Voting Starts Next Week! How will you vote and why.

[Just A UPS Guy]

What I believe will happen if this contract gets voted down. 1 of 2 things.

1. Hoffa imposes it because to little voted.

2. They tweak the littlest thing and the Union let's it be known everywhere there will be a strike after this. That will make all the non voters scared and rush to vote yes.

I think by adding the simplicity to the voting system that we will actually get to 50%. I know, it can't get much more simple than dropping an envelope in the mail, but now you can vote from the couch. Not hard to get an additional 11% to participate from the couch.

 

[Db2400]

This came in the mail today


View attachment 212995 View attachment 212997 View attachment 212998 View attachment 212999 View attachment 213000 View attachment 213001 View attachment 213002

These people are a joke. What a bunch of dummies

 

[542thruNthru]

I think by adding the simplicity to the voting system that we will actually get to 50%. I know, it can't get much more simple than dropping an envelope in the mail, but now you can vote from the couch. Not hard to get an additional 11% to participate from the couch.

I highly doubt we will get 50% but would be happy to see that.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

We have already approved the strike vote. It is a good negotiating tool, but it also means if we vote down the contract, we will go on strike. We do not “go back to the table”, we strike. Of course negotiations will resume as soon as we strike. If you have not been through a strike before, you need to be prepared to be out of work for about 3 weeks. That’s how long it was last time. In my local, we will be without medical insurance. If I need coverage, I can purchase Cobra insurance retroactively. My point is, if the contract does not pass, a strike has financial consequences. Be prepared.

Starting another account? Clever calling it cell block one, since your other accounts are in mod queue, it's like being in prison.

 

[Brownslave688]

What I believe will happen if this contract gets voted down. 1 of 2 things.

1. Hoffa imposes it because to little voted.

2. They tweak the littlest thing and the Union let's it be known everywhere there will be a strike after this. That will make all the non voters scared and rush to vote yes.

He can't impose it until the 3rd vote.

 

[542thruNthru]

He can't impose it until the 3rd vote.

Where did you read 3rd vote? I haven't seen that.


This is the language that I saw.

Article 12 - Section 2(d) reads:

"Results of ratification or rejection
votes with respect to master agreements shall be determined
by all involved voting members on a cumulative
basis of all votes cast as follows:

(1) If at least one half of the members eligible to vote
cast valid ballots then a cumulative majority of
those voting in favor of the final offer shall result
in acceptance of such offer; and a cumulative majority
of those voting against acceptance of the final
offer shall authorize a strike without any additional
vote being necessary for such strike
authorization. A tie vote shall be resolved as provided
in Section 1(b)(l) of this Article.

(2) If less than half of the eligible memberscast valid
ballots, then a two-thirds (2/3) vote of those voting
shall be required to reject such final offer and to
authorize a strike. The failure of such membership
to reject the final offer and to authorize a strike as
herein provided shall require the negotiating committee
to accept such final offer or such additional
provisions as can be negotiated by it."

 

[Brownslave688]

Where did you read 3rd vote? I haven't seen that.


This is the language that I saw.

Article 12 - Section 2(d) reads:

"Results of ratification or rejection
votes with respect to master agreements shall be determined
by all involved voting members on a cumulative
basis of all votes cast as follows:

(1) If at least one half of the members eligible to vote
cast valid ballots then a cumulative majority of
those voting in favor of the final offer shall result
in acceptance of such offer; and a cumulative majority
of those voting against acceptance of the final
offer shall authorize a strike without any additional
vote being necessary for such strike
authorization. A tie vote shall be resolved as provided
in Section 1(b)(l) of this Article.

(2) If less than half of the eligible memberscast valid
ballots, then a two-thirds (2/3) vote of those voting
shall be required to reject such final offer and to
authorize a strike. The failure of such membership
to reject the final offer and to authorize a strike as
herein provided shall require the negotiating committee
to accept such final offer or such additional
provisions as can be negotiated by it."

FINAL OFFER

which would be a 3rd vote. Aka vote no = automatic strike vote

 

[542thruNthru]

FINAL OFFER

which would be a 3rd vote. Aka vote no = automatic strike vote

I took final offer to mean the company will not negotiate any further.

 

[Brownslave688]

I took final offer to mean the company will not negotiate any further.

"voting against acceptance of the final
offer shall authorize a strike without any additional
vote being necessary for such strike
authorization."

This is the key part of it. These words are only true on a 3rd vote. No other vote holds an automatic strike with it.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

FINAL OFFER

which would be a 3rd vote. Aka vote no = automatic strike vote

Assuming over 50% voted, or a 2/3 majority vote no.
Though there is no mention in this section about a specific number of votes.

 

[Brownslave688]

Assuming over 50% voted, or a 2/3 majority vote no.

Doesn't matter for this vote. It's not a final offer vote.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Doesn't matter for this vote. It's not a final offer vote.

Some people would try to make us believe it is. And I don't know that there is anything that would prevent the union from calling a strike since we authorized it, regardless of whether it is a final offer or not.

Well, except maybe common sense...

 

[Brownslave688]

Some people would try to make us believe it is. And I don't know that there is anything that would prevent the union from calling a strike since we authorized it, regardless of whether it is a final offer or not.

Right we could call a strike if we vote no. However it's not mandatory. Which is what a final offer vote is.


It's essentially an accept the offer or strike vote.

The fact that the union is preying on the fear that some have about striking makes me sick to my stomach.

Not the company. I expect that from them but our own union leaders acting like company cheerleaders. It's disgusting.

 

[Coldworld]

Right we could call a strike if we vote no. However it's not mandatory. Which is what a final offer vote is.


It's essentially an accept the offer or strike vote.

The fact that the union is preying on the fear that some have about striking makes me sick to my stomach.

Not the company. I expect that from them but our own union leaders acting like company cheerleaders. It's disgusting.

Yep

 

[Just A UPS Guy]

"voting against acceptance of the final
offer shall authorize a strike without any additional
vote being necessary for such strike
authorization."

This is the key part of it. These words are only true on a 3rd vote. No other vote holds an automatic strike with it.

It could be a second, fifth, ninth, or any vote. The distinction is "final offer" and must be declared as such when presented to the membership.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Watching this now. I certainly agree with the fact that some people's criticism of her one video rebutting Tyler went too far and should have focused on the topic and avoided personal attacks. The criticism about her arguments were not, however, unwarranted. But she didn't mention that video, she mentioned the financial analysis videos.

I'm fairly certain the flaming she got on those videos was a result of turning off the comments on the tyler rebuttal video. So, if she wants to play a martyr, she can, but she needs to be honest about what she's really a martyr for.

Trying not to make this too long, one last comment, if she thinks Orion will help scabs do our jobs, she should set up a time to test that theory herself. She'll find out real quick the only reason we can get the job done is because we know it, and orion is a huge obstacle to overcome. They may pay a scab half as much, but if they actually try to run Orion, they will have a staggering amount of service failures, and will have to bring back half the work after they run out of dot hours every day. It's not going to be cheaper for UPS.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

There's just too much bugging me about that video, I have to say some more.

She suggests that any rank and file member who is voting no is being manipulated by political activists. While this may be the case for some, suggesting that all of us are being manipulated is an insult. It implies that we didn't draw our own conclusions, and our arguments are invalid simply because of guilt by association, which is a logical fallacy.

We have valid concerns that are being completely dismissed. If the union wants to argue that 22.4 is necessary for UPS to stay competitive, which is a dubious point at best, they can, but they still need to remember that they represent us and not UPS.

She's a financial analyst, but completely side steps the fact that total compensation will likely fall short of keeping up with inflation by the end of the contract. She also fails to share the fact that if you compare total compensation now vs 5 years from now, if the master passes and you adjust for inflation, you will see only a negligible increase, and only if inflation isn't higher than normal.

You will also see that our compensation structure will shift slightly, wages will be a slightly smaller percentage of total compensation, while benefits will be a larger percentage. These increases are not a selling point, they are trying to hide the fact that we will pay for some of our benefits by diverting some of our compensation away from wages and towards benefits. As a financial analyst, she must be aware of this.

The other "improvements" she mentions are subject to interpretation as to whether they are actually improvements. If you have to present something in the most positive light possible, then it really isn't very good. And if you are actively hiding the bad parts, you are not being very trustworthy.

A strike is meant to scare the company, not the members. We voted for the strike authorization. A strike could happen, we're ready for it, end of conversation. If the company tries to lock us out or replace us with scabs, then we need to be ready to put the squeeze on them and make them see the error of their ways.

We are Teamsters, we are strong, we do not cower in the corner and weep at the mere mention of a strike. She needs to stop embarassing herself and the rest of us with all these signs of weakness.

That's about it.

 

[nancyg]

Folks ,

We , the people , the backbone,heart eat and spirit of this beloved corporation are being sold down river , very , very cheap . We can do so much better than what is being shoved down our throats or up our rear ends . What our Teamster negotiation committee members are tentatively agreeing to is so beneath what we deserve . Let's start with the wages , yes we are already paid nicely but we "earn" it , dont we !!! . What is $4.15 over 5 years , roughly 83 cents a year . What happened to the days of $1.00 , $1.25 , hell 95 cent raises ? U.P.S. recieved such a nice tax cut , from 35% to 21% , and this is the best they can do ? , "NO" !!! . They are forecasted to net 6 , six , BILLION dollar profit this year alone (then add newly added tax cuts ) . We live in the most prosperous nation in the world , our economy is exploding . I'm not getting into politics ,however we have a "BILLION" dollar President , a businessman at that . Why should we vote "NO" is a no brainer ? It's our time , we deserve more , the economy is ripe, tax cuts on businesses , labor shortages, CDL driver shortage , we control the shipping industry all adds up to "it's there for the taking " . This might be our last time in a while to capitalize on all that is front of us . The most that can happen if we fail to vote "no" is we move ahead with this subpar contract , BUT if we were to overwhelmingly vote "NO" we send our representatives back to the table with so much more to gain , folks U.P.S. will bend , but we have to ask for it . We have to continue to engage our fellow coworkers, we have to use all tools available such as SOCIAL MEDIA , flyers , text , emails , parking lot meetings , Union hall meetings. We can do this folks , dont settle for this low ball offer , when we have so much more to gain at such a fruitful time . A vote "NO" does not mean we will go on strike , they still have til July 31st to wrap this up , but if a yes vote now will only get you what is being offered , and our representatives get to go back to playing golf and fancy dinners and vacays. Let's make them work for us , is that to much to ask ?? Remember this , what might be a nice contract for a senior feeder driver looking forward to retirement in a couple years , might look like crap to a new hire part time who is paying his dues , same thing for a combo employee and a package car driver . All that glitters , is not gold . Lastly , I will leave you with this , U.P.S. wants to succeed, so do you , corporate wants the numbers to keep going up , we want our bank accounts to keep thriving , our time with our families going up . Right now what is being offered is only a scratching of the surface of what we could have . And "NO" , I do not want a strike , that's why we send them back to the table to negotiate, but if we dont come together you will never no what you could have had . Unity folks , we can do this !!!!
"VOTE NO "

I got my ballet and voted no on both the master and the supplemental.

 

[DELACROIX]

Just a last ditch effort to scare up some yes votes..

Her charts do not reflect what UPS is saying on their projected Q3 2018 Earnings Release. In a nutshell, continuing profits, reduced cost with their retirements funds due to increasing returns on their investments (last year 14.5%).

I generally get the feeling that she is stating that the International is cowering down on their strike option for liability reasons. It was those rank and file people who voted it down, we are not responsible, take it out on them, leave us alone. Quite a turn from the "Ron Carey" Strike in l997, which she never participated in considering her age, so she speaks from no experience.

A couple of points relating to her data would be that the Strike Fund is handled by the International, the locals are not involved with it's funding. The International raises our Union Dues after the l997 strike to cover those increases.

My Health Coverage during the 2 week strike in l997 that was covered by the Company at that time, they honored those benefits which I never had to use. Currently most of us are now under the Teamster's controlled plans which they clearly stated will continue if there is a work stoppage. (TeamCare).

As far as scabs crossing any picket line with the Teamsters even if the International permits it, that will be another story that NOBODY wants to hear...Even her scare tactics of even thinking or suggesting that scenario really should show where her mind is, even worst considering her paid position.

People..Do not go for this..You will be hearing a lot of imagined horror stories over the next 3 weeks..The game plan is to plant doubt in the minds of the swing votes to cross over and change their votes before the deadline.

Her claim that politics are involved...You kidding me, where has she been over the last 15 years. It always and will always be political, that is the nature of the game, like it or not...

Maybe she is just doing her job to protect the vested interests of her own local and the International, but her willingness not to see how this "Master" will affect other rank and file in different parts of the nation is alarming..Again I will state that if she was working in the Central, East or Southern regions she would be singing a different tune.

 

[wide load]

We have already approved the strike vote. It is a good negotiating tool, but it also means if we vote down the contract, we will go on strike. We do not “go back to the table”, we strike. Of course negotiations will resume as soon as we strike. If you have not been through a strike before, you need to be prepared to be out of work for about 3 weeks. That’s how long it was last time. In my local, we will be without medical insurance. If I need coverage, I can purchase Cobra insurance retroactively. My point is, if the contract does not pass, a strike has financial consequences. Be prepared.

friend off! We won’t strike a single day let alone 3 weeks! We will go back to the table. Wanna know why? No spine.