Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Superteeth2478" data-source="post: 3570230" data-attributes="member: 73024">See, the thing is that 93% didn&#039;t vote for strike authorization, it&#039;s 93% of the percentage that actually voted, which we still do not know what that percentage was. Granted, you are right that the ones that voted are the vocal ones, and are likely to be the ones that vote on the contract as well, and would likely vote &quot;no&quot; if the contract proposal is weak (hopefully). But again, the problem is the battle of attrition that will be waged against the membership through extending the time that we work under the old contract...would repeatedly extending the current contract from weeks to months to even years while repeatedly offering weak contracts with little to no changes count as collusion? That&#039;ll be a question for the DoL and DoJ to determine...And then, even if we did strike, who&#039;s to say that the IBT forcing us to return to work, citing the loss to the union and to the company, would count as collusion? At the end of the day, seeing as how it would start affecting the U.S. economy, what are the chances that governmental entities wouldn&#039;t see a valid argument in the cost to the U.S. economy of a strike? And then, of course you&#039;re right about Hoffa, he&#039;s not likely to care about being elected president again, and his leadership probably wouldn&#039;t care whether or not they held their offices, either, if UPS buys them off. Remember, the price of buying off a couple of weak-minded people is far less than the price of giving the workers a fair contract...I really hope I&#039;m wrong with all these assumptions, because if I&#039;m right, we&#039;re going to get a subpar contract shoved up our bungholes whether we like it or not.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Superteeth2478, post: 3570230, member: 73024"] See, the thing is that 93% didn't vote for strike authorization, it's 93% of the percentage that actually voted, which we still do not know what that percentage was. Granted, you are right that the ones that voted are the vocal ones, and are likely to be the ones that vote on the contract as well, and would likely vote "no" if the contract proposal is weak (hopefully). But again, the problem is the battle of attrition that will be waged against the membership through extending the time that we work under the old contract...would repeatedly extending the current contract from weeks to months to even years while repeatedly offering weak contracts with little to no changes count as collusion? That'll be a question for the DoL and DoJ to determine... And then, even if we did strike, who's to say that the IBT forcing us to return to work, citing the loss to the union and to the company, would count as collusion? At the end of the day, seeing as how it would start affecting the U.S. economy, what are the chances that governmental entities wouldn't see a valid argument in the cost to the U.S. economy of a strike? And then, of course you're right about Hoffa, he's not likely to care about being elected president again, and his leadership probably wouldn't care whether or not they held their offices, either, if UPS buys them off. Remember, the price of buying off a couple of weak-minded people is far less than the price of giving the workers a fair contract... I really hope I'm wrong with all these assumptions, because if I'm right, we're going to get a subpar contract shoved up our bungholes whether we like it or not. [/QUOTE]

Verification