FedEx Freight | new work rules at EPH

Nope the majority ruled in this case the rest of the country was fine with contract. Majority always rules.

As usual you have no idea what your talking about, local 89 rejected their local supplement by 94%, then it was pushed through anyway. The majority did not rule, the national contract passed, get your story straight before you mouth off. You know nothing about the Teamsters.
 
As usual you have no idea what your talking about, local 89 rejected their local supplement by 94%, then it was pushed through anyway. The majority did not rule, the national contract passed, get your story straight before you mouth off. You know nothing about the Teamsters.
The only thing worse than a guy that don't know, is a guy that don't know he don't know....and that guy don't know!!! :1036316054:
 
The majority he speaks of is on the National level.

There is more to consider with this story. If you go WAY back, we covered this long ago...

Yeah, the workers at that local were upset. But how long to you hold up a contract that was approved by some 240,000 members in the rest of the country?

http://www.wdrb.com/story/25334234/stalemate-between-ups-and-union-workers-reaches-bitter-end

"The nearly year-long stalemate between Louisville's largest employer and its union workers has reached a bitter and controversial end...

...Local 89 was the largest of the last three local union holdouts. National and regional contracts for all 240,000 UPS teamsters had already been ratified, but couldn't take effect until the locals agreed.

"The goal post kept moving," said Leigh Strope, assistant director of communications at the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. "What was acceptable one day was unacceptable the next."

At first, the biggest issue was healthcare. Then the parties couldn't agree on things like pensions, sub-contractors and other insurance benefits. So the union's top executives literally re-wrote the rules to have the final say.

"About 5 percent of members were holding up an entire national contract and wage increases for the other 95 percent of UPS teamsters," said Strope."


A tough call either way. Please the 5%, or the 95% (Nationally)? I think MOST can understand that after nearly a year, a tough decision had to be made.
 
Last edited:
A tough call either way. Please the 5%, or the 95%? I think MOST can understand that after nearly a year, a tough decision had to be made.
It wasn't the national contract they were upset with, it was the supplements that concern the local.
Seems holding out for a year didn't get them what they desired....sounds familiar!!
 
The majority he speaks of is on the National level.

There is more to consider with this story. If you go WAY back, we covered this long ago...

Yeah, the workers at that local were upset. But how long to you hold up a contract that was approved by some 240,000 members in the rest of the country?

http://www.wdrb.com/story/25334234/stalemate-between-ups-and-union-workers-reaches-bitter-end

"The nearly year-long stalemate between Louisville's largest employer and its union workers has reached a bitter and controversial end...

...Local 89 was the largest of the last three local union holdouts. National and regional contracts for all 240,000 UPS teamsters had already been ratified, but couldn't take effect until the locals agreed.

"The goal post kept moving," said Leigh Strope, assistant director of communications at the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. "What was acceptable one day was unacceptable the next."

At first, the biggest issue was healthcare. Then the parties couldn't agree on things like pensions, sub-contractors and other insurance benefits. So the union's top executives literally re-wrote the rules to have the final say.

"About 5 percent of members were holding up an entire national contract and wage increases for the other 95 percent of UPS teamsters," said Strope."


A tough call either way. Please the 5%, or the 95%? I think MOST can understand that after nearly a year, a tough decision had to be made.

I'm familiar with the situation but the fact is the local has the right to vote the contract down and the unions top executives have no business overriding any legitimate vote which this was. It's a dangerous precedent with deeper implications than just that contract. What if 51% nationwide voted no but union executives decide to override it? The fact is (because you guys love facts) that the union ignored a legitimate vote and did what they wanted, the ends do not justify the means.
 
It wasn't the national contract they were upset with, it was the supplements that concern the local.
Seems holding out for a year didn't get them what they desired....sounds familiar!!
95% Nationally...

You must have skimmed over this part: ""The goal post kept moving," said Leigh Strope, assistant director of communications at the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. "What was acceptable one day was unacceptable the next."
 
95% Nationally...

You must have skimmed over this part: ""The goal post kept moving," said Leigh Strope, assistant director of communications at the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. "What was acceptable one day was unacceptable the next."
94% Locally....I guess their desires mean nothing when it comes to "the greater good"??

No, I didn't skim over anything but I do agree with JD...."top union execs have no business overriding any legitimate vote. It's a dangerous precedent with deeper implications than just that contract"....perhaps even at other elections for other companies located in Louisville....just sayin'!!
 
Not to be "that guy" but this thread has gone WAY off-topic. Y'all might wanna steer it back on course again.

I agree for the most part but it's not uncommon for a thread to morph into something else. I do feel like it's a subject worth discussing we could start a new thread which doesn't seem to always be popular or move it to the union thread where it maybe should have been to start with. I know you too well to think your trying to change or avoid the subject but many on here play the off topic card when they're losing. Just my perspective.
 
A n
Quite a different scenario, in that "what if" case, I would expect. At what point do you go around the last holdout? One that continues to move the goal posts, for nearly a year?

As I said, "tough call either way".
A national contract got put on hold for one supplemental contract. One out of 20 more or less. They might have taken a revote but magority rules a national contract. This one raised part time and seasonal contracts. Not saying it was great contract for Louisville but better than the national average.
 
Quite a different scenario, in that "what if" case, I would expect. At what point do you go around the last holdout? One that continues to move the goal posts, for nearly a year?

As I said, "tough call either way".
"The goal post kept moving," and "What was acceptable one day was unacceptable the next" were statements made by Leigh Strope, assistant director of communications at the Hoffa Jr/Hall lead International Brotherhood of Teamsters. Couldn't this possibly be political spin??

According to makeupsdeliver.org,

http://makeupsdeliver.org/why-did-louisville-vote-no/

"UPS could've easily settled the remaining supplements and ratified the national contract by bargaining over reasonable union demands."

"Some Teamster officials have started a whisper campaign that Local 89 is “holding up the national contract” to continue a lost battle over healthcare. It’s true that Local 89 has called for enhancements in Teamcare coverage, so no members suffer any benefit reduction. But that is just one of several issues on the table."

"At stake is a contract covering nearly 9000 Teamsters who are getting the shaft from UPS. Teamster politics needs to take a back seat"

"The company is counting on the International Union to force through a bad contract in Louisville as political payback because Local 89 President Fred Zuckerman has been a vocal critic of Hoffa and Hall."

It's quite possible it's all political spin, just depends on which side you believe!!
I'm guessing with LOU being the largest world hub in the US, their 5% would carry a lot more leverage than the other 95% IMO...just my two cents.
 
Top