The Teamsters would have a lot less Union dues coming in every month.;Tells me that the union should have never let UPS to create the pt position to begin with.
Why does this tell you that the union should have never let UPS to create the pt position to begin with?Tells me that the union should have never let UPS to create the pt position to begin with.
Why would there be less dues?The Teamsters would have a lot less Union dues coming in every month.;
UPS would only need a 1/3 of the current PT work force if they were replaced by FT.Why would there be less dues?
Thanks for your contributionI am really sorry.UPS would only need a 1/3 of the current PT work force if they were replaced by FT.
I looked very carefully on line for this information.218000 union employees in the US. The split is almost 50/50 on part-time and full-time
Basically it is just a wild guess. Consider you would only need half of the PT workforce working 3 1/2 hours compared to FT working 8 hours. Than you consider the FT would be experienced and trained long term employees. Also consider UPS would not need the army of PT sups who pretty much do the same work as the PT Union members they are suppose to be supervising. You have to agree that the Teamsters would lose a lot of dues paying members who most likely would be more involve in Union politics. That also could be a threat to the Union leadership.Thanks for your contributionI am really sorry.
I don’t understand your math.
Would you be so kind to explain it?
Again I am sorry .
Thanks.Basically it is just a wild guess. Consider you would only need half of the PT workforce working 3 1/2 hours compared to FT working 8 hours. Than you consider the FT would be experienced and trained long term employees. Also consider UPS would not need the army of PT sups who pretty much do the same work as the PT Union members they are suppose to be supervising. You have to agree that the Teamsters would lose a lot of dues paying members who most likely would be more involve in Union politics. That also could be a threat to the Union leadership.
That there are 170,100 part-timers and 72,900 full-timers covered?Not sure of accuracy but will have to do to further discussion.
Published online.
UPS Master covers: 243,00 members.
+ 70% are part time for discussion purposes will use 70% even.
Which means UPS Master covers:
170,100 Part-time members
and
72,900 Full-Time members.
If these numbers are true or even close to true what does this tell you?
That is obvious but if true it tells me the Part-timers have an overwhelming majority of votes and if properly organized could exercise serious control over the UPS Collective bargaining process and other areas that are established by membership vote.That there are 170,100 part-timers and 72,900 full-timers covered?
Most of them don't stay herr long enough to vote on her next contractThat is obvious but if true it tells me the Part-timers have an overwhelming majority of votes and if properly organized could exercise serious control over the UPS Collective bargaining process and other areas that are established by membership vote.
Never going to happen. Both UPS and the Teamster leadership want a divided Union. Makes control much easier. They even found a way to divide the delivery drivers with the new 22.4 language.That is obvious but if true it tells me the Part-timers have an overwhelming majority of votes and if properly organized could exercise serious control over the UPS Collective bargaining process and other areas that are established by membership vote.
I do know there is a portion of the part-time work force that is transient however in my area there are many part-timers that are long time employees.Most of them don't stay herr long enough to vote on her next contract
Many but not most in my area.Most of them don't stay herr long enough to vote on her next contract