Yes or NO on NEW CONTRACT?

[HazMatMan]

either way...i'm voting YES! and almost everyone else will too. you'll see. no way this contract gets turned down. anything to avoid a strike....

Wow, that's a perfect example of an informed intelligent way to put the future of you and your family in jeopardy.

Just vote no regardless!!

Which one sounds more intelligent?? I heard the proposals, didn't like them and am voting no. OR, someone voting yes for the hell of it because they are scared of a strike REGARDLESS of what they are proposed with?? Like 804 said, a no vote does not mean a strike. People need to understand that, which I don't think they do. Too busy worrying about the "future of their family" I guess...

 

[GuyinBrown]

A part-timer gets a 25% raise after 90 days??? please explain. I know a part-timer starts at either 8.50 or 9.50 an hour and gets a 50 cents raise after 90 calender days. Explain how that is a 25% raise. Unless I misread your post.

His 25% number was based on the same speculative information that you're using to say this is a terrible contract.

 

[HazMatMan]

I think the point is that any information given out now is speculative. It may or may not be true but the point remains we should reserve judgement until all details are made public. To do otherwise is to jump the gun and seems a bit silly and for some to come here and espouse rumors as gospel is irresponsible.

I agree, but if there is any truth to these proposals my vote would sway to the no side...

 

[HazMatMan]

His 25% number was based on the same speculative information that you're using to say this is a terrible contract.

So, getting info from a Steward that got his info from a Business Agent is speculative info?? AND I never said this was a terrible contract, just said from what I am being informed with from my Steward that I would vote no.

 

[Damok]

I agree, but if there is any truth to these proposals my vote would sway to the no side...

Understood and thanks for the clarification

 

[NI3]

So even if the "details" are true, it seems nobody in here thinks the $6 billion figures in. Well I would think that the company looks at that as a major give in. Wonder how much more that would give us in compensation. Not that we should not have helped CS but c'mon it surely plays a part in the reason we aren't getting COLA.

Agreed, and if Big Brown is willing dip this deep into their wallet and knowingly sacrificing their hard earned and extremely rare AAA credit rating, I would imagine the cost of not doing so before the new pension rules take effect must be ridiculous. I don't understand how some expect a better contract if UPS is hit with a even bigger tab for CS by the government.

 

[GuyinBrown]

I agree, but if there is any truth to these proposals my vote would sway to the no side...

Seems like you've already agreed that it's speculative....

 

[HazMatMan]

Are you saying UPS doesn't buy fuel?

How much is .30 times all the drivers + what all other employees are getting?

What does eskew make compared to all other COEs and what is their stock doing?

Not all drivers turn in sales leads, because they don't want more work.
Maybe you make too much money for mgmt. to hook new accounts

UPS almost lost the Starbucks account in 1998 because a driver was woking out and showering in one of it's facilities. Can you imagine having to explain that to Howard Schultz?

Why should UPS pay because there is no national health plan?

Have a clue, sounds like you're the greedy one here. If UPS was in the red would you give something back? I don't think so. Profit isn't a bad thing (I know you've heard that) UPS must keep making money to support you and the union.

Sure UPS buys fuel, and trucks, and airplanes, and a hell of a lot of other things but unlike UPS, I don't have 4.2 billion in my pocket when all is said and done.

 

[HazMatMan]

Seems like you've already agreed that it's speculative....

There is a difference between speculation and information isn't there???

 

[GuyinBrown]

There is a difference between speculation and information isn't there???

Not necessarily. There is a difference between speculation and fact. Information can be correct or incorrect. In your response to Damok's post that it is speculative information right now, you agreed. You said that if there is any truth to the proposals, your vote would be "no". I can live with that. Let's wait for the truth to come out though.

 

[HazMatMan]

Not necessarily. There is a difference between speculation and fact. Information can be correct or incorrect. In your response to Damok's post that it is speculative information right now, you agreed. You said that if there is any truth to the proposals, your vote would be "no". I can live with that. Let's wait for the truth to come out though.

Ok, fair enough.

 

[local804]

I remember striking to keep the central states in 97. Where did that get us? Ten years later UPS is able to cut their losses. UPS was right on that issue. And now have to bail out. That costs more money now than it would have then. Therefore less money now for all the things you want. If you want socialized health care move to Canada.

1989- If the Central states 10 years ago would have been a teamster-ups pension, there is a high probability they would have cut the pension anyway. UPS trustees voted to cut our pension 30% and did. They are atm going to an arbitrator to cut local 177 (NJ) by 30% also.We are part of this awesome UPS run pension plan that you keep talking so much about. Was UPS right on the issue? Please do me a favor, if you dont know what your talking about or have no clue, please STFU. This UPS-Teamster pension plan is now worse than the Teamter plan in the CS. Have a good day.

 

[sendagain]

I am retired and my yearly cost for keeping the medical in retirement is going up another $772 a year starting in 08. There's some money the company is going after, and by the way, they don't tell you about these possible increases when you retire. In fact, they tell you almost nothing.

 

[GuyinBrown]

Sure UPS buys fuel, and trucks, and airplanes, and a hell of a lot of other things but unlike UPS, I don't have 4.2 billion in my pocket when all is said and done.

I agree that 4.2 billion is a large number but you need to keep things in perspective. Again, I don't claim 47 Billion is an entirely accurate number, but I'm fairly certain that was close to the total revenue UPS had last year. Of that 47 Billion, 4.2 Billion was profit... the amount they had left after they took care of all their obligations.

That's a lot of money. More than any of us will ever see in 5 lifetimes no doubt. But as a percentage, it's really not that much. Let's say you made $470 dollars last week. After you take care of all your costs for the week, tax, food, gas, rent, misc expenses, you find that you have $428 in expenses and you're left with $42. Doesn't seem like much, now does it? Can you get by? Sure. All your expenses are paid for that week. But what if something unexpected comes up? What if your hot water tank goes bad and you have to replace it? Will $42 cover that? What if you want to buy a new car? You're either adding an expense that will cut into your $42 a week or your going to have to save up for quite a while to pay it off free and clear.

Point is, yeah $4 Billion is a hell of a lot of money, but when your financial obligations are $43 billion... it really isn't. You need to get over the monetary number and look at the percentages.

 

[HazMatMan]

(1) It IS a cut in pay. You've heard of inflation, right. IN-FLAY-SHUN. Look it up. Like, $3 gas. Maybe $6 in 2013. Yes, UPS pays it too. But so does FedEx. That's why UPS gets to add a fuel surcharge to its rates whenever it can signal FedEx and DHL to do the same and still make lots of money. But it's not a reopener for us.

(2)And why are we going BACKWARDS on making seniority and progression and medical benefits for parttimers and god knows what else we haven't heard about yet? It's not like they're buying us off with money.

(3)Starting parttimers at 1980(!) wages (plus 50 cents) is just management stupidity. Bad point when you're trying to hire and it won't save them much money. But not giving medical benefits for new hires is (a)a huge wage cut for them and (b)a real blow to everybody else's health plans. I think I saw someone say the capitation is about $14/hr, and the value lost to new hires (effective wage cut) is maybe half that on average (mostly they're young and healthy). The other half subsidizes the health benefits the rest of us get (and won't if they're not on the rolls, so expect even worse benefit cuts than otherwise).

Not going backwards is a "demand of the greedy"? You wear a tie at work? Sounds like it.

I get that same impression about the tie wearing.

 

[brazenbrown]

You joined in FEB 2007? Everybody is here to have their say.

You missed my point! He has specifically registered to bad mouth the contract and then posted the same exact thing he copied from another website in several places. I find his manipulative efforts distrubing especially before we know all the details.

There, I had my say again!

 

[local804]

You missed my point! He has specifically registered to bad mouth the contract. I find his manipulative efforts distrubing especially before we know all the details.

There, I had my say again!

Brazen,
You might be in the closet about the details, but we here in our local are well informed about ours. We have had building meetings led by our BM who is on the neg committee and we have a huge local meeting on the 14th. Its not so hush hush outside of your bubble.

 

[HazMatMan]

It's absolutely STUPID to run a poll on this contract when NONE of us actually have seen it.

It's absolutely STUPID to sit and complain about hearsay.

It would be SMART to wait until we all actually got to read the proposed new contract, no?

Just like watching tv, if you don't like what you see here change channels.. From what we are hearing from our reps (Stewards) at work, that is what we are going by. My Steward gave me the proposals and I do not like them, it is my right to vote yes OR no on it..

 

[HazMatMan]

Brazen,
You might be in the closet about the details, but we here in our local are well informed about ours. We have had building meetings led by our BM who is on the neg committee and we have a huge local meeting on the 14th. Its not so hush hush outside of your bubble.

Couldn't have said it better myself!! Brazen seems to have a problem with people who say they are going to vote no..

 

[HazMatMan]

I agree that 4.2 billion is a large number but you need to keep things in perspective. Again, I don't claim 47 Billion is an entirely accurate number, but I'm fairly certain that was close to the total revenue UPS had last year. Of that 47 Billion, 4.2 Billion was profit... the amount they had left after they took care of all their obligations.

That's a lot of money. More than any of us will ever see in 5 lifetimes no doubt. But as a percentage, it's really not that much. Let's say you made $470 dollars last week. After you take care of all your costs for the week, tax, food, gas, rent, misc expenses, you find that you have $428 in expenses and you're left with $42. Doesn't seem like much, now does it? Can you get by? Sure. All your expenses are paid for that week. But what if something unexpected comes up? What if your hot water tank goes bad and you have to replace it? Will $42 cover that? What if you want to buy a new car? You're either adding an expense that will cut into your $42 a week or your going to have to save up for quite a while to pay it off free and clear.

Point is, yeah $4 Billion is a hell of a lot of money, but when your financial obligations are $43 billion... it really isn't. You need to get over the monetary number and look at the percentages.

Your comparing me having 42 dollars left in my pocket after all expenses paid to UPS's 4.2 billion after all expenses paid?? I think i'd rather be in UPS's boat...To start with 43 billion and end up with 4 billion is a lot different than ending up with 42 dollars from 428. Big percentage difference....