East coast navy
Veteran
Monday night meeting during peak! WHAT THE friend$&@!
Supplement status
- Thread starter BrownMonk
- Start date
3 done 3 to go
In control of own destiny
It will go down again. BA did say he thinks it may get shoved up our asses. Just like the national. If less than 50%. Liberals voting
browned out
Well-Known Member
If they do not fix Metro Detroit's Rider; Charges will absolutely be filed. Probably in vain but none the less; charges will be filed. The Teamsters and/or UPS will have to respond to those charges.
We were flat out lied to numerous times regarding 22.4 language and 40 hour guarantees for RCPDs. Cutting routes on Fridays and Mondays will not fly.
The end result will not be in anyway similar to the 2013 CBA supplements forced implementation. This is totally different.
We were flat out lied to numerous times regarding 22.4 language and 40 hour guarantees for RCPDs. Cutting routes on Fridays and Mondays will not fly.
The end result will not be in anyway similar to the 2013 CBA supplements forced implementation. This is totally different.
browned out
Well-Known Member
Does anyone have the updated proposed supplements for Upstate New York and Central PA?
They are to be voted on soon, so please post them.
They are to be voted on soon, so please post them.
WTFm8
Well-Known Member
Went to the Central PA one over a month ago, not much changed except they ‘lowered’ the hours required for vacation to 1,000.
Last/extended/current is 800, proposed was 1,200, and this ‘new’ one is 1,000.
just chillin'
Rest in peace wooba
did you guys get to second vote yet? we in the 804 have brand new union leadership taking over next week and im assuming that negotiations will start from thew ground floor on our supplement.
JustDeliverIt
Well-Known Member
Ours (Upstate NY) is supposed to be done but still no word when the second vote is.
Superteeth2478
Well-Known Member
Disregarding the fact that this a late response to you since I've dropped off of the boards for a bit, seeing as how the Master Agreement being ratified allows the Master Negotiating Committee to determine the appropriate action to be taken, why was there a re-vote last time for the 2013 supplements but not this time around for not passing a 50% threshold?
Seeing as how apparently the membership "ratified" the Master Agreement this time around with too low of a voter turnout?
If the Master passing is a caveat in regard to failed supplemental agreements (which it is in accordance with the IBT Constitution, as you indicated), then what's with the inconsistent application of this language? Again, the Master Agreement was ratified this time around as well. The constitutional language doesn't differentiate between the master being imposed or outright ratified by a majority.
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
Superteeth2478
Well-Known Member
I expected better than strawman attacks from you, BUG. If it's a locker room lawyer argument, then it shouldn't be hard to refute it. Do so, or keep your lack of a refutation to yourself. It makes you look like a fool.
Even though I know it's impossible for you or anyone else to refute what I said, I'll just humor you by pointing at the important point in my post in case you didn't find it. WHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION DOES THE LANGUAGE DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN A MASTER AGREEMENT BEING IMPOSED OR RATIFIED BY A MAJORITY?
Last edited:
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
Wow.
Maybe you could yell louder.... instead of reading Article 12.
Just because your recent ex-wife....took you for everything....
doesn't mean you should bitch at me.
Superteeth2478
Well-Known Member
I can't really tell if you're joking right now. The only relevant language here was what you underlined, about whether or not the master agreement was ratified. The point I'm making is that Article 12 DOES NOT differentiate between the agreement being imposed or ratified by a majority of the membership. Hence why it doesn't make sense to be wishy-washy in whether or not the National Negotiating Committee either puts the supplementals to the vote again or imposes them.
It's up to their discretion, but the discretion they used this time around is in complete contradiction to what they did last time, and Taylor cited the 50% and 2/3rds rule as if it was relevant when this language is also apparently giving them the power to choose how they want things to go. By the way, the capitalization was for emphasis. If I was yelling at you the whole post would have been capitalized. I'm sure you knew that, though.
Let me dumb it down step-by-step for you so that you don't go around in circles with me:
-In 2013, the master agreement was ratified by the membership by a majority vote.
-In 2013, supplementals were rejected by the membership with less than a 50% turnout.
-In 2013, those supplementals were still re-negotiated.
-In 2018, the master agreement was rejected by a majority of the membership.
-In 2018, supplementals were rejected by the membership with less than a 50% turnout.
-In 2018, those supplementals were NOT re-negotiated.
Really, in the end it doesn't matter whether or not the master agreement was ratified, the point Bubblehead was making was that the NNC was inconsistent with the way rejected supplementals were handled. They never even met again in 2018 to "identify the issues which resulted in the rejection of the special rider or supplement". They just imposed them. They apparently didn't even have to re-negotiate the supplementals last time around, but they did. Why is that? Was the payout to sell out the membership bigger this time?
Last edited:
UpsYours
Well-Known Member
Was told mid January re vote Upstate NY.
WTFm8
Well-Known Member
Just searched my emails, meeting was Nov 18th. Business agent said revote paperwork would be in 2 weeks at the earliest... it’s been 5.5 weeks since that meeting/update. I missed the 2 monthly union meetings after it so idk if there was anything updated after.
JustDeliverIt
Well-Known Member
Figured as much. Really wasn't expecting anything until after peak.
Benben
Working on a new degree, Masters in BS Detecting!
awwww, again you resort to attacks on the poster, and accusations it's TDU's fault when the answer to the question at hand is uncomfortable!
Superteeth give him a few and he'll be right back at the, "it's all the voter's fault in that they didn't get 50% of the temporary, transient part timers to vote!
Superteeth2478
Well-Known Member
Yeah, usually I just expect him to not respond when the question is uncomfortable or the point is irrefutable, but this time he just used an ad hominem attack. I broke it down real simple for him in my last response to him, though. Not sure what he'll say this time.
Superteeth2478
Well-Known Member
Meant to say "ad hominem attacks"...
3 done 3 to go
In control of own destiny
Upstate N.Y. Will be mailed mid January. It has very little change. BA said it's a NO vote again. We are thinking the local will do the same as the national. If under 50%. Shove it thru
Similar threads
