Under No Circumstances Can 22.4 Be Allowed To Remain

[542thruNthru]

If they didn't change the "ten" to "five", it would be locked in place and not have to be negotiated. Read it slowly and carefully.

I understand what you're saying. What if the company refused to negotiate that? Do we strike because they won't add another 5 years to the agreement or do we renegotiate when the agreed upon years have passed?

 

[a911scanner]

I understand what you're saying. What if the company refused to negotiate that? Do we strike because they won't add another 5 years to the agreement or do we renegotiate when the agreed upon years have passed?

I personally don't think that this 1 item is egregious enough by itself to go on strike over. But if you add it on to the other 6 language issues, we now have an extremely big problem.

I have said before on this forum, I do not want to go on strike at all. It will be bad for everyone.

i do, however, strongly believe that we are in a excellent bargaining position this time and have given away far too many things with the whole of this contract. It was poorly negotiated and now being supported by those that did it.

Get rid of 22.4, 70 hour work weeks and at least half of the language loopholes, and I might be able to vote the other way.

 

[1whofan]

So this contract will pass because of Apathy, but the same people that are apathetic will strike because of the pension?

 

[542thruNthru]

I personally don't think that this 1 item is egregious enough by itself to go on strike over. But if you add it on to the other 6 language issues, we now have an extremely big problem.

I have said before on this forum, I do not want to go on strike at all. It will be bad for everyone.

i do, however, strongly believe that we are in a excellent bargaining position this time and have given away far too many things with the whole of this contract. It was poorly negotiated and now being supported by those that did it.

Get rid of 22.4, 70 hour work weeks and at least half of the language loopholes, and I might be able to vote the other way.

I agree with you about this contract. I only think that this memorandum of agreement is being blown out of proportion. I understand people being upset with this contract but I feel like we will lose credibility with people on the fence when we point out things like this.

Just my opinion is all.

 

[542thruNthru]

So this contract will pass because of Apathy, but the same people that are apathetic will strike because of the pension?

The pension affects everyone. 22.4, PT wages and even 70 hr work affects only certain groups. You may disagree with this but remember there are many different jobs at UPS. Pension covers them all.

 

[a911scanner]

I agree with you about this contract. I only think that this memorandum of agreement is being blown out of proportion. I understand people being upset with this contract but I feel like we will lose credibility with people on the fence when we point out things like this.

Just my opinion is all.

And your opinion matters, even to me as an "internet stranger". I do think this issue is a bigger problem than you see it to be. Some factual, some hypothetical.

Factual - if the language is not changed, it is locked in, therefore never to be negotiated on because this issue is "locked in place" for 10 years on a five year contract negotiating period.

Hypothetical - It just so happens that this language change allows UPS to negotiate our pensions the same year that they are eliminating the management pensions. If this doesn't seem like something that is questionable to an reasonable thinking person, then maybe they need a bigger tinfoil hat.

Maybe it's not a big deal and can be negotiated on in the future for a positive outcome for us. But from my view in the cheap seats, when we give an inch, they take 27 miles. ---> 9.5 & 70 hours work weeks anyone?

 

[1whofan]

The pension affects everyone. 22.4, PT wages and even 70 hr work affects only certain groups. You may disagree with this but remember there are many different jobs at UPS. Pension covers them all.

I understand what your saying it was a response to Laguna's apathy answer to one of my posts.

 

[542thruNthru]

And your opinion matters, even to me as an "internet stranger". I do think this issue is a bigger problem than you see it to be. Some factual, some hypothetical.

Factual - if the language is not changed, it is locked in, therefore never to be negotiated on because this issue is "locked in place" for 10 years on a five year contract negotiating period.

Hypothetical - It just so happens that this language change allows UPS to negotiate our pensions the same year that they are eliminating the management pensions. If this doesn't seem like something that is questionable to an reasonable thinking person, then maybe they need a bigger tinfoil hat.

Maybe it's not a big deal and can be negotiated on in the future for a positive outcome for us. But from my view in the cheap seats, when we give an inch, they take 27 miles. ---> 9.5 & 70 hours work weeks anyone?

I may be misunderstand your factual comment. It's locked in for 5 years on a 5 year contract now. It was 10 years on a 5 year contract in 2013.

I completely agree with you that the company will take full advantage and then some of anything. Though the pension has always been a hot button and I personally don't think the union would jeopardize the only thing they can actually brag about.

Though I've been wrong before

 

[a911scanner]

I may be misunderstand your factual comment. It's locked in for 5 years on a 5 year contract now. It was 10 years on a 5 year contract in 2013.

I completely agree with you that the company will take full advantage and then some of anything. Though the pension has always been a hot button and I personally don't think the union would jeopardize the only thing they can actually brag about.

Though I've been wrong before

If it was 10 years in 2013, that means 2023 before they can propose a change.

If it stays 10 years in 2018 with no change to the language, that means 2028 is when they can propose a change.

If it stays 10 years in 2023, that means 2033 before a change can be discussed.

In other words, it stays locked in place in perpetuity so that the pension NEVER GOES AWAY. I like this option better, thank you.

PS It was a 10 year agreement back in 2008 as well....

 

[1whofan]

If it was 10 years in 2013, that means 2023 before they can propose a change.

If it stays 10 years in 2018 with no change to the language, that means 2028 is when they can propose a change.

If it stays 10 years in 2023, that means 2033 before a change can be discussed.

In other words, it stays locked in place in perpetuity so that the pension NEVER GOES AWAY. I like this option better, thank you.

PS It was a 10 year agreement back in 2008 as well....

 

[1whofan]

It changed to 5 yrs in 2018 it ends in 2023, the same time the company freezes pensions for non-union employees. My point in bringing this up is that language on the pension never ends on the date of the current contract...

 

[a911scanner]

It changed to 5 yrs in 2018 it ends in 2023, the same time the company freezes pensions for non-union employees. My point in bringing this up is that language on the pension never ends on the date of the current contract...

Thanks for your point. No one said it did. And it hasn't changed yet. It is a PROPOSED change until it is voted on.

I did, however, say that it should continue to be 10 years in the language so that they never have to opportunity to try to take it away from us.

Carry on...

 

[1whofan]

So why would the union agree to that? Does not make any sense to me...

 

[Feederquacker]

The language “when work is available” is ! That much is true. That should have never been allowed. The rest of the rhetoric just confuses me. Regular PKG drivers start at $18.75. 22.4’s will start at what, $20.50? In 36 months, the Regular PKG job is at $25.00. I’m not sure where the 22.4 will be at hat point but I think it is higher. So, during wage progression, the 22.4 is better. There are no 9.5 protections so that is on the bad side for sure. Now, what I haven’t seen is, are there any protections to ensure these “combo” jobs are exactly that? Meaning that their day is supposed to be composed of part of the time as an inside worker and the other part on the road. If the company uses them exclusively as drivers, is there a mechanism in place to ensure this can’t happen? There should be a minimum report that triggers a new RPCD job opening. Say.... 150 (or less) reports where a 22.4 drives 75% (or less)of their paid day will trigger a new RPCD job. Should be a penalty if they don’t.

At the end of 22.4 progression, if they didn’t already get to move to a higher paid classification, then that needs to be addressed. But the pay for their first 4yrs will be higher so that’s not really an argument. As far as loosing OT... this is baffling to me. Either you want the OT or you want to have a 9.5 day. The Sat and Sunday delivery led to this but I’m sure the number of 9.5 grievances also led to it as well. I listened to a guy tell me he is tired of the company making him work so many hours and then fifteen minutes later tells me that 22.4’s will cost him all his OT. What!!!??? This kind of schizophrenic talk gets you into trouble. Hence, we are here now.

 

[1989]

Last page of the proposed contract, where the company enhances the long term stability of the pension until the end of this contract. I wonder what they have in mine for 2023 and beyond....

Oh...that doesn’t affect much of the country.

 

[Dulce Bombón]

The simplest solution is the lowest full time drivers on the seniority list have to work that schedule. Once they get a few drivers below them, then they can get the Monday-Friday gig. It’s really not that difficult. This is nothing more than UPS getting a lower paid driver to do the same work, with zero overtime protection. Ups will abuse the crap out of this, just like every thing else they get away with. The only full time drivers that will be hurt by this are the guys that cry for overtime. You know the ones that would work 9am to 10pm every day, if they could.

 

[Dulce Bombón]

Is there a union equivalent to the congressional switchboard where you can call the people that came up with this "contract" and tell them to shove it up their ass? Everyday the details just keep getting worse.

 

[Dulce Bombón]

You already know the Teamsters are endorsing 22.4 or else they wouldn't have shaken hands already which UPS proudly bragged about.

Right now it seems there's an intentional delay so we phase into peak with UPS using 22.4's before it's even written, then UPS and the Teamsters both will claim we've already been using them so we might as well just accept it.

The solution is to pledge to leave the Teamsters if they don't fight for us against 22.4. Tell it to their face and mean it.

 

[siouxman]

So pass contracts the company has always gone pass the end date of the contract, it just so happens in this contract it ends July 31, 2023. Around the same time as UPS plans to freeze non-union pensions. This gives the company to much leverage over us in future negotiations.

Pensions as we know it are going away. Something like a 401 k match is coming.the current defined pensions are to expensive and some if not most are under funded. Deregulation corruption pick your poision

 

[542thruNthru]

If it was 10 years in 2013, that means 2023 before they can propose a change.

If it stays 10 years in 2018 with no change to the language, that means 2028 is when they can propose a change.

If it stays 10 years in 2023, that means 2033 before a change can be discussed.

In other words, it stays locked in place in perpetuity so that the pension NEVER GOES AWAY. I like this option better, thank you.

PS It was a 10 year agreement back in 2008 as well....

I did not realize it was a memorandum of understanding in 2008 as well. I apologize it seems I am ill-informed on this matter. Thank you for bringing that to my attention .

That does change things.