New retirement vacation policy

[UPSER1987]

Things are what you make of it. The 80s and early 90s were a much different and better time for all involved-including our customers.
On a side note, why would anyone buy stock into such a supposedly “inept” company- whether you worked there or not?

 

[Popeye]

I agree .The notion that we were all a happy family before the strike is complete BS. I started in 1983 and if that was a “Family “, I am glad I made my own...

UPS is a very big company. People working for the company at the same time but in different places or departments will have vastly different experiences. It's always been this way.

 

[bowhnterdon]

My point was that before the strike, I never saw where we treated well. After the strike, it did get worse, but even if we had never gone on strike, we were never going to be a real part of the Company.. Never..

 

[Old Man Jingles]

My point was that before the strike, I never saw where we treated well. After the strike, it did get worse, but even if we had never gone on strike, we were never going to be a real part of the Company.. Never..

Actually, just you!

 

[DOK]

The IPO benefited everyone who owned stock in 1999. At least in the short term. In the long term it put the financial fate of that piece of their portfolio in the hands of outside forces. A privately held UPS portfolio would not have lost around 20% of it's value this year.

UPS was looking to reduce costs to better compete and get capital to expand into other markets. That effort failed spectacularly in 97 and undoubtedly hastened the decision to go public if it did not cement the decision entirely.

YYYUUUUPPP!

A privately held UPS would have a P/E Ratio of 12-14%.

Even with the precipitous drop of the last couple months, the UPS Stock P/E
did not quite reach the upper range of 14%.
Ergo, UPS's stock price never dropped down to the highest it would ever be priced under a Privately Held UPS.

I remember all the excitement of DIVERSIFICATION!
We did keep some of the technology acquisitions from that Oz Land period.

Regarding the stock, pre ipo it seemed to split regularly, it hasn’t yet post ipo, you think we’ll see a split any time soon?

 

[Old Man Jingles]

Regarding the stock, pre ipo it seemed to split regularly, it hasn’t yet post ipo, you think we’ll see a split any time soon?

Not really any reason to do so ... therefore, NO.

 

[Frankie's Friend]

Going public had been considered for over 15 years prior to 1999.
The market conditions were there prior to 1997 but the Board was reluctant to go public because they knew it would change the culture at UPS and the Board and Management Committee felt a paternal loyalty to its employees ... both Union and non-Union.
After the disloyalty and abandonment by the Union employees in 1997, that sense of loyalty and paternal relationship was gone and so the UPS BOD and Management Committee made the change to go public.
It's all current history after that.

Like you, I am completely perplexed how many of the Union employees do not understand that 1997 was a turning point in UPS's decision to go public.

That sounds like a good hypothesis but looking at it from the other side of the fence I will say that NO hourly employee wanted to be put on HMOs and we sure as heck did not trust the company to make our compensation "performance based". There was enough animosity left over from years of abusive supervision for those two issues alone to make us open to a work stoppage.

The company took the first swing and that's where the divorce proceedings started.

Not all management was abusive but there was enough of them over the years that even being "self directed" and a "team" didnt diminish the ridiculous two issues (with increased subcontracting) above offered.

Most here haven’t been around long enough to know or don’t educate themselves to know the origins. Most people just blindly agree with the majority of anything as its the easiest path.

A swing and a strike.

I'm not sure I agree.

Going public benefited two groups of people:
1) the already filthy rich descendants of the already filthy rich founding fathers and;

2) the managers and supervisors who were rewarded with stock and "hypo-loaned" their home, wife, kids and collected beer cans to buy stock when it split (like rabbits).

The PTer and FTer that buys $50 of stock every payday really isn't benefiting.

Going public had nothing to do with 1997.

If the company had gotten the pension away from the Teamsters they probably wouldn't have had to go public...at least for a while.

 

[DOK]

Regarding the stock, pre ipo it seemed to split regularly, it hasn’t yet post ipo, you think we’ll see a split any time soon?

Not really any reason to do so ... therefore, NO.

What would be a good reason to split? I apologize for my lack of investment knowledge.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

What would be a good reason to split? I apologize for my lack of investment knowledge.

In today's market (with UPS) not much reason since most UPS stock is owned by huge institutional entities.
The reason UPS use to split stock was to make it seem the buyers (management) were getting more for their money. A price of $25 share means each manger could buy more shares of stock for a given amount.
Anytime you market to a free populace of many individuals, the same idea applies ... more shares for a given amount.

 

[Frankie's Friend]

I call BS. Maybe one or 2 bone heads were peeved at the decision. Most management were happy to try and get drivers on board with having a vested interest in the company doing well financially. I never met a management person who thought that was a bad idea.

The opening to non management purchasing stock was not limited to bargaining unit employees btw. Non union, non management employees such as technical and clerical employees were also allowed to buy at that time.

They wanted all of us "self directed" team players to be "owners" (of stock) so they could cheapen our healthcare, make our raises "performance based" and basically accept the concessions in the 97 company proposals. When it didn't work they said "screw you ungrateful union parasites" and that is when the "family team" concept got flushed. I was there...read the proposed sheets from the company. It was a joke. Animosity abounded and we were all in disbelief of the company demands in a prosperous time.

The pension fund (CS) bled money in 97 before the company offered the $1000 bump. The union matched it and the leaking ship then became the Titanic.

Idk how anyone would feel or believe this workplace had a family atmosphere prior to 97. A few months of relaxed "standards" did not erase the culture in the workplace.

 

[Frankie's Friend]

UPS is a very big company. People working for the company at the same time but in different places or departments will have vastly different experiences. It's always been this way.

The hourly "experience" precipitated a strike.
185,000 walked.
I guess that described our vast experience with the big company.

 

[UPSER1987]

Hence the correct statement:

Most here haven’t been around long enough to know or don’t educate themselves to know the origins. Most people just blindly agree with the majority of anything as its the easiest path.

 

[Frankie's Friend]

Hence the correct statement:

Hence...the arrogance or shall we say

"the divide between management and hourly".

It's the gift that keeps on giving.

Your best secret weapon is about to retire and then it just very possible that history will repeat itself. "Most" that weren't there may just become the "most" that go there.

 

[PT Car Washer]

They wanted all of us "self directed" team players to be "owners" (of stock) so they could cheapen our healthcare, make our raises "performance based" and basically accept the concessions in the 97 company proposals. When it didn't work they said "screw you ungrateful union parasites" and that is when the "family team" concept got flushed. I was there...read the proposed sheets from the company. It was a joke. Animosity abounded and we were all in disbelief of the company demands in a prosperous time.

The pension fund (CS) bled money in 97 before the company offered the $1000 bump. The union matched it and the leaking ship then became the Titanic.

Idk how anyone would feel or believe this workplace had a family atmosphere prior to 97. A few months of relaxed "standards" did not erase the culture in the workplace.

This is the way I remember the what led up to the strike. The company pushed the members into it. Of course the Union slogan of helping the PT was a joke also.

 

[Frankie's Friend]

This is the way I remember the what led up to the strike. The company pushed the members into it. Of course the Union slogan of helping the PT was a joke also.

Carey shifted gears and got public support on the part time America issue.
But the real deal was the rank and file's lack of trust in what the company promised (the performance based raises issue was seen as a trojan horse) due to years of perceived falsehood, harassment, and disregard for any cba negotiated in the past.

It wasnt even that we (in our building) had it in for management or the company as a whole but rather that the concessionary issues proposed by the company were so skewed that there was no way we were going to agree to their "last, best, and final offer".
What happened to the "team"?

Every bargaining gain in the corporate world comes with pain and resolve. It's the norm, reality, and a choice that every union member has got to decide. Stand up for the next generation or allow the erosion to take over.

 

[Frankie's Friend]

Honestly, I feel bad for the vast number of management who are truly great people just trying to do their job to the best of their ability and trying to support their families.
The reality of today's corporate goals not only often divorce the bargaining unit workers but it seems that profits trump people's futures who have spent their lives trying to feed the machine.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

Hence the correct statement:

Dave!
Welcome back!

 

[BakerMayfield2018]

Honestly, I feel bad for the vast number of management who are truly great people just trying to do their job to the best of their ability and trying to support their families.
The reality of today's corporate goals not only often divorce the bargaining unit workers but it seems that profits trump people's futures who have spent their lives trying to feed the machine.

U feel bad for unicorns

 

[Old Man Jingles]

U feel bad for unicorns

Lord Voldemort certainly did not feel anything but bad for unicorns!

 

[brownIEman]

They wanted all of us "self directed" team players to be "owners" (of stock) so they could cheapen our healthcare, make our raises "performance based" and basically accept the concessions in the 97 company proposals. When it didn't work they said "screw you ungrateful union parasites" and that is when the "family team" concept got flushed. I was there...read the proposed sheets from the company. It was a joke. Animosity abounded and we were all in disbelief of the company demands in a prosperous time.

The pension fund (CS) bled money in 97 before the company offered the $1000 bump. The union matched it and the leaking ship then became the Titanic.

Idk how anyone would feel or believe this workplace had a family atmosphere prior to 97. A few months of relaxed "standards" did not erase the culture in the workplace.

There was no Kumbaya we're all great loving family. It was always a tough business. There were plenty of management that thought the only way to get effective work out of hourlies was to be a prick, just as there were drivers that sat around enjoying a grand slam at Denny's on the clock sheeting packages.

There was, prior to 97, a culture in upper management that we were all in the business together, both hourly and management, we all wanted to see the business succeed long term. The union successful sold the hourly that the company only wanted to screw them, so the hourly screwed the company.

The team concept was actually already on the way out prior to the strike, because it had showed no dividends. Oz Nelson was removed as CEO partly because that was his boondoggle, and he had already been replaced by Kelly prior to the strike.

The union should have been able to explain financial realities to their members. I've heard the argument many times that UPS somehow forced the union to match their offer just by making it and therefore forced them to more quickly kill the CS plan. That argument is completely without merit.

UPS was losing market share, primarily due to cost disadvantages. The leadership at the time was taking the long view. Financially the company was strong, but they saw the writing on the wall. They wanted to make changes to control cost growth while they were strong, not try to do it from a failing company. That's why the CSTC's and DI and COD sites were consolidated, among others.
The leaders were correct about the loss of market share. What they did not anticipate was the level to which e commerce would expand the market. UPS continues to lose market share, and continues to grow as the market growth makes up for it.

There were no merrit based raises for hourlies in UPS proposals, not sure where you're getting that. There was a profit sharing bonus proposed that would have been based on the profit performance of the company, not the performance of any individual if that's what you mean.