding the whole country up for better language is beneficial to all. Something to build on in the next CBA negotiations.

We are just asking for answers and they will not give them to us. Even if they are answers we don't like, just give us the answers.

NorCal has solid language that protects the rights of regular package car drivers by allowing them to bump 22.4s or to work four 10-hour days.

The incident regarding colluding with UPS was no more than an employee not doing as he was told. He had a thick file which didn't help.
If you had gone to any meetings they gave answers on what they knew of but didn't have all the answers to some questions which was understandable.

You are correct Norcal has solid language and once AGAIN if you were at the meetings local 243 was told by the company that the language we were asking for nobody else had around the country which was a LIE!! So thats why the company wasn't going to negotiate with 243 because no one had it. Norcal has it agreed to why not 243? The company wants a vote so we NEED TO VOTE IT DOWN AND GET THE 51% WE NEED!

 

[burrheadd]

The company refused to

It's the company who goes to the IBT and asks for a vote. Local 243 has no say on the matter!

If the company doesn’t want to negotiate maybe it’s time to step away and let them think about it for awhile

If the company is set on 22.4s then maybe they should give something back

This isn’t rocket science it’s negotiation ‘s 101

 

[Bubblehead]

WRONG AGIAN !! The new vote will be on several things the company agreed to and signed off on.
I question if you ever have been to a meeting!!

Do tell then....

What things, "signed off on" where???

 

[browned out]

The incident regarding colluding with UPS was no more than an employee not doing as he was told. He had a thick file which didn't help.
If you had gone to any meetings they gave answers on what they knew of but didn't have all the answers to some questions which was understandable.

You are correct Norcal has solid language and once AGAIN if you were at the meetings local 243 was told by the company that the language we were asking for nobody else had around the country which was a LIE!! So thats why the company wasn't going to negotiate with 243 because no one had it. Norcal has it agreed to why not 243? The company wants a vote so we NEED TO VOTE IT DOWN AND GET THE 51% WE NEED!

 

[browned out]

????

 

[browned out]

Still no answer from BUG.

Bo knows, BUG knows.

Why even announce another vote before the findings from the NLRB charges are explained to the members?

243 rules by instilling fear. And by attempting keep to members divided and in the dark.

Some, beyond reproach, 243 UPSers are coueagous,, stand in solidarity and see the light

The Truth will set you free my Buger.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

Come on 243, you were required to fulfill your DFR.

I don't think you know what "duty of fair representation" is.

Your Local hasn't refused to bargain on your behalf....

I question if you ever have been to a meeting!!

I still question if he even works at UPS.


He has made several references to UPS facilities as being "barns".

That's a freight term.... that 99.9% of employees would never use.

Still no answer from BUG.

You just don't want to hear what I have to say.

I'm waiting to hear all about the NLRB charges you are filing with your attorney.



-Bug-

 

[Frankie's Friend]

Yes.... I do.





It's just the same, as it was in 2013.
A small group of dissidents, thought that continually voting down their supplement/rider would result in a re-negotiation of the ratified Master language.
-Bug-

"Dissidents"? I thought they were called members...

who had the numbers in their locals to vote down the proposed contract.

In 2013 the "small number of" negotiatiators actually allowed (or planned for) two large regions to vote on other regions healthcare without being subject to getting the same plan themselves.

That's honestly representing all members?

We havent forgotten.

Nor have we forgotten that a record number of members voted this time and it still didn't matter.

Now members are reduced to being dissidents because they have the percentages necessary to face off with the company and the IBT.

Good for them.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

"Dissidents"? I thought they were called members...

That's the terminology always subscribed to TDU.

Self-admittedly....

 

[Frankie's Friend]

That's the terminology always subscribed to TDU.

Self-admittedly....

Self-admittedly...

I have the same issue... with locals that claim autonomy and yet use other local's compromised decisions to screw their own members instead of fighting for their own members rights that are slam dunk, black and white in the cba.

That's why many members don't vote. They've given up fighting the system. That's embarrassing and failure for the union as a whole.

 

[What'dyabringmetoday???]

N


No way. The Union has to decide what are the important things and go after those. We all know the consequences if there is disagreement, but neither side is required to agree with the other.

Lol.

 

[What'dyabringmetoday???]

Self-admittedly...

I have the same issue... with locals that claim autonomy and yet use other local's compromised decisions to screw their own members instead of fighting for their own members rights that are slam dunk, black and white in the cba.

That's why many members don't vote. They've given up fighting the system. That's embarrassing and failure for the union as a whole.

I hope Big Union Guy....doesn't see this. Lol.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

I have the same issue... with locals that claim autonomy and yet use other local's compromised decisions to screw their own members instead of fighting for their own members rights that are slam dunk, black and white in the cba.

I have a problem with that myself.

Especially, when a panel decision states "Based on the Facts presented".


That's not a closed door.


Unless you have a transcript of the actual case.... what are the "Facts" ?

Are the facts of the case, identical to yours ?

And, why would a Local decline to process a grievance because of it ?