pkgdriver
Well-Known Member
Yep I saw RPS taking plenty of our business in the early nineties. Consignee billing and tracking may have been a couple of the reasons.
New retirement vacation policy
- Thread starter upscorpis
- Start date
UPS is such an honest company that highly values it's personnel.
texan
Well-Known Member
I was in the admin group. I volunteer in my Congregation office doing admin things now.
Signature Only
Blue in Brown
As I recall the company wanted control over the pension funds. They would leave the muti-employer Teamster plans across the country and substitute a "company only" plan. Control over investments would have been by equal numbers of union and company people like the Teamster plans but payouts at various years of service points would have been company set.
They were looking at $3000.00 per month after 30 years I think. We didn't want to see UPS get their hands on all that money with only the promise of "taking care of bar-unit employees" in the coming years.
Nobody trusted UPS to do the right thing as the years rolled on and looking at the current management benefits its crystal clear that those fears were well founded and the decision to strike was right.
QUOTE="Old Man Jingles, post: 3876880, member: 18222"]What would UPS be like to work for had the strike not occurred, when or if we would be a public company.
UPS was never an easy company to work for. It required dedication and compliance with many rules.
UPS put out in 2000-2003 several memos to employees that UPS would not be 'our' Paternal protector in regards to "hire to grave" that it had been. All UPS employees were considered part of a big family ... that was the culture.
Would pt employees stayed full time, ( I understand there was a time all were ft) what would Wages for pt and ft and management be at current or below or higher.
I started in 1973 and there were P/T galore.
Wages would be pretty much the same as now for Union people ... way above industry average.
Market conditions have driven the Non-Union salaries and wages down to industry average.
Consequently, Non-operations management are not expected to work the hours like they did prior to 2003
22.4s would they exist,etc.
22.3 would not exist in my opinion but 22.4 may have developed.
Please elaborate as much as you care to or can give your experiences within the UPS system and culture.
When I started with UPS, the ratio of outside to P/T going friend/T was 1 to 1.
UPS told the P/T that they had to be in college and were expected to leave UPS when they graduated.
I was approached by UPS management as I approached graduation and they explained to me the benefits of going into friend/T Management so I stayed with UPS when it was offered. (I quit a friend/T Engineering job to go friend/T with UPS)
I think in the 1977 contract and in the early 80's, the expectations of a P/T going to friend/T driving began to progress in the direction it is today. I was in Personnel (Human Resources) for 4 years in the early 1980's and I never hired a P/T employee that was not a student except during Peak Season.
UPS was in a growth mode and so this worked out but as UPS expanded into the entire United States, the growth began to slow down in the early 90's (recession hurt too).
There was a huge gap between UPS and the Teamsters regarding the expectations of the P/T going into friend/T positions. UPS expected the P/T to leave after 4 or 5 years while the Union saw a progression into friend/T driving positions.
Both UPS and the Teamsters have adapted in various ways since then but the overall quality/threshold of the friend/T UPS Driver (according to long-held beliefs) has changed considerably since the P/T to friend/T progression rate has become almost totally Union P/T to Union friend/T.
I don't have any opinions on the downward spiral of the quality of UPS employees as it reflects the reality of today's competitive environment. It is what it is and it will be in the future what it has to be.[/QUOTE]
They were looking at $3000.00 per month after 30 years I think. We didn't want to see UPS get their hands on all that money with only the promise of "taking care of bar-unit employees" in the coming years.
Nobody trusted UPS to do the right thing as the years rolled on and looking at the current management benefits its crystal clear that those fears were well founded and the decision to strike was right.
QUOTE="Old Man Jingles, post: 3876880, member: 18222"]What would UPS be like to work for had the strike not occurred, when or if we would be a public company.
UPS was never an easy company to work for. It required dedication and compliance with many rules.
UPS put out in 2000-2003 several memos to employees that UPS would not be 'our' Paternal protector in regards to "hire to grave" that it had been. All UPS employees were considered part of a big family ... that was the culture.
Would pt employees stayed full time, ( I understand there was a time all were ft) what would Wages for pt and ft and management be at current or below or higher.
I started in 1973 and there were P/T galore.
Wages would be pretty much the same as now for Union people ... way above industry average.
Market conditions have driven the Non-Union salaries and wages down to industry average.
Consequently, Non-operations management are not expected to work the hours like they did prior to 2003
22.4s would they exist,etc.
22.3 would not exist in my opinion but 22.4 may have developed.
Please elaborate as much as you care to or can give your experiences within the UPS system and culture.
When I started with UPS, the ratio of outside to P/T going friend/T was 1 to 1.
UPS told the P/T that they had to be in college and were expected to leave UPS when they graduated.
I was approached by UPS management as I approached graduation and they explained to me the benefits of going into friend/T Management so I stayed with UPS when it was offered. (I quit a friend/T Engineering job to go friend/T with UPS)
I think in the 1977 contract and in the early 80's, the expectations of a P/T going to friend/T driving began to progress in the direction it is today. I was in Personnel (Human Resources) for 4 years in the early 1980's and I never hired a P/T employee that was not a student except during Peak Season.
UPS was in a growth mode and so this worked out but as UPS expanded into the entire United States, the growth began to slow down in the early 90's (recession hurt too).
There was a huge gap between UPS and the Teamsters regarding the expectations of the P/T going into friend/T positions. UPS expected the P/T to leave after 4 or 5 years while the Union saw a progression into friend/T driving positions.
Both UPS and the Teamsters have adapted in various ways since then but the overall quality/threshold of the friend/T UPS Driver (according to long-held beliefs) has changed considerably since the P/T to friend/T progression rate has become almost totally Union P/T to Union friend/T.
I don't have any opinions on the downward spiral of the quality of UPS employees as it reflects the reality of today's competitive environment. It is what it is and it will be in the future what it has to be.[/QUOTE]
Old Man Jingles
Rat out of a cage
And so you trusted the Teamsters?
How'd that work out?
Guess you were screwed no matter what decision the Union members made.
P
pickup
Guest
And not only for that reason. More demand for the stock makes the price go up benefitting those who were already holding.
brownIEman
Well-Known Member
You're ignoring the fact that this was 4 years before the stock went public. As a private company the board set the stock price, not the market, demand was not yet a factor.
brownIEman
Well-Known Member
Payouts would not have been set by the company. They would have been negotiated between the company and IBT. The company could not have changed then arbitrarily.
The company wanted to pay to get out of the multi employer plans and set a company only plan for UPSERS only. Think about that, only one company, UPS, would be paying into that plan. "All that money" you didn't want to see UPS get there hands on would have been UPS' own money paid into the plan per the offered contract. The teamsters sold you on the propaganda that UPS was making a greatg money grab at it's own money.
Ironically, I just spoke to a buddy who was part of the border line management pensioners. He left the company in 08 with 15 years. They offered him a buy out of the pension he'd be eligible for in about 17 years a year or so back. He did the math and determined they would have to offer him into 6 figures so he could invest it in that time to make it worth while. They offered him just exactly what his math showed so he took it.
Yes, they are phasing out management pensions, but they are taking care of the pensioners on the way out. How's the IBT doing with the CS pensioners as that fund implodes?
DELACROIX
In the Spirit of Honore' Daumier
They have too..It is Federal law (ERISA)..If they could they would lawyer out of it. The money grab would be an appropriate term considering that with a any Pension Plan that UPS totally controls including the IBT/UPS Pension Plan is a Defined Benefit Plan. They only have to pay an annual contribution at the end of the year to cover the promised benefit, they are under no obligation to pay per Article 34 (Master). That is one of the reasons that their is so much disparity with our union pension benefits, one region gets this, one area gets another.
The current Central States underfunding was a result of UPS trying to get out of their liability back in l997, they offered that 100 dollars per full time / 50 dollars per part time pension benefit capped at 35 years knowing that the Central would have to increase their pension putting more pressure on the decreasing active members to cover the growing number of pensioners. With that offer the vested funds in the Central would of been used at the beginning of one's retirement not at the age of 65. Retirement Medical was included at 50 dollars a month per family, for sure that would of went up. Let's not sugar coat this this was a money grab.
The elimination of the UPS Retirement Plan in 2023 could be a result of the Central going belly up, it will free about 3 billion a year in contributions that would cover any losses with their agreement made with covering any any elimination or reductions that may occur with the Central's underfunding. The timetable of the next contract is kind of obvious (2023).
The current Central States underfunding was a result of UPS trying to get out of their liability back in l997, they offered that 100 dollars per full time / 50 dollars per part time pension benefit capped at 35 years knowing that the Central would have to increase their pension putting more pressure on the decreasing active members to cover the growing number of pensioners. With that offer the vested funds in the Central would of been used at the beginning of one's retirement not at the age of 65. Retirement Medical was included at 50 dollars a month per family, for sure that would of went up. Let's not sugar coat this this was a money grab.
The elimination of the UPS Retirement Plan in 2023 could be a result of the Central going belly up, it will free about 3 billion a year in contributions that would cover any losses with their agreement made with covering any any elimination or reductions that may occur with the Central's underfunding. The timetable of the next contract is kind of obvious (2023).
brownIEman
Well-Known Member
Maybe they would have lawyered out of it, that is irrelevant speculation because they cannot, anymore than they could lawyer out of their obligation under the now solely UPS/IBT pensions they are in. Remember, the exit UPS tried in '97, it got in 2007, and none of the nefarious destruction of the UPSers pensions so prevalent in the IBT propaganda from '97 has come to pass. Even in the CS fiasco, the UPSer's will be better taken care of than most.
This was an attempt by UPS to save money to compete with lower cost competition. You want to call that a money grab, so be it. For the record, UPS was not trying to get out of its liability (they knew they could not lawyer out of that), it was trying to exit the fund by paying off it's liability, with $2B in '97 (remember, that is above what it had already paid for UPS pensioners) then finally with $6B in '07. It is hardly UPS's fault the fund lost all that money in the '08-'09 financial crash.
The increase benefit UPS offered was not done knowing CS would have to increase their benefit. It was an attempt to get the members to vote yes on UPS', contract offer. Saying that offer forced the IBT to up the benefit with no way to fund such an increase is completely nonsensical. It would be like if you had your house foreclosed on because you could not afford the mortgage and you blame the guy you beat out on in bidding when you bought the house. "I only offered more than I could afford for this house because of how much you bid, so it's really your fault I am being foreclosed on now!!" Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? The IBT had the trust of the membership enough to take them out on strike without a vote on UPS' offer, they should have had enough trust to let them know they could not afford increased benefits without killing the fund.
Again, UPS is trying to reduce its huge cost picture. I have a hard time believing it will free up $3B/Year, were do you get that figure from? Assuming they were putting away $30K/year for each management employee in the plan, that would be 100,000 management employees. Not sure there are that many, or that they were contributing that much. Either way, they will need to find ways to pay for the part of the CS liability that they are still on the hook for.
DELACROIX
In the Spirit of Honore' Daumier
I believe the master plan is to extend their Central States pension liabilities. The IBT/UPS pension plan for the most part covers early retirement benefits for their union members. When the union members reach 65 their costs are offset by any vested time under the Central, with ever passing year their liability gets reduced. The same can be said for any retiree's medical benefit when medicare kicks in, less financial drain on the Health and Welfare plans.
During the last contract it was stated that the average weekly monetary contribution that is going into either the Pension or the Health and Welfare plans was running about 450 to 500 a week per full time union employee. Quick math: 24,000 to 26,000 annually per plan. That 3 Billion total might be correct considering they contributed about 5 billion last year into all their controlled pension trusts. I know that back in the mid nineties their was roughly 65,000 management or non union people who had vest time under the UPS Retirement Plan. I am presuming that today it is close to that total.
If you study the weekly monetary contribution per Article 34 (master) you will find that after the l997 strike the following contracts greatly increased the funding into the unions's Pension Plans, primarily the Central States. It was an failed attempt to help the Central's future underfunding issues, the crash in the markets in 2008 was one of the nails in the coffin. It is still the ugly elephant in the room and may be addressed with the next contract with it's projected insolvency, time will tell.
During the last contract it was stated that the average weekly monetary contribution that is going into either the Pension or the Health and Welfare plans was running about 450 to 500 a week per full time union employee. Quick math: 24,000 to 26,000 annually per plan. That 3 Billion total might be correct considering they contributed about 5 billion last year into all their controlled pension trusts. I know that back in the mid nineties their was roughly 65,000 management or non union people who had vest time under the UPS Retirement Plan. I am presuming that today it is close to that total.
If you study the weekly monetary contribution per Article 34 (master) you will find that after the l997 strike the following contracts greatly increased the funding into the unions's Pension Plans, primarily the Central States. It was an failed attempt to help the Central's future underfunding issues, the crash in the markets in 2008 was one of the nails in the coffin. It is still the ugly elephant in the room and may be addressed with the next contract with it's projected insolvency, time will tell.
For those management employees who were around when UPS changed the vacation accrual policy from earning vacation in the current year for the following year to earning all vacation in the current year for the current year, UPS owes you vacation. I was one of those employees and when UPS gave me my six weeks plus one when I retired, they didn’t give me anything. They owed it to me.
The policy change did result in a few folks retiring at the very start of this year so I guess mission accomplished. I've also heard that some people have already been spoken to about taking a demotion or a buy out. The buy out people would be impacted by the policy change so there's more money for Scooter Lowprice to claim in his ledger.
Popeye
Well-Known Member
And don't tell your management team that this is what you're doing. I confirmed with HR that it's possible to retire without giving any notice. You can just decide to tell your boss, "by the way, today is my last day. AMF!". It may delay the start of collecting your pension, but you won't actually lose any money. Before the VRP came up and I accepted it this is exactly what I planned to do. My dept manager was a dishonest little prick and I was looking forward to leaving him high and dry with no notice.
ski or die
Ski or Die
You might have made a mistake. First, they will put you on the "Do Not Rehire List", and second, they will post a picture of you in the guard shack and you won't be allowed in the building to visit or pick up your Christmas Turkey.
Popeye
Well-Known Member
By accepting the VRP I’m not eligible to be rehired anyway. I don’t foresee this being a problem. I don’t expect to ever set foot on UPS premesis again and I won’t miss it a bit.
