nospinzone said:
The union's duty of fair representation to all bargaining unit employees, whether union members or nonmembers, has long been recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171, 180-83 (1967)
Syres v. Oil Workers, 350 U.S. 892 (1955).
When a collective bargaining agent(Teamsters) negotiates a contract with the employer, they are negotiating on behalf of union members and non-union members alike. The contract protects both employees equally, and the union is required to represent both employees.
Nospin,
After reading the case you sighted (above), I see no relevence in that case to what you are trying to prove. This was a case about an employee that was discharged for medical reasons, even though he had conflicting medical reports. The Union took his grievence through 4 of the 5 stages of the arbitration process. Before the final stage, the union even paid for him to see a doctor of his choice which returned an unfavorable medical report. At this point, the union decided to no longer push the case due to the fact of that unfavorable report. The courts even upheld the union's decission and found no wrong doing on the part of the union.
Now I agree about the union having to represent all bargaining unit employees. However, your differentiating between union and nonunion members gets a little fuzzy. In right to work states where members don't have to pay dues (Free Riders as we call them) then yes you are correct. However, to ambiguosly state that all employees are covered and negotiated for doesn't hold water. Unless the employee is part of the bargaining unit, then he/she has no right to union representation, benefits, or rights of bargaining unit members.
That’s just the point, Animo. People supporting APWA don’t want IBT representing them anymore. The contract we work under now was paid for with our contributions prior to 2002. If I don’t want IBT negotiating my contract in 2008, then why should I continue giving them money? The hell if I’m gonna send them anymore money. Union representation is based on a democratic model allowing the employees to choose who should represent them.
Just how many people are supporting APWA? I doubt you will have enough interest to even make it to the bargaining tables...(Just my opinion). Secondly, whether you believe your contributions prior to 2002 gave you the current agreement you work under, the point is, just because YOU don't want the IBT to represent YOU after 2008 doesn't mean YOU should neglect YOUR fair part and contribute (pay dues)to the union in order to provide the salaries for the people that are still representing you now....(unless of course you're in a right to work state). Now if memory serves me correctly, didn't UPS workers
CHOOSE to be represented by the Teamsters in 2002?
But the IBT presently owes you all the protection and benefits that go along with representation. And I suspect you still want their representaion and protections until 2008, and if APWA doesn't make it to the bargaining tables, you will still want that representation after 2008. If not, I suggest you take a withdrawal card and find work elsewhere.....oh but where else would you be able to make the big bucks UPS drivers make???
The majority, if not all, of the people at UPS understand the necessity of union representation. They understand that if they don’t support
whichever union is in place, that UPS will screw the grunts that make the Brown Machine move. And APWA would earn that support rather than demand it by providing a service with
value to the people at UPS-- a service that people will recognize and willingly support because its makes their life better.
I totally agree that without any representation, UPS workers would definitely get the short end of the stick. However, I still have not seen anything other than words about what APWA can offer. You presently represent
NO ONE, yet you and your website constantly tell of better insurance, better pension, better representation, better, better, better......
Where is your track record?
What contracts have you negotitated?
Who do you represent?
What medical have you already put in place?
What insurance have you already put in place?
What pension do you already have put in place?
How do you plan to pay officer's wages without an income such as dues?
Why would you expect anyone to pay for something that you tell them they don't have to pay for?
Once again, when the union sits at the negotiating table with UPS, the only voice that UPS cares about are the couple hundred thousand UPS employees that are union members. The suits don’t give a damn about the other million Teamsters. The other million Teamsters don’t drive the brown trucks, sort the packages, or pull the freight with UPS’s logo on it…..therefore, they hold no control over Uncle Buster’s bottom line which is all that Buster cares about.
The industries that those other million Teamsters work in would have an adverse affect on UPS should there be times of Labor struggles. No support for a strike fund, no support on picket lines (although I'm sure the Teamsters wouldn't cross Your lines in that event). How about deciding not to use UPS in favor of a Teamster represented package carrier such as DHL? Tell me that wouldn't affect Brown's bottom line??? So you see, the other million members do in fact hold some control, no matter how subliminal it may be.
This blight is exercising my right to support and elect union representation of my choosing as provided by law. A privilege and right that extends to the people at UPS Freight also. You’re free to exercise that right yourself, as you have so done here, Animo. Don’t we live in a great country??!!
You have every right to pick the representation of your choosing, but you should still support the representation you have until it gets replaced if at all. Yes, we do live in a great country. A country that was built on the backs of generation after generation of hard working Teamsters.
