UPSPAC & United Way 2012

[pretzel_man]

It just makes you feel good inside that UPS gives us the opportunity to give to these politicians that care so deeply about the working class and the poor.

Just for the record....

UPS gives between 35% and 45% to democratic candidates.

I had a chance to spend a week with our "Public Relations" people in Washington.

It's your choice to give or not. But don't think for a minut that UPS is NOT giving to a wide range of candidates, or that back room deals are being made.

I have seen it first hand. Go check out opensecrets.org

 

[ActionJaxson]

If you follow this site, you will see that UPS favors republicans: UPS | Follow The Money

 

[Catatonic]

If you follow this site, you will see that UPS favors republicans: UPS | Follow The Money

Well DUH!
Yes UPS supports Republicans more than Democrats.

If you take the time to look at the individual states, you will see that UPS supports incumbents and political parties that are in control of the state/local government.

In Georgia where UPS is trying to influence state and local politics, the Republicans contribution was 80% to the Dems 20%.
Every statewide office is held by the Republicans.

In California, where the Dems are in solid control of the State, the contributions are essentially 50/50.

If you click on the "2" in the page selection of Table 5, it will open table 4, which lists contributions to individual politicians.

It would appear that UPS has spread the money around pretty well to all political parties and political candidates but it is slanted towards Republicans in what I have heard 60% t0 40%.

 

[pretzel_man]

If you follow this site, you will see that UPS favors republicans: UPS | Follow The Money

Yes. UPS favors republicans.

Go to Opensecrets and you can see the contributions.

Some years, its 55% to repulicans. Others as high as about 65%.

Check the Teamsters while you are there.

Some years its about 10% to republicans. Others 2% to republicans.

 

[SignificantOwner]

Just for the record....

UPS gives between 35% and 45% to democratic candidates.

I had a chance to spend a week with our "Public Relations" people in Washington.

It's your choice to give or not. But don't think for a minut that UPS is NOT giving to a wide range of candidates, or that back room deals are being made.

I have seen it first hand. Go check out opensecrets.org

The only reason you give money to someone is because you expect to get something in return. Call it back room, front room, whatever you want.

Based on your breakdown of giving between dems & repubs I have updated my comment as follows:

It just makes you feel good inside that UPS gives us the opportunity to give to these politicians that care so deeply about the working class and the poor...and the bankers and financial institutions that nearly destroyed our economy.

 

[j13501]

The only reason you give money to someone is because you expect to get something in return. Call it back room, front room, whatever you want.

Sometimes all you "expect" in return in an opportunity to tell your side of the story. Make no mistake, FedEx is in Washington, telling congressmen and congresswoman their story. Or do you think it's just a coincidence that the Washington Redskins play in FedEx Field - something that FedEx feels so strongly about, that they pay over $7 million a year to have their name on the football field. FedEx isn't afraid to spend money in Washington!

I'm glad our Public Affairs people work in Washington and spend our UPSPAC dollars. When they do their job, we get the opportunity to do our job - delivering packages. I don't believe any company can beat our people at our core mission of providing great service at a reasonable cost. I do believe there are companies every day who try to get our packages through political relationships, that they could never get with a level playing field. Thanks, UPS Public Affairs, for spending our UPSPAC dollars to protect our business and jobs.

 

[Catatonic]

The only reason you give money to someone is because you expect to get something in return. Call it back room, front room, whatever you want.

Based on your breakdown of giving between dems & repubs I have updated my comment as follows:

It just makes you feel good inside that UPS gives us the opportunity to give to these politicians that care so deeply about the working class and the poor...and the bankers and financial institutions that nearly destroyed our economy.

That would be both the Dems and the Repubs so ...

 

[pretzel_man]

The only reason you give money to someone is because you expect to get something in return. Call it back room, front room, whatever you want.

Based on your breakdown of giving between dems & repubs I have updated my comment as follows:

It just makes you feel good inside that UPS gives us the opportunity to give to these politicians that care so deeply about the working class and the poor...and the bankers and financial institutions that nearly destroyed our economy.

You should go to the Public Affairs web page. You should read their newsletter. See what they are talking to the lawmakers about.

You mention UPS in your post. You can substitute UPS for any company or labor union then. What you mention is true for anyone with a PAC from your perspective.

Like it or not PAC's are how legislation works. Not participating would be naive on UPS' part.

 

[SignificantOwner]

You should go to the Public Affairs web page. You should read their newsletter. See what they are talking to the lawmakers about.

You mention UPS in your post. You can substitute UPS for any company or labor union then. What you mention is true for anyone with a PAC from your perspective.

Like it or not PAC's are how legislation works. Not participating would be naive on UPS' part.

Perhaps we should use this model with our service providers. Shippers or consignees (anyone really) could approach service providers and ask them for specific delivery times or accomodations. Of course, only the ones bringing checks made out to the service provider would have the opportunity to have their voices heard. The checks wouldn't be bribes or any type of quid pro quo - no way - that would be unethical. It's simply listening money. Sometimes the requests would work against the goals of their employer, but the service providers need to keep their check writing customers happy after all that listening they did. Some customers will say "why do I have to write a check for the service providers to do their job"? We call those customers the naive ones.

 

[Catatonic]

Perhaps we should use this model with our service providers. Shippers or consignees (anyone really) could approach service providers and ask them for specific delivery times or accomodations. Of course, only the ones bringing checks made out to the service provider would have the opportunity to have their voices heard. The checks wouldn't be bribes or any type of quid pro quo - no way - that would be unethical. It's simply listening money. Sometimes the requests would work against the goals of their employer, but the service providers need to keep their check writing customers happy after all that listening they did. Some customers will say "why do I have to write a check for the service providers to do their job"? We call those customers the naive ones.

Impressive that a teenager is a Center Manager.

 

[brownmonster]

Impressive that a teenager is a Center Manager.

More impressive that they run our country.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

Impressive that a teenager is a Center Manager.

Have you been in operations lately?

 

[Catatonic]

Have you been in operations lately?

Whoosh!

 

[UnconTROLLed]

Whoosh!

You have never encountered an operations center manager that did not act appropriately for their age?
Thought I got what you were saying, but n/m. Guess not.
It was a good post by S.O., regardless.

This post format is Hoaxter-approved.

 

[Catatonic]

You have never encountered an operations center manager that did not act appropriately for their age?
Thought I got what you were saying, but n/m. Guess not.
It was a good post by S.O., regardless.

This post format is Hoaxter-approved.

OK ... whoosh on me!

I assumed SO was being tongue-in-cheek in his satirical analogy.

And I enjoyed it myself.

 

[pretzel_man]

Perhaps we should use this model with our service providers. Shippers or consignees (anyone really) could approach service providers and ask them for specific delivery times or accomodations. Of course, only the ones bringing checks made out to the service provider would have the opportunity to have their voices heard. The checks wouldn't be bribes or any type of quid pro quo - no way - that would be unethical. It's simply listening money. Sometimes the requests would work against the goals of their employer, but the service providers need to keep their check writing customers happy after all that listening they did. Some customers will say "why do I have to write a check for the service providers to do their job"? We call those customers the naive ones.

Like it or not, government has processes and procedures. PAC's, Lobbying, relationships are part of those processes. There is a reason its called politics.

As I said, like it or not. Not acknowledging the process is naive.

The situation you outliined is NOT the process (at least it's not supposed to be).

There are lots of processes I don't like. This is one of those.

But, why would I not utilize the process when competitors and labor does?

 

[SignificantOwner]

Like it or not, government has processes and procedures. PAC's, Lobbying, relationships are part of those processes. There is a reason its called politics.

As I said, like it or not. Not acknowledging the process is naive.

The situation you outliined is NOT the process (at least it's not supposed to be).

There are lots of processes I don't like. This is one of those.

But, why would I not utilize the process when competitors and labor does?

I don't accept the "everyone else is doing it" argument.

"Everyone" was sniffing glue way back when.

"Everyone" didn't used to wear their seatbelts.

"Everyone" used to drink and drive.

"Everyone" used to walk out of the bathroom without washing their hands.

"Everyone" texts while driving.

"Everyone" used to let employees smoke in their buildings.

As society learns from mistakes individuals change behavior. The money floating around Washington is not a good thing for the individual. It takes away the power of the individual vote and I think individuals will eventually see it. This isn't about UPS. UPS and the Teamsters are just a couple of the many enablers.

 

[UnconTROLLed]

OK ... whoosh on me!

I assumed SO was being tongue-in-cheek in his satirical analogy.

And I enjoyed it myself.

thought he was, too...okay, I'm confused.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

As society learns from mistakes individuals change behavior. The money floating around Washington is not a good thing for the individual. It takes away the power of the individual vote and I think individuals will eventually see it. This isn't about UPS. UPS and the Teamsters are just a couple of the many enablers.

I agree 110% with you but as P-man said it would be naive and potentially costly for UPS or the Teamsters to stand on principle alone and not "play the game".

 

[pretzel_man]

I don't accept the "everyone else is doing it" argument.

"Everyone" was sniffing glue way back when.

"Everyone" didn't used to wear their seatbelts.

"Everyone" used to drink and drive.

"Everyone" used to walk out of the bathroom without washing their hands.

"Everyone" texts while driving.

"Everyone" used to let employees smoke in their buildings.

As society learns from mistakes individuals change behavior. The money floating around Washington is not a good thing for the individual. It takes away the power of the individual vote and I think individuals will eventually see it. This isn't about UPS. UPS and the Teamsters are just a couple of the many enablers.

Let me know when you get the process changed.

Until then a good organization will utilize the legal process that exists. I will support that use of the process, just like the Teamsters and our competitors do.