The Media are Calling You Liars!

[Liberty Bear]

I really think we could help get the word out and counter the media at the same time by posting on online blogs and forums. Unfortunately, few of the articles about this proposed contract that I've read solicited comments. There are probably some good political forums where we could make a splash. The first that comes to mind is www.democraticunderground.com, though I'm not exactly endorsing them (and not just because they banned me!).

I just find it a bit troubling that the outside world is scarcely aware of this issue, which is hardly trivial. If we just roll over and unconditionally vote yes, we will remain anonymous losers. If we stand tall and vote NO, the media would be almost forced to recognize us. That couldl give us the leverage we need to negotiate a decent contract.

 

[Brown Dog]

The Wall Street Journal and Wall Street get their facts from Management and the Union.

Right, they do . But just because mgmt and the union say it's a good deal Doesn't mean it benefits me and you! It absolutely benefits UPS and the Union. The union is a big business that we pay for- sometimes their best interests don't coincide with OURS (actual dues paying teamsters). We want our union to speak on our behalf not work out some deal with UPS that leaves way to many details unanswered. Our teamster reps, who we pay their saleries and very good retirements, ANSWER TO US! We want our retirement protected, not wasting away unattended to . Look, I'm not TDU but I disagree with the way MY/OUR union handled this very importent contract that WE will have to abide by for 5 years. UPS is not abiding by the last contract(talk to anybody in 705) This new contract must have stronger language

 

[my2cents]

Liberty Bear,

You can rant and rave all you want about the corporate media, but I believe this contract is weak because of the sorry state of the multi-employer pensions. This issue alone put the IBT behind the 8 ball right from the get-go, thus putting them in a weak bargaining position. Below is an exercise I performed earlier this year, which was to calculate the funding ratios for the Teamster multi-employer plans UPS contributes to. There are 21 plans, although I don't know the names of all of them.

I performed this exercise around February of this year, so I used the latest available Form 5500 data at the time. My source for the data for performing the calculations was found by searching the database on http://freeerisa.benefitspro.com/. The method for the calculation follows the one employed in Trucking: The Less-than-Truckload (LTL) Industry and Pension, Safety, and Security Issues, Congressional Research Service Report RL32257, April 19, 2004. The Total Assets figure is derived from Schedule H, Part 1, Line 1df(b). The Current Liability uses the RPA 94 figure from Schedule B, Part 1, Line 1d(2)(a). Assets were divided into liabilities to obtain the funding ratio.

Central States - 56%
Western Conference - 99%
New England Fund - 52%
NYS Teamsters - 59%
Local 804 IBT & 447 IAM - 53%
Local 177 - 57%
Central Penn. Teamsters - 66%
Western Penn. Teamsters - 61%
Trust Fund of Phil. & Vicinity - 62%
Local 639 - 100%
Locals 175 & 505 - 65%
Joint Council No. 83 - 73%
Local 705 - 73%
Local 710 - 89%
Milwaukee Drivers - 70%
Teamsters Negotiated - 70%
IAM National - 119%

An attachment to this post can be found on this thread: http://www.browncafe.com/community/threads/ups-subsidizing-non-ups-pensions.27725/ which provides more detail than the above summary. Just for the record, I'm a participant in the New England Fund, which has a funding ratio similar to Central States. I'm not crazy about this contract, but its only a matter of time before this slow motion train wreck becomes fully realized, thus the dose of bad medicine in this contract.

 

[Damok]

Long live socialism! I favor a mixed economy combining capitalism and socialism.

What do you mean by "free market economy"? If you're referring to a system of "authoritarian capitalism" where corporations control just about everything and corruption is rampant - kind of like the way things are right now - then I would hope TDU would be against it.

Because Socialism is free of corruption? Hehe, that's a good one.

 

[Liberty Bear]

Because Socialism is free of corruption? Hehe, that's a good one.

You clearly don't understand socialism. Capitalism and socialism are both economic systems and forms of government and are therefore both susceptible to corruption. (Of course, capitalism isn't always thought of as a form of government, but it can be very closely intertwined with government. Thus, the term "authoritarian capitalism" is popularly associated with China, which is becoming strikingly similar to the U.S.)

Anyway, socialism is a complex thing that comes in various flavors. It didn't fare too well in the Soviet Union, but it is hardly associated with evil in Sweden. In our country, socialism has played a major role in steering greedy capitalists towards the high road. In fact, the word socialism has come to be equated with "social justice" in many people's minds.

In the early-mid 20th century, the greatest evil on the planet was fascism. Today, it is corporate corruption, centered in the United States. Many people around the world are looking to socialism for solutions, notably in Latin America.

Right-wingers are generally contemptuous of the idea that socialism is even roughly equal to social justice. Ironically, they're the ones how have helped forge that definition. But that's a lesson for another day.

On another note, I find it ironic that people who are so supportive of the Teamsters have so much contempt for socialism. When you study the labor movement in America, you will likely come across many references to socialists. Indeed, they've done far more for America than the Teamsters, though the latter like to pretend they care about social justice.

 

[Damok]

You clearly don't understand socialism. Capitalism and socialism are both economic systems and forms of government and are therefore both susceptible to corruption. (Of course, capitalism isn't always thought of as a form of government, but it can be very closely intertwined with government. Thus, the term "authoritarian capitalism" is popularly associated with China, which is becoming strikingly similar to the U.S.)

Anyway, socialism is a complex thing that comes in various flavors. It didn't fare too well in the Soviet Union, but it is hardly associated with evil in Sweden. In our country, socialism has played a major role in steering greedy capitalists towards the high road. In fact, the word socialism has come to be equated with "social justice" in many people's minds.

In the early-mid 20th century, the greatest evil on the planet was fascism. Today, it is corporate corruption, centered in the United States. Many people around the world are looking to socialism for solutions, notably in Latin America.

Right-wingers are generally contemptuous of the idea that socialism is even roughly equal to social justice. Ironically, they're the ones how have helped forge that definition. But that's a lesson for another day.

On another note, I find it ironic that people who are so supportive of the Teamsters have so much contempt for socialism. When you study the labor movement in America, you will likely come across many references to socialists. Indeed, they've done far more for America than the Teamsters, though the latter like to pretend they care about social justice.

I understand Socialism quite well, you can see in another post of mine that I believe it is just another model that gets corrupted by human nature. You have quite masterfully turned many posts away from their intended purpose and I'll admit you sucked me in as well

I'd like to try to steer them back to how you believe UPS can be a better place to work, how the Union could be made better and how the same troubles that plague the UAW can be avoided with so many people crying "vote no" and wanting more and more and more. Keep in mind this is just a start

 

[FromBluetoBrown]

The media's job is to understand business??? Oh, yeah - kind of like it was their job to understand the war in Iraq they cheered so loudly for.

*snif snif* I smell........LIBERALS!!!!!

 

[Liberty Bear]

I'd like to try to steer them back to how you believe UPS can be a better place to work, how the Union could be made better and how the same troubles that plague the UAW can be avoided with so many people crying "vote no" and wanting more and more and more . . .

So people who don't like this contract are little more than whining socialiss who want more and more and more. OK.

 

[Damok]

So people who don't like this contract are little more than whining socialiss who want more and more and more. OK.

I like how you quote me and then respond with words I never typed... for shame Liberty for shame

 

[tieguy]

Liberty Bear,

You can rant and rave all you want about the corporate media, but I believe this contract is weak because of the sorry state of the multi-employer pensions. This issue alone put the IBT behind the 8 ball right from the get-go, thus putting them in a weak bargaining position. Below is an exercise I performed earlier this year, which was to calculate the funding ratios for the Teamster multi-employer plans UPS contributes to. There are 21 plans, although I don't know the names of all of them.

I performed this exercise around February of this year, so I used the latest available Form 5500 data at the time. My source for the data for performing the calculations was found by searching the database on freeERISA.com. The method for the calculation follows the one employed in Trucking: The Less-than-Truckload (LTL) Industry and Pension, Safety, and Security Issues, Congressional Research Service Report RL32257, April 19, 2004. The Total Assets figure is derived from Schedule H, Part 1, Line 1df(b). The Current Liability uses the RPA 94 figure from Schedule B, Part 1, Line 1d(2)(a). Assets were divided into liabilities to obtain the funding ratio.

Central States - 56%
Western Conference - 99%
New England Fund - 52%
NYS Teamsters - 59%
Local 804 IBT & 447 IAM - 53%
Local 177 - 57%
Central Penn. Teamsters - 66%
Western Penn. Teamsters - 61%
Trust Fund of Phil. & Vicinity - 62%
Local 639 - 100%
Locals 175 & 505 - 65%
Joint Council No. 83 - 73%
Local 705 - 73%
Local 710 - 89%
Milwaukee Drivers - 70%
Teamsters Negotiated - 70%
IAM National - 119%

An attachment to this post can be found on this thread: http://www.browncafe.com/community/threads/ups-subsidizing-non-ups-pensions.27725/ which provides more detail than the above summary. Just for the record, I'm a participant in the New England Fund, which has a funding ratio similar to Central States. I'm not crazy about this contract, but its only a matter of time before this slow motion train wreck becomes fully realized, thus the dose of bad medicine in this contract.

Great post that i think got lost in the middle of a flame war.

 

[705red]

Liberty Bear,

You can rant and rave all you want about the corporate media, but I believe this contract is weak because of the sorry state of the multi-employer pensions. This issue alone put the IBT behind the 8 ball right from the get-go, thus putting them in a weak bargaining position. Below is an exercise I performed earlier this year, which was to calculate the funding ratios for the Teamster multi-employer plans UPS contributes to. There are 21 plans, although I don't know the names of all of them.

I performed this exercise around February of this year, so I used the latest available Form 5500 data at the time. My source for the data for performing the calculations was found by searching the database on freeERISA.com. The method for the calculation follows the one employed in Trucking: The Less-than-Truckload (LTL) Industry and Pension, Safety, and Security Issues, Congressional Research Service Report RL32257, April 19, 2004. The Total Assets figure is derived from Schedule H, Part 1, Line 1df(b). The Current Liability uses the RPA 94 figure from Schedule B, Part 1, Line 1d(2)(a). Assets were divided into liabilities to obtain the funding ratio.

Central States - 56%
Western Conference - 99%
New England Fund - 52%
NYS Teamsters - 59%
Local 804 IBT & 447 IAM - 53%
Local 177 - 57%
Central Penn. Teamsters - 66%
Western Penn. Teamsters - 61%
Trust Fund of Phil. & Vicinity - 62%
Local 639 - 100%
Locals 175 & 505 - 65%
Joint Council No. 83 - 73%
Local 705 - 73%
Local 710 - 89%
Milwaukee Drivers - 70%
Teamsters Negotiated - 70%
IAM National - 119%

An attachment to this post can be found on this thread: http://www.browncafe.com/community/threads/ups-subsidizing-non-ups-pensions.27725/ which provides more detail than the above summary. Just for the record, I'm a participant in the New England Fund, which has a funding ratio similar to Central States. I'm not crazy about this contract, but its only a matter of time before this slow motion train wreck becomes fully realized, thus the dose of bad medicine in this contract.

You know what the cs pension is in better shape now than ups's other single employer fund that 804 is in! Csers thats your new company sep that they have promised you, i guess its being funded at 53% isnt ups's fault. Right, good luck to you in whatever your decison is.

 

[tieguy]

You know what the cs pension is in better shape now than ups's other single employer fund that 804 is in! Csers thats your new company sep that they have promised you, i guess its being funded at 53% isnt ups's fault. Right, good luck to you in whatever your decison is.

Yea I was kind of surprised with 804 . I figured Carey would have that one at 100%. But this seems to be the trend with 9 of those listed being less then 70 % funded.

any idea why 710 is doing so much better then 705?

 

[705red]

Yea I was kind of surprised with 804 . I figured Carey would have that one at 100%. But this seems to be the trend with 9 of those listed being less then 70 % funded.

any idea why 710 is doing so much better then 705?

Tie ups recently turned the 447 iam trustee to vote with them cutting the fund. Now ups is loaning the fund 18 million to get it up to 69% and all the members have to give 10 cents a year in raises back to ups. Now something is wrong with this picture, if i am wrong please correct me, but this is what i have been told by several 804 members over a couple beers on friday.

705s is up around 79 80% as of our last meeting 2 weeks ago. The fund was in the 60s when our sec/treas took office jan of 04 and he has made some moves and we have raised our benefits for upsers and the fund is still gaining. Now i cane explain why 710 is doing better they recently gained a new sec/treas to.

 

[ups79]

Tie ups recently turned the 447 iam trustee to vote with them cutting the fund. Now ups is loaning the fund 18 million to get it up to 69% and all the members have to give 10 cents a year in raises back to ups. Now something is wrong with this picture, if i am wrong please correct me, but this is what i have been told by several 804 members over a couple beers on friday.

705s is up around 79 80% as of our last meeting 2 weeks ago. The fund was in the 60s when our sec/treas took office jan of 04 and he has made some moves and we have raised our benefits for upsers and the fund is still gaining. Now i cane explain why 710 is doing better they recently gained a new sec/treas to.

I have no idea where you get your fiqures, 710 as of Jan 31, 2007(the last reporting date) was 67.65%, a slight increase from Jan 31,2006.

 

[Cole]

Tie,

How would Carey have it funded at 100%, seeing how he's not allowed to be involved!

 

[tieguy]

Tie,

How would Carey have it funded at 100%, seeing how he's not allowed to be involved!

He ran that local for ever.

 

[govols019]

Dude, let it go.