You are visitor #
on my site!
Welcome to Jill's Thrill...UPS page! UPS page, you say? Yep! Here you'll find opinions from various people regarding the ongoing UPS strike! This is an additional section to my Spout Off page.
Why have I done this, you might ask? Well, I visit a net corkboard freguently and the UPS strike was a recent subject on that board. I decided to make a page for others opinions, as well. So....if you have anything to add to the discussion,
please...by all means...e-mail it to me! Not everyone agrees with this situation, be you Union or non-Union folks, but the discussions that ensue can be quite interesting, to say the least! Please read on for opinions obtained so far on this
subject!! Remember...speak, speak, speak!!
UPS strike
Sure hope UPS and the Teamsters settle their strike soon, but WITHOUT government intervention forcing the
Teamsters back to work. I worked there 16 years with a great bunch of people. What are your thoughts?
Posted by Van T. on Wed Aug 13 10:26:27 1997.
Just happy....
I'm just happy not to be part of an organization in which a few big guys in the head office control my employment
by telling me I'm going to strike against my employer without any chance to voice my opinion about it all.
Posted by JQ on Wed Aug 13 12:01:15 1997.
Who gets paid?
Does the Teamster Union President Jim Carey get paid during the strike? I bet it would be over quickly if he
didn't get paid or any expense money during the strike.
Posted by ARM on Wed Aug 13 12:34:38 1997.
to JQ
The rank and file Teamsters DID reject a contract proposal, and authorized the strike. This was not merely the
Teamster officials making the call.
Posted by Van T. on Wed Aug 13 13:44:28 19
JQ....and Van
Generally in order for a union to have entered the workplace....it had to have been voted in by the employees to
start with. :-)
Van...I hope the strike is settled quickly also. This strike may very well influence how employers/employees deal
with the part-time wage/benefits status across this country. I, for one, do not believe that just because one works
part-time, they should be receiving only half the pay (for the same work, just less hours???). One of the biggest
reasons employers employ part-timers is to avoid paying benefit packages generally enjoyed by a full-time status.
While being part-time has it's advantages to some employees (i.e., flextime), the majority of part-timers must
work 2 or 3 part-time jobs in order to sustain a decent living. In doing so, the part-timers are still without benefit
protection...from any of the jobs, as a rule. I believe there should be a certain amount of part-time jobs available
for college students, retirees, etc., but not for the rest of the working population. Like a fellow stated on television
last night...one does not pay their power bills, cable, food, etc., part-time....nor do we have part-time kids.
Let's face it folks....the companies keep stuffing their pockets with megabuck profits...while their workers are
still "enjoying" wages equivalent to 1973's wages. More profits for these companies is also the big reason for
companies moving down south, or even out of the country. This way, they can pay slave wages, reopen sweat
shops, and offer zero benefits...all the while becoming even fatter cats than they are now. Somethings terribly
wrong here..........
I, for one, also disagree with government intervention. As I stated in a previous post....due to former President
Reagan's extremely UNwise decision to intervene in the '80's Air Traffic Controller strike...workers have
increasingly lost their bargaining power against the companies. It is my opinion, that when one has a skill or
talent to offer a company....they should have equal say in what they will "sell" their trade for. If you think about
it, employees are essentially subcontractors. Most subcontractors, or contractors, state a price for their services.
The company then counter offers....and wahla! You have....negotiations. It's too bad most companies do not feel
that their employees are subcontractors worth negotiating with. All along these employers have set the wages
for employees....what is so wrong with employees doing the same for the services they "sell"?
Just something to think about.......
Posted by Jill on Wed Aug 13 14:35:07 1997.
Politics
Like everyone else, I hope the strike ends soon. There are many "innocent bystanders" that are being badly hurt
by the stoppage. Like Jill, I have noticed the trend to part-timers and feel that in many cases the workers get
shafted by the arrangement. I’m not so sure that is the case in the current UPS dispute, though. An average
part-time wage of $11 per hour plus a wide range of benefits (medical, retirement, etc.) doesn’t smack me as
1973 wages. If that was the case there would not be so many part timers that have stayed with UPS for a long
time. I certainly am not privy to employment records, but I’ve heard and read a great many part-timers who have
been with UPS for 10 or more years. It would be interesting to know how long the average part-timer has been
with the company..
The other point brought up concerns voting on the contract. Correct me if I’m mistaken, but I was under the
assumption that the rank and file voted on a strike action after hearing the recommendations of the Teamster
leadership, but the proposed contract itself has NOT been directly voted upon. There’s a big difference.
As I mentioned in my post earlier, I feel that the matter of who controls the pension fund is the real sticking point.
UPS wants a separate fund for only UPS employees. The Teamster president only won his position by a 4%
margin and cannot lose that pension fund and retain his presidency. I think that political factors are why the
Teamsters are on strike as opposed to the workers benefits and as the strike continues, the workers are going
to realize that something must be done.
Lest I be accused, I am NOT anti-union. But it upsets me to think that the leadership of any union would play
games with the livelihoods of the workers they represent. I hope that some common sense is forthcoming andm
everyone gets back to work.
Posted by bill on Wed Aug 13 15:28:40 1997.
More thoughts...
Please don't assume in any way I'm pro-company or anti-union, but I have a hard time listening to the Union
members gripes. I was born into and currently work in a small family business. I have never seen one benefit. I
pay insurance. I have never seen anything close to a union wage. I still support 4 children and have great living
quarters. No one has ever assured me I will have a job tomorrow. I work hard to assure myself I will.
If part-time work is such an issue, why did the UPS employees take the job? Is the fact hidden that many of jobs
are indeed part-time? Are workers lied to and told they will get full-time positions and then don't?
No way to back either side until a whole picture is painted.
Posted by JQ on Wed Aug 13 15:38:53 1997.
Excellent points...
made by both Bill and JQ! I, for one, am not "set in stone" on what I believe is happening with the UPS strike. I
will concede to Bill, however, that it does reek of politics. While I strongly support workers rights, be it union or
non-union, in regards to the UPS strike, it is extremely hard to decipher what side is right or wrong. It is
especially hard when you're talking about the Teamsters union, who has - no doubt - has had a questionable
history under it's belt. Is this the issue now? Who knows. I do know that (and I heard $9.00/hr) even if a part-time
employee is earning $11.00/hour, and puts in 20 hours a week at that job, he still is unable to support his family
with those wages. I don't know, nor have I heard, if part-time UPS employees are required to pay for part of their
insurance premiums either. And...is that premium pro-rated by the number of hours an employee works? Many
retirement plans are configured by the number of hours/wages one works. That would be interesting to know.
As far as JQ's statements regarding workers not having a guaranteed job future, I have to question (politely) his
response regarding HIS ensuring his own job security. While I have no doubt that JQ is an extremely hard
worker and a definite asset to his family's business, being a part of a family-owned business gives you alittle
more "edge" in securing that future...and I think you are extremely lucky. Not all workers have that alliance (nor
opportunity) however, and they must depend upon their employers (without the benefit of knowing them
personally) and their own hard work for their job security. This, however, doesn't always work, as we all know. It
is becoming increasingly apparent that just because a worker has been employed with a company for 10, 15,
20 or whatever years, does not guarantee job security anymore. There is no such thing as job security anymore.
Is this a good thing?? Used to be when a man/woman graduated from high school, or even college, they went to
work at a company with the notion they would remain employed - if they was loyal & hardworking - until
retirement. Not so anymore. Without warning, nor provocation, an employer can and will terminate
employment...to reduce wages and benefits. Many times a full time employee is replaced with 2 part-time
employees. People, these days it seems, have become increasingly expendable. America is increasingly
becoming a disposable country. Is it really so much to ask to work for a company, for good wages (not just
acceptable and thank-you very much I'm grateful for anything you "give" me) have job security for a job well
done, and have insurance benefits?? Why is it the workers, who really are earning good wages, must be made
to feel badly for wanting to hang on to those wages? I've said it before, those of us who are earning less than
favorable wages, seem to be envious (with reason, of course) of them. Why shouldn't employees expect to earn
more as their employers earn more??? Why is it we think nothing of employers who are greedy (in excess of
millions), but, have a definite problem with workers who are making $11 or even $19 per hour? If you stop to
think about it...those wages aren't that great in today's economy! I think our problem is...we are comparing those
wages...with that of people earning minimum-wage or $5, $6 per hour and thinking..."geez...what are those
other people complaining about..they COULD be making much less!" If the truth be known...the lesser wages I
just stated....stink...and shouldn't be compared to wages everyone SHOULD be enjoying. Corporations such as
(but not limited to) McDonalds, etc., should be ashamed for hiring mostly part-time employers and paying them
minimum or slightly above wages. And no, JQ, I'm sure the employers didn't lie about their part-time positions -
or their pay scale - for that matter. The problem, for alot of unskilled, non-college educated people is...they need
to survive too. Actually, they need to do more than survive. Alot of non-college educated people have plenty of
"hands on" skills and experience in many aspects of business....why should they be denied gainful employment
due to what could possibly have been nothing more than a simple inability or opportunity to have gone to
college? The importance of such an education has really only been touted so highly in this society for probably
the last 20 years. Where does that leave all of 40+ people who may have not had the opportunity to enter
college? An example is, I know a woman who is 60 years old. A very young 60, I might add. She attended high
school up to the 12th grade. However, she never received her high school diploma. Why? She started work
many years ago to help support her family. She has been working in factories all of those years and is/has been
an extremely loyal and hardworking employee. She has been forced to work at many factory jobs, however,
because those jobs have since left the area (yep...moved south to "save" money). Recently, she was - again -
laid off. As a matter of fact, again, the whole company up and relocated to the south. Upon applying to one of
the few remaining factories in town, she was refused employment because she didn't have her G.E.D. or high school
diploma. Mind you....she's been doing the identical job...for 40+ years! She was told if she had her G.E.D. or
diploma...they would have hired her in a NY minute. I hear some of you saying, "Well, maybe she should retire,
after all...she's 60!". Ok, but, if you think back, I stated that every job she has had...has ceased. Meaning
no more benefits...no more retirement plan. She's still plenty young enough to work. As a matter of fact, she
can run circles around most people half her age! She loves to work and is also her sole support. What happens
to her now? Is this fair? She was loyal to her companies. She didn't leave them ....they left her. She'd still
be at her original employ, had they not packed up and cleared town. She was also born of the "old school"...
that if you worked hard, had a good attendance record, devoted yourself to the company....they would return the
favor for your labors...and take care of you until you retired. Boy! Have we been so removed from that era! Where
are we headed?? It's pretty scary to me. What is almost scarier is this attitude that we are disposable...that
workers earning a decent or good living...should be grateful for it and never hope for anything better because
there is always some there to take your place! When did we become such scavangers that we put down other workers
for wanting what each of us should also have??
I'm sorry...but, I don't believe we should be grateful for $11.00 per hour. It's what most of us deserve for giving
our lives for our companies.
**stepping off of soapbox feeling extremely winded**
I find these types of conversations extremely interesting and look forward to your responses. Be nice though
*smile*...I'm not attacking anyone....just presenting my point of view. The beauty in all of this is....I know I will
learn something! :-) Thanks!
Posted by Jill on Wed Aug 13 16:55:33 1997.
clarification
Bill, I worked 10 years as a part-timer before I became a package-car driver (in 1987). It was represented to
me that the drivers mostly came from the part-time employees. At the time, I was making $14.70/hr, and had full
medical benefits for my family as well as myself.
The part-timers were sold down the river in successive contracts, by making new hires come in at substantially
less ($8/hr, and taking the benefits away from their families, only including them). Then once the two-tier system
was in place, there became more emphasis on hiring more part-timers, having them do work that could have
been done on a full-time basis. Then came talk of contracting out work to non-union workers.
After 16 years, I do not work for UPS any longer. I will tell you that it was the hardest, most stressful job that I
ever had, and that the employees there earn every penny that they make because of the way the company is
run. If an employee performs at 100% today, then tommorrow that same level is considered 90%.
I also know that the only reason that I made as much as I did, was because I was a Teamster. The other big
shipping companies don't pay their people as much (RPS, FedEx, etc.)
By the way Bill, the membership always had the right to vote on whether or not to strike in the 16 years that I was
there. From what I gathered from watching the news, there was a vote from the membership on whether to
strike.
Posted by Van T. on Wed Aug 13 17:22:25 1997.
Okay, Folks...
My husband does not work for UPS. But the work he does is directly effected by the strike. He had to take a
weeks vacation this week due to the strike because he had no work to do. That was not tough, but now what is
he supposed to do next week? He might have enough vacation time left to cover another week or so, but then
what? We do not have a fancy union giving us $55.00 a week to feed the family, and the bills still have to be
paid. He did not vote to be out of work. No one asked his opinion. No one said he had a say, yet he will be
effected. Personally, I am very anti-union. I used to belong to one that did nothing but take my money, and when
the company chose to move on and close the factory, the union just shrugged its collective shoulders and said
"that's life!" If I were the head of UPS, I would fire every last one of the striking workers, and hire some people
who will be glad to have work. Get rid of the ingrates. I only make $9.00 an hour and my husband makes a little
better. If we can make it, they can make it. I know some of you are going to think I am a closed minded moron
who is just shooting off my mouth, but, really people! Why should we suffer just because Mr. Cary wants to look
good? Why should many others suffer, as they are, just because the union is too stubborn to do a little give and
take. The heyday of the union is past. They are a dead organization, but they just don't want to admit it yet.
Posted by Marilyn on Wed Aug 13 17:23:53 1997.
Jill
Very good thoughts Jill, but you can have a college degree and still laid off. After getting a degree and working
at several different jobs, I ended up at a major oil company. Started as a draftsman and throught he years
ended up as a field engineer supervising construction jobs. Afte many moves, promotions, and good raises,
with a work schedule of 50 to 60 hours a week. (no overtime) I was called into the bosses office one day and
was told they were going to save salery expenses and since I was the highest paid engineer, I was being laid
off. So after 16 years and working the butt off at the cost of a family, there I was at 55 and no job.
So a degree is not a guarentee of a job in this day and age.
Posted by ARM on Wed Aug 13 17:34:07 1997.
UPS Discussion...continued!! Click here!
Background & graphics provided by 
OH WAIT! BEFORE YOU GO! Thrill me more....please sign my new guestbook! :-) Thanks! P.S. And...remember what your mother's taught you (or should have)...if you have nothing nice to say...STAY OUTTA MY BOOK! :-)
