Strike Rumors

[rod]

I don't think Rod is "here." I think he's retired.
- - - -
By the way, you can make thirty dollars an hour working for almost any sucessful business. Just negotiate a contract where half the workers take a huge cut in pay and benefits, and add that money to the pay of the other half.

HINT: be sure you are among the second half.

I'm neither here nor there: I'm everywhere!

[video=youtube;XcQfy1SavdQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcQfy1SavdQ[/video]

 

[JonFrum]

First off, Crowbar, I am not picking on you, just happened to pick your post to reply to this idea of "minimum" that several people have mentioned on this thread and in others in the past on the board.

Now, to all those bringing up the point that the pay in the contract is just the minimum, and UPS can voluntarily pay more any time it wants, please stop. You sound like idiots when you say that. Don't believe me? Consider this, the pay scales in the contract are a business agreement negotiated between UPS and the bargaining unit employees (through their representative the teamsters). Like any other business agreement.

So, try this. Next time you are planning to move, and you go to sell your house, after all the negotiating is done with your realtor, the buyer, their realtor, and the final communications are going back and forth, I want you to tell your buyer "now, this price we have agreed on is only a minimum, you can pay me more if you want, and if you really cared about me you would, you can afford it"

Try it. I would be willing to bet every one involved will look at you as though you sound like and idiot.

Contractually negotiated wage rates are minimums to allow for the payment of time-and-one-half (and maybe double time), to allow for someone working in a higher pay classification for part of the day to be paid the higher pay all day, to allow for an air driver to be paid package car driver rate when handling ground packages, to allow for premium pay on a sixth punch, to allow a highly-paid part-timer to be grandfathered at the higher rate when he goes full-time, to pay driver Bonus, to allow the payment of the "extra dollar" to all part-timers in areas where UPS can't attract enough warm bodies, etc.

UPS can pay higher wages if they want to, just as they can give us a holiday turkey, safety awards, years of service awards, stock purchase discounts and tuition reimbursement etc. if they want to.

Also check your Maintainence of Standards clause in your Supplement.

And finally, there's . . .
ARTICLE 22. PART-TIME EMPLOYEES
Sections 5.Wages
The wage rates and increases provided in (a) and (b) shall be a minimum.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

My question would be if the grass is greener somewhere else (no pun intended) why are you here?

He is no longer here but has been unable to move on.

 

[hypocrisy]

First off, Crowbar, I am not picking on you, just happened to pick your post to reply to this idea of "minimum" that several people have mentioned on this thread and in others in the past on the board.

Now, to all those bringing up the point that the pay in the contract is just the minimum, and UPS can voluntarily pay more any time it wants, please stop. You sound like idiots when you say that. Don't believe me? Consider this, the pay scales in the contract are a business agreement negotiated between UPS and the bargaining unit employees (through their representative the teamsters). Like any other business agreement.

So, try this. Next time you are planning to move, and you go to sell your house, after all the negotiating is done with your realtor, the buyer, their realtor, and the final communications are going back and forth, I want you to tell your buyer "now, this price we have agreed on is only a minimum, you can pay me more if you want, and if you really cared about me you would, you can afford it"

Try it. I would be willing to bet every one involved will look at you as though you sound like and idiot.

As JonFrum pointed out, that's the language in the contract that the Company agreed to. Your original post made it sound as if the Teamsters demanded an inferior wage for future part-timers when in fact it was the Company that seemed to think that we could attract a better UPSer by offering less money than you could make at the McDonald's near my house and withholding benefits for a year. Now I've always said that UPS is the kind of job that pays off in the long term but that's getting pretty ridiculous!

I think the Company would be pretty smart to notify the Teamsters that "Hey, we might have screwed up on that whole wage/benefit thing for the part-timers. Seems we let that jerk-off Bob run the numbers and he was just trying to polish his own crown for the higher ups. We're going to bump that up to a more competitive wage so we get some real quality people looking at UPS as a career since it's pretty hard for the average Joe-off-the-street to go from Christmas hire to Driver anymore. We'll go ahead and extend benefits after 6 months like we used to since we went ahead and included domestic partners a while back while ignoring the people who are actually breaking their backs for us every day".

Of course, that's just my opinion.

I think your real estate argument doesn't hold a lot of water either. I won't pretend to be an expert on real estate but I notice quite often that property around my city goes for significantly more than the original asking price. I could see where someone went through the negotiations as you expressed and then in the "final communications" said "You know Bob, I see that you put a lot of extras in that backyard shop you've got there. I'm really liking that whole machine shop setup you've got back there. How about I throw another $20k cherry on top and you just leave it all as-is?"

 

[UnconTROLLed]

First off, Crowbar, I am not picking on you, just happened to pick your post to reply to this idea of "minimum" that several people have mentioned on this thread and in others in the past on the board.

Now, to all those bringing up the point that the pay in the contract is just the minimum, and UPS can voluntarily pay more any time it wants, please stop. You sound like idiots when you say that. Don't believe me? Consider this, the pay scales in the contract are a business agreement negotiated between UPS and the bargaining unit employees (through their representative the teamsters). Like any other business agreement.

So, try this. Next time you are planning to move, and you go to sell your house, after all the negotiating is done with your realtor, the buyer, their realtor, and the final communications are going back and forth, I want you to tell your buyer "now, this price we have agreed on is only a minimum, you can pay me more if you want, and if you really cared about me you would, you can afford it"

Try it. I would be willing to bet every one involved will look at you as though you sound like and idiot.

Great post. You managed to cram in the arrogant, all-knowing management mentality with a hint of indecency and insulting flair.

Perfect recipe, except next time when the retort is logical, make sure you give the blank stare and look-away in a more timely manner. Also, wipe your nose of all the drugs dripping out, IE is supposed to be " behind the scenes" operations.

Anti-Socks

 

[FracusBrown]

where is it written that a blue collar worker that breaks his back for a living should only make a living wage?are the only people that should make 60k/year plus white collar or what?dont our kids deserve to have the same things that white collar kids get.if a company can afford to pay $30/hour and still turn mega profit why is that bad.i dont know what kind of homelife you have but 3 kids and a wife eats $30/hour up pretty quick.20years ago $30/hour and you were rich,now in todays times you are definitly not rich.

The sad truth in economics is that employees don't deserve any more than they are worth in any legitimate business.

The employee's value determines their worth in the real world. Employment is not a social program where the needs of the employee or profitability dictates pay. Any employee can participate in the profit and well being of any publicly traded company by purchasing stock in the company. If you want an equal share of the profit, put up some risk that goes along with it. If needs dictated pay, wouldn't it be fair to pay people with less needs less money? Do you think Microsoft pays their workers ten times more than oracle just because the company makes more money? On the other side of the equation, people don't work for free when a company is not profitable.

 

[brownIEman]

Great post. You managed to cram in the arrogant, all-knowing management mentality with a hint of indecency and insulting flair.

Perfect recipe, except next time when the retort is logical, make sure you give the blank stare and look-away in a more timely manner. Also, wipe your nose of all the drugs dripping out, IE is supposed to be " behind the scenes" operations.

Anti-Socks

thanks for the advice. Maybe I will try it if I ever actually do get a response with some logic in it. yours is, as I am sure you are aware, completely lacking in it.

 

[brownIEman]

As JonFrum pointed out, that's the language in the contract that the Company agreed to. Your original post made it sound as if the Teamsters demanded an inferior wage for future part-timers when in fact it was the Company that seemed to think that we could attract a better UPSer by offering less money than you could make at the McDonald's near my house and withholding benefits for a year. Now I've always said that UPS is the kind of job that pays off in the long term but that's getting pretty ridiculous!

I never meant to imply the teamsters demanded a low wage for part-timers. It does seem they did not fight very hard for it though. If the company insisted on the part time rates we currently have, and the union had made it a first line priority to get them significantly higher, they could have gotten it by either giving concessions in other areas like full time pay rates or by holding out and threatening to strike. Did they do either of those?

I think the Company would be pretty smart to notify the Teamsters that "Hey, we might have screwed up on that whole wage/benefit thing for the part-timers. Seems we let that jerk-off Bob run the numbers and he was just trying to polish his own crown for the higher ups. We're going to bump that up to a more competitive wage so we get some real quality people looking at UPS as a career since it's pretty hard for the average Joe-off-the-street to go from Christmas hire to Driver anymore. We'll go ahead and extend benefits after 6 months like we used to since we went ahead and included domestic partners a while back while ignoring the people who are actually breaking their backs for us every day".

Of course, that's just my opinion.

For what it is worth, that is exactly what I would do were I running the company. I think it makes more sense in the long run, paying more for quality workers in part time ranks, as well as easing off the push for more work per car per day and putting more driver on road to improve service. The down side is that would lead to running in the red for a few quarters prior to the next contract negotiation.

I think your real estate argument doesn't hold a lot of water either. I won't pretend to be an expert on real estate but I notice quite often that property around my city goes for significantly more than the original asking price. I could see where someone went through the negotiations as you expressed and then in the "final communications" said "You know Bob, I see that you put a lot of extras in that backyard shop you've got there. I'm really liking that whole machine shop setup you've got back there. How about I throw another $20k cherry on top and you just leave it all as-is?"

Your time line is off. Once the contract is signed, the negotiations have been completed the price agreed to by all sides, after all factors (like your machine shop) have already been factored in.

Forget about real estate then. It works for any negotiated agreement. Take buying a car. When was the last time you bought a car, and once you had negotiated the final terms the salesman says "Now this price is just a minimum, you can of course pay us more than this if you would like" ? You would have thought he was an idiot.

 

[Catatonic]

There are a lot of people making that kind of money where I live. Its called working for the government or in the trades. One friend makes $28.50 plus great health ins. and all the other perks and all he does is work for the City Parks Dept. Most of the time he and his partner just drive around the city cleaning the parks. It ain't rocket science. Another friend works for the Street Dept. Once again you don't have to be an Einstein to drive a plow. Another works for the County----I still haven't figured out what he does. They all make 25 to 30 bucks an hour. They get more paid time off,if you include sick time and comp time than any UPS driver ever dreamed of. They get EVERY holiday off. I also have many friends that work in the trades. (plumbing, carpentry, elect., etc) and granted things aren't as good as they used to be but the ones that are good at what they do are all finding work. Hell- I make $17 bucks an hour mowing grass and doing other no talent things for my local township. Thats for a job where I have absolutely no supervision or fixed schedule.

Thanks for the lesson on what is wrong with "government" and why governments all over the country are outsourcing these types of non-core responsibilities and reducing their cost by 50% or more.
Trades are "sort of" or actually are self-employed and these people's compensation are market driven. They should get as much as they can.

 

[JonFrum]

. . .Forget about real estate then. It works for any negotiated agreement. Take buying a car. When was the last time you bought a car, and once you had negotiated the final terms the salesman says "Now this price is just a minimum, you can of course pay us more than this if you would like" ? You would have thought he was an idiot.

When negotiating the selling price of a house or car, the whole idea is to settle on a specific price at that specific moment in time that both sides can agree on. Then the sale is made. End of story.

The negotiated union Contract, on the other hand, will be operative for five (or so)years under a wide range of changing conditions. The Contract itself contains numerous clauses that increase the various "normal" straight time wage rates. And like I said, specifically states that all part-time wages and raises are minimums.

 

[pretzel_man]

When the financial portion of the contract is worked out, it is seen as a package. UPS determines the total amount of money that it is willing to pay in a contract. The finances are seen as a whole pie and UPS and the Teamsters negotiate the final numbers. In one of Jim Casey's speeches he talks about this.

That total pie is divided up into full time wages, part time wages, pension, etc., and I believe the Teamsters have control as to how to divide the pie (I do not know the mechanics of this).

I think that the total % of UPS revenue paid to wages and benefits has been about 65% to 69% for a long time. So, if part time wages increase (as I believe they should), the money will come from somewhere. Some other part of that pie will decrease. That has been the process from the beginning.

I do think UPS screwed up when it allowed part time wages to be so low. I remember when that happened and the reasons we were told. When they did that, it allowed the part of the pie for full time employees to grow and that's where we are today.

I think it somewhat disingenuous to thank the Teamsters for great full time wages and blame UPS for the part time wages. They are both negotiated in the same contract by the same people. You can't take credit for one and pass blame for the other. Both sides got us here.

As far as the concept of a minimum goes, that seems silly to me.... The position seems to be that if conditions change, UPS can pay more. What if conditions worsen, can UPS pay less? Of course not... In the worst financial crisis of our lifetime, many here complained about the loss of a turkey and safety awards which were not part of the contract.

P-Man

 

[JonFrum]

When the financial portion of the contract is worked out, it is seen as a package. UPS determines the total amount of money that it is willing to pay in a contract. The finances are seen as a whole pie and UPS and the Teamsters negotiate the final numbers. In one of Jim Casey's speeches he talks about this.

That total pie is divided up into full time wages, part time wages, pension, etc., and I believe the Teamsters have control as to how to divide the pie (I do not know the mechanics of this).

I think that the total % of UPS revenue paid to wages and benefits has been about 65% to 69% for a long time. So, if part time wages increase (as I believe they should), the money will come from somewhere. Some other part of that pie will decrease. That has been the process from the beginning.

I do think UPS screwed up when it allowed part time wages to be so low. I remember when that happened and the reasons we were told. When they did that, it allowed the part of the pie for full time employees to grow and that's where we are today.

I think it somewhat disingenuous to thank the Teamsters for great full time wages and blame UPS for the part time wages. They are both negotiated in the same contract by the same people. You can't take credit for one and pass blame for the other. Both sides got us here.

As far as the concept of a minimum goes, that seems silly to me.... The position seems to be that if conditions change, UPS can pay more. What if conditions worsen, can UPS pay less? Of course not... In the worst financial crisis of our lifetime, many here complained about the loss of a turkey and safety awards which were not part of the contract.

P-Man

Whatever the behind-closed-doors negotiating process, both sides sign-off on the offer that is put to the members for a vote, so both sides are to blame. In fact, both sides always recomend the Proposal enthusiastically, and call it the "last, best, and final offer." They both endorse the new concessions, and also endorse the many old concessions that are carried forth into the new contract.

The Carnage of '82 should never have been alowed to happen to part-time wage rates. But it did, and has been perpetuated and grown worse ever since as the starting wage has not been raised, and inflation has taken its toll.
- - - -
Wages are minimums in part so that UPS can not cut them during the Contract. If they wern't minimums, UPS could pay feeder drivers less when hauling empty trailers, or no trailer at all; pay package car drivers less if they failed to deliver all the packages and had send agains; pay everyone less while idle during unavoidable delays, etc.

It works like the COLA clause . . .
ARTICLE 33. COST-OF-LIVING (COLA)
All cost-of-living allowances paid under this Agreement will become and remain a fixed part of the base wage rate for all job classifications. A decline in the [Cost-of-Living] Index shall not result in the reduction of classification base wage rates.

 

[rod]

Thanks for the lesson on what is wrong with "government" and why governments all over the country are outsourcing these types of non-core responsibilities and reducing their cost by 50% or more.
Trades are "sort of" or actually are self-employed and these people's compensation are market driven. They should get as much as they can.

We all know what is wrong with the government but I'm not so blind that I fail to realize that no matter who gets elected - major change ain't happening. power corrupts. I didn't say I agree that paying 30 bucks an hour to empty trash at a city park was right- I'm just saying that UPS don't hold the market on high paid unskilled jobs. I always hated being told I was an unskilled worker.

 

[22.34life]

What do you consider a living wage ???? $40 hr, $50 hr, $100 hr, ETC. In order for you to say we should make more than you need to put a number on it? Your reasoning that we should make more money becasue UPS can afford it is the same reasoning why the the econmoy is the way it is today.

thats bullsh** if a company can pay DRIVERS $30/hr and still turn over a $2 billion net profit a year thats good for both sides.the more a company pays its employees the more they can spend and put back into the economy.the majority of ups is p/t and make less than 20k a year which is poverty level.less than 20 thousand 22.3 jobs that make about 50k a year,so dont act like ups is paying everbody driver pay.since you drivers seem to believe that you are so overpaid next contract why dont you give up some of your $30/hr salary and spread it around to the p/t employes.

 

[slantnosechevy]

My browns don't lace up ... I will put out a notice that if we see a driver wearing a brown corset we have identified Slantnose ... I feel a promotion coming on.

There ya go again reading through the lines. I thought being in mngmnt. you'd know I was talking about shoes. You might need to volunteer for a demotion to pre-load. Mangmnt. says you don't have to know anything to do that job.

 

[deleted9]

thats bullsh** if a company can pay DRIVERS $30/hr and still turn over a $2 billion net profit a year thats good for both sides.the more a company pays its employees the more they can spend and put back into the economy.the majority of ups is p/t and make less than 20k a year which is poverty level.less than 20 thousand 22.3 jobs that make about 50k a year,so dont act like ups is paying everbody driver pay.since you drivers seem to believe that you are so overpaid next contract why dont you give up some of your $30/hr salary and spread it around to the p/t employes.

Nobody forced you to take the 22.3 job, you keep complaining about wages yet you must be satisfied because your avatar name says it all. 22.3 positions due less than friend/t package drivers( i am basing this on 22.3 that work inside and del air) absolutely no comparison,
when ups first used p/t back in the early 70s, the purpose was for them to be students and work thru college and leave, not to make a friend/t job out of a p/t one. Some p/t"ers are staying till they retire with 30 years..... i believe that was not the intent.

 

[brownIEman]

- - - -
Wages are minimums in part so that UPS can not cut them during the Contract. If they wern't minimums, UPS could pay feeder drivers less when hauling empty trailers, or no trailer at all; pay package car drivers less if they failed to deliver all the packages and had send agains; pay everyone less while idle during unavoidable delays, etc.

It works like the COLA clause . . .
ARTICLE 33. COST-OF-LIVING (COLA)
All cost-of-living allowances paid under this Agreement will become and remain a fixed part of the base wage rate for all job classifications. A decline in the [Cost-of-Living] Index shall not result in the reduction of classification base wage rates.

Exactly. The purpose of the minimum language in the contract is to ensure no one is paid less under any circumstances. To try and use that language to say "hey, it says minimum, so UPS can pay more if they want to" is ignoring the purpose behind the language. It is just an idiotic thing to suggest. And it would be an idiotic thing for UPS to do, as once they started paying higher in one area due to changing conditions, they certainly would not be able to pull it back to the contractual minimum if those conditions changed. It is just a silly argument. Its basis is in claiming that the minimum language is in the contract to allow UPS to pay more, when, in fact as you have pointed out the purpose of the language is to ensure UPS does not try to pay less for special circumstances.

 

[22.34life]

Nobody forced you to take the 22.3 job, you keep complaining about wages yet you must be satisfied because your avatar name says it all. 22.3 positions due less than friend/t package drivers( i am basing this on 22.3 that work inside and del air) absolutely no comparison,
when ups first used p/t back in the early 70s, the purpose was for them to be students and work thru college and leave, not to make a friend/t job out of a p/t one. Some p/t"ers are staying till they retire with 30 years..... i believe that was not the intent.

first of all my post was not a complaint about my combo job or my pay,im happy with my job and my pay.my post was in reply to another post about drivers making to much money.read the thread before you start posting some stupid stuff.my point is that drivers make a fair pay for what they have to do,more than just a living wage a good wage to live a good life and there is nothing wrong with that.you seem bitter,nobody told you to go managment,dont be mad that hourlys make more money than you.

 

[brownIEman]

When negotiating the selling price of a house or car, the whole idea is to settle on a specific price at that specific moment in time that both sides can agree on. Then the sale is made. End of story.

The negotiated union Contract, on the other hand, will be operative for five (or so)years under a wide range of changing conditions. The Contract itself contains numerous clauses that increase the various "normal" straight time wage rates. And like I said, specifically states that all part-time wages and raises are minimums.

If you don't like the analogy of a one time purchase, perhaps a contract over time will help. What would you say if you cell phone company called you up and pointed out that the payment you make for your monthly bill is just the minimum under your contract and if you would like and are in a good financial position, you are more than welcome to pay more to them each month. Not to be put as a positive balance on your account, just as a nice thing to do.

It is just a silly notion.

 

[satellitedriver]

There are a lot of people making that kind of money where I live. Its called working for the government or in the trades. One friend makes $28.50 plus great health ins. and all the other perks and all he does is work for the City Parks Dept. Most of the time he and his partner just drive around the city cleaning the parks. It ain't rocket science. Another friend works for the Street Dept. Once again you don't have to be an Einstein to drive a plow. Another works for the County----I still haven't figured out what he does. They all make 25 to 30 bucks an hour. They get more paid time off,if you include sick time and comp time than any UPS driver ever dreamed of. They get EVERY holiday off. I also have many friends that work in the trades. (plumbing, carpentry, elect., etc) and granted things aren't as good as they used to be but the ones that are good at what they do are all finding work. Hell- I make $17 bucks an hour mowing grass and doing other no talent things for my local township. Thats for a job where I have absolutely no supervision or fixed schedule.

I agree with your point that "good" money can be earned without formal education, but you chose the wrong examples.
The "trades" do go through an educational process and have to meet license standards to perform their craft, in most cities.
County, Parks Dept. and Street Dept. employees are not involved in the competitive free market.
Government employees wages are paid by taxes, which are being paid by many folks who make far less.
No wonder my County taxes are so high.