Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JL 0513" data-source="post: 6157853" data-attributes="member: 50088">I&#039;m still confused as to why UPS agreed to a promise no business can promise, adding an arbitrary amount of jobs in the future. Sean O&#039;Brien seems to lack this basic understanding of economics. Say the country fell into a depression during the contract, UPS must legally be bound to creating 10&#039;s of thousands of jobs? What good is all of this if UPS goes out of business? Economics is economics, Union or not. UPS is a business first, everything else has to follow. SOB keeps saying UPS is driven by profit. Well I hope so, because that&#039;s the only way we have jobs. SOB talks like UPS has to be a non-profit while also paying us twice as much as competitors. He&#039;s not putting two and two together in that the &quot;historic contract&quot; he delivered has forced this restructuring for the company to continue to survive.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="JL 0513, post: 6157853, member: 50088"] I'm still confused as to why UPS agreed to a promise no business can promise, adding an arbitrary amount of jobs in the future. Sean O'Brien seems to lack this basic understanding of economics. Say the country fell into a depression during the contract, UPS must legally be bound to creating 10's of thousands of jobs? What good is all of this if UPS goes out of business? Economics is economics, Union or not. UPS is a business first, everything else has to follow. SOB keeps saying UPS is driven by profit. Well I hope so, because that's the only way we have jobs. SOB talks like UPS has to be a non-profit while also paying us twice as much as competitors. He's not putting two and two together in that the "historic contract" he delivered has forced this restructuring for the company to continue to survive. [/QUOTE]

Verification