cachmeifucan
Well-Known Member
I think I posted this 705
Buuut.... what really upsets me is there are workers with up to around 5 years not making what a new hire is getting based on this new hire incentive. 5 years with the company to find out that someone hired off the street is making more then you would really piss me off. The local just says, "Well they are not getting benefits yet" Majority of the people hired to work in the hub are like 18 years old and have insurance through their parents still.
Well of course. Why are these bonuses not going to EVERYONE that is showing up on time everyday??? It is the matter of the fact that there are NEW employees making a lot more in some cases then someone who has been with the company for around 5 years.If the negotiated wage for part timers wasn't so low then these bonsuses wouldn't exist.
The company is trying to hire more people but because with the current wages and work load nobody stays.They are hiring many new hires probably to make them in union to vote yes for 14$ a hour probably a signing bonus for public support and new hires who don't care about insurance, 9.5 enforcement working conditions, keeping the benefits we have not concede on anything. Record profits again I think it was 5.8 billion and projection over u billion this year
Contacted my steward about it again and I guess there was a grievance on it with UPS and it made it to a national level supposedly. And the union lost. Due to the company saying, "Well they get no insurance for a full year, so this bonus makes up for it."
Yes the majority of all the people hired to work in the building are kids. That are on their parents insurance already. Hell, they probably don't even need insurance at that age. I never did when I got hired 15 years ago. The company using leverage on the union failing on a prior contract when it went from 90 days to get insurance all the way up to a full year.
Sounds like a weak ass decision to me. The COMPANY wanted insurance not to be given for a full year to save money on their end. If they need to offer something to make up for it, why not just give the insurance earlier to begin with? Good god...Contacted my steward about it again and I guess there was a grievance on it with UPS and it made it to a national level supposedly. And the union lost. Due to the company saying, "Well they get no insurance for a full year, so this bonus makes up for it."
Yes the majority of all the people hired to work in the building are kids. That are on their parents insurance already. Hell, they probably don't even need insurance at that age. I never did when I got hired 15 years ago. The company using leverage on the union failing on a prior contract when it went from 90 days to get insurance all the way up to a full year.
My BA said the bonuses are allowed because of an educational program that also pays for living expenses is allowed and thus considered to be a bonus. However, any bonus must be approved by the union in local 705
View attachment 197178
I would love to see the documents and decision of the case on why the bonus is allowed.
My BA said the bonuses are allowed because of an educational program that also pays for living expenses is allowed and thus considered to be a bonus. However, any bonus must be approved by the union in local 705
View attachment 197178
I would love to see the documents and decision of the case on why the bonus is allowed.
We do have incentives for new hires such as education benefits BUT that bonus is approved by the union in local 705. How does the new hire weekly bonus get approved by the union??That makes sense. When we lost our class action grievance in arbitration, the BA said UPS was claiming past-practice as their defense. And in retrospect, we do have a history of letting UPS use targeted incentives on new hires, like the education benefits.
Im assuming that it does not get approved by the unionWe do have incentives for new hires such as education benefits BUT that bonus is approved by the union in local 705. How does the new hire weekly bonus get approved by the union??