What is the REAL reason negotiations have stalled?

[Just A UPS Guy]

OK. This is my theory. Earning number is bad. Releasing it before the strike will not help UPS negotiating with the Union one iota. UPS stock would be punished by Wall Street and that would be a double whammy. Releasing it after the deal with the Union lessen the blow; oh, look it is bad but at least we have a deal with the Union.

I don't think for a second they would be hurt by a dip in stock because of a bad report. They can recover from that, there's no going back on raising wages to a new floor. If the report was bad, they'd wave it like a rainbow flag in June to show why they can't pay PTers. They're hiding the report because it is favorable for us.

 

[hondo]

I still find it interesting that Chicago locals 705 and 710 who are separate from the national, settled their contract and have an agreement, but we do not have a national agreement yet. And they are usually holding out longer than the national.

L705 has only TA'd (settled) non-economic issues.

 

[HarryWarden]

I hate that they disable the comments want to see people opinions

Vast majority of comments I’ve seen on Twitter and YouTube have been on our side thankfully

 

[PT 4 Life]

Vast majority of comments I’ve seen on Twitter and YouTube have been on our side thankfully

Most part timers don’t even know they’re in the union. I could go ask half my part timers who’s our shop stewards and they wouldn’t know.

 

[Undertow]

There was a study done by someone at MIT, I think, that concluded that earnings reports pushed back more than five days was not a good sign versus reports moved forward were a good sign. But I don’t know if it’s data included circumstances of a possible strike. I don’t think the profit/loss data of Aug 1-8 would be included in the second quarter and you could make the same point by revealing that information before August 1 right before a possible strike.

That might be true to an extent but only in the abstract given the current impasse between the company and it's labor force. Most analysts that usually listen in on a quarterly earnings call and ask questions aren't solely interested in whether the company beat the number that past guidance were expecting. Many put much more emphasis on potential future guidance before they consider altering their current recommendations regarding the stock.

Had the company not moved the date of the release back and just gone ahead and released numbers that did surpass what the consensus had previously expected, it's not as if all the analysts would revise their recs on the stock upward from Hold to Buy or Strong Buy if they couldn't get a definite answer from the CEO or CFO stating "There won't be any chance of a strike." The boardroom in Atlanta certainly knows that.

They are coming off 3 years of record profits and they have a pretty good idea that FedEx and USPS are in worse shape than they were in 1997 and possibly far less likely to retain much additional temporary volume they'd see in the event of a strike. If the company believes the competition isn't much of a threat then it might feel even more like taking some really hard swings at a union they have long despised and it's president who they likely despise even more so.

 

[2Down2Many2Go]

Most part timers don’t even know they’re in the union. I could go ask half my part timers who’s our shop stewards and they wouldn’t know.

Most fulltimers don't know what's going on ....I had a full-time Driver ask me what was going on smh.

.

 

[PT 4 Life]

Most fulltimers don't know what's going on ....I had a full-time Driver ask me what was going on smh.

.

Sadly it’s the same here. Why I’m curious how a strike will play out.

 

[Just A UPS Guy]

Most fulltimers don't know what's going on ....I had a full-time Driver ask me what was going on smh.

.

I had to explain to a 29-year driver how his PT pension credits work in our system. He thought he had three years to go...he could've left two years ago.

 

[2Down2Many2Go]

I had to explain to a 29-year driver how his PT pension credits work in our system. He thought he had three years to go...he could've left two years ago.

And it's sad that they blame on part timers

 

[Pullman Brown]

That might be true to an extent but only in the abstract given the current impasse between the company and it's labor force. Most analysts that usually listen in on a quarterly earnings call and ask questions aren't solely interested in whether the company beat the number that past guidance were expecting. Many put much more emphasis on potential future guidance before they consider altering their current recommendations regarding the stock.

Had the company not moved the date of the release back and just gone ahead and released numbers that did surpass what the consensus had previously expected, it's not as if all the analysts would revise their recs on the stock upward from Hold to Buy or Strong Buy if they couldn't get a definite answer from the CEO or CFO stating "There won't be any chance of a strike." The boardroom in Atlanta certainly knows that.

They are coming off 3 years of record profits and they have a pretty good idea that FedEx and USPS are in worse shape than they were in 1997 and possibly far less likely to retain much additional temporary volume they'd see in the event of a strike. If the company believes the competition isn't much of a threat then it might feel even more like taking some really hard swings at a union they have long despised and it's president who they likely despise even more so.

Okay, then it’s more likely that the change was based on an assumption that there is a tentative agreement by the August 8, to calm the fears of investors on the future trajectory of the company. Because I hear from your comment that the pushback is because there is no guarantee of a agreement therefore not calming the fears of investors.

 

[I have NOT been lurking]

Vast majority of comments I’ve seen on Twitter and YouTube have been on our side thankfully

The only decent snow mexican

 

[Pullman Brown]

The only decent snow mexican

What’s a snow Mexican?

 

[I have NOT been lurking]

What’s a snow Mexican?

@Just A UPS Guy can explain
Or @rickyb

 

[Just A UPS Guy]

What’s a snow Mexican?

It's a Canadian, we get 'em in AZ all winter long.

 

[Just A UPS Guy]

And it's sad that they blame on part timers

Blame what on PTers?

 

[PT 4 Life]

Blame what on PTers?

Everything and anything

 

[Undertow]

Okay, then it’s more likely that the change was based on an assumption that there is a tentative agreement by the August 8, to calm the fears of investors on the future trajectory of the company. Because I hear from your comment that the pushback is because there is no guarantee of a agreement therefore not calming the fears of investors.

That's a possibility, but I wouldn't put anything in the "likely" category given how little anybody not in the room during the last round of negotiations really has to go on.

Here's what we do know. A strike might hurt upper management's bottom line in the near term, but it's not as if any of those few elites would have to work another day in their lives even if that were to occur. It's not as if they couldn't afford the short term pain and if they saw an opportunity to increase the chances of achieving long term goals by taking on a short term hit, then whatever collateral damage occurs in the wake of that pursuit could be deemed as acceptable in their eyes.

Did the orchestrators of the Enron fraud really care that their schemes destroyed a company and turned a majority of it's employees' lives upside down? Not really. Most of them just went on to work at places like Goldman Sachs and ExxonMobil and just employed the same tactics on a far wider scale thus driving up energy prices for far more people by due to rampant speculation in energy markets. All the destruction and upheaval they caused the first time didn't deter them from pursuing their ideological ambitions a second time.

 

[Just A UPS Guy]

That's a possibility, but I wouldn't put anything in the "likely" category given how little anybody not in the room during the last round of negotiations really has to go on.

Here's what we do know. A strike might hurt upper management's bottom line in the near term, but it's not as if any of those few elites would have to work another day in their lives even if that were to occur. It's not as if they couldn't afford the short term pain and if they saw an opportunity to increase the chances of achieving long term goals by taking on a short term hit, then whatever collateral damage occurs in the wake of that pursuit could be deemed as acceptable in their eyes.

Did the orchestrators of the Enron fraud really care that their schemes destroyed a company and turned a majority of it's employees' lives upside down? Not really. Most of them just went on to work at places like Goldman Sachs and ExxonMobil and just employed the same tactics on a far wider scale thus driving up energy prices for far more people by due to rampant speculation in energy markets. All the destruction and upheaval they caused the first time didn't deter them from pursuing their ideological ambitions a second time.

I see what you mean about Enron execs, but I'd like to think UPS is slightly more than an elaborate ponzi scheme.

 

[Pullman Brown]

That's a possibility, but I wouldn't put anything in the "likely" category given how little anybody not in the room during the last round of negotiations really has to go on.

Here's what we do know. A strike might hurt upper management's bottom line in the near term, but it's not as if any of those few elites would have to work another day in their lives even if that were to occur. It's not as if they couldn't afford the short term pain and if they saw an opportunity to increase the chances of achieving long term goals by taking on a short term hit, then whatever collateral damage occurs in the wake of that pursuit could be deemed as acceptable in their eyes.

Did the orchestrators of the Enron fraud really care that their schemes destroyed a company and turned a majority of it's employees' lives upside down? Not really. Most of them just went on to work at places like Goldman Sachs and ExxonMobil and just employed the same tactics on a far wider scale thus driving up energy prices for far more people by due to rampant speculation in energy markets. All the destruction and upheaval they caused the first time didn't deter them from pursuing their ideological ambitions a second time.

UPS delivers too much to fail right now so the company isn’t going anywhere. I don’t know if we are comparing apples to oranges with those situations and examples but I agree that the c-suite’s level of risk is minimal compared to the streets but how much we deliver cannot just be absorbed by the existing industry players. You can over think situations.

 

[Undertow]

I see what you mean about Enron execs, but I'd like to think UPS is slightly more than an elaborate ponzi scheme.

The sectors are certainly different and the shipping business model is certainly far more transparent than a company that was essentially just buying and selling the price of energy, but that by itself is no guarantee that the boardroom doesn't have a broader agenda that's beholden to an ideology that runs contrary to the stated goals of the union it has grown accustomed to dealing with from a position of strength.

No company in ALEC wants to come out of a negotiation with it's union emerging stronger. I wouldn't put it past the board in Atlanta to lose a little if they thought the union lost far more. This "TA" is that in name only at this point and the company could just as easily withdraw all of it a week into a work stoppage if they thought there was a good enough chance that O'Brien saw an exodus of UPS hourlies after all the gains they assumed were money in the bank just weeks prior were suddenly gone like a mirage in the desert.

I think we need to be prepared for all possibilities and not just "Eventually the company will yield to hourlies, the general public, big institutional investors, etc." For many years, the largest holder of shares was the Casey Foundation, an organization sharing the last name of the company's founder. When that foundation took issue with UPS's growing role in ALEC, it's not as if the company altered it's course even in the slightest. If the C-suite doesn't care what the largest shareholder thinks, then they might not care what anybody outside that isolated insular circle thinks.