Central States
#1
Posted July 30 2011 - 08:20 AM
#2
Posted July 31 2011 - 08:41 AM
BeReal, on July 30 2011 - 08:20 AM, said:
#3
Posted July 31 2011 - 10:06 AM
Almost every point you have laid out was Jim Santangellos responsibility up until a year and a half ago with the exception of freight and car haul. The IBT doesn't enforce contracts on the local level especially when the local exercises its autonomy and says leave us alone, Jim was famous for that. Points 3, 4 and 5 came right to his desk and he didn't do shit. As far as Coke the last round, the IBT and the JC President(Cammack) told THE LOCALS that there was full support and the LOCALS decided to not move and the members supported the LOCALS recommendation. The IBT and JC made it clear that they would support a strike, very clear.
In car haul a national project was put together and good ol Zuckerman killed it, stating he had better ideas that never came to fruition.
Freight
As far as your pension comment, workers organize for a voice on the job, respect and the right to fight for more at first. Some want it right away but the fact is most workers don't prioritize it. They build towards a pension after we educate them on the importance of one. Pension is important to US and unfortunately nonunion workers are so beat down when they organize they want a contract that gives them rights first. WE shouldn't shove it down their throat. In time they move towards a pension. The pension rules are written this way. You have time to bring them in because of the retroactivity of the plan. Being a teamster in not "all about the pension" sorry, it's a piece of it and our unions biggest gains historically were without the pension, that's a fact. The pension came later, then it was built on and you and I inherited it. It's about workers rights and fairness on the job. They gain pensions in time as they should.
Pension? Pope? Lol, now that is funny. Look at her record before you commit your vote. Educate yourself on how all of this ties together with facts and the right people taking responsibility for their actions. I think I responded to every point. Hopefully you are open to dialog so that you may change your mind and find that Hoffa and his team is the best for the job.
#4
Posted July 31 2011 - 11:06 AM
BeReal, on July 30 2011 - 08:20 AM, said:
#5
Posted July 31 2011 - 12:27 PM
Because the Central States was falling apart UPS took a position to offer a far superior plan to the members. The 25 and out was not funded when it went thru like our PEER in the West They paid to withdrawal and it was very smart for Hall and Hoffa to negotiate what they did. Let's talk about what would have happened had they not moved out of Central States:
UPS would have given a last and final offer with there superior Pension plan in it and the members would have been forced to vote on it. It would have passed with no $6 billion buyout. Puff, gone, see ya, bye bye for free, or
We would have called a national strike over the Central States and taken a position the encourage members not to consider the companies superior plan. Wonder how the members nationaly would have responded? Wonder if the entire nation would have witnessed a national strike showcasing Gegares failure to run the Central States. It would have been all over the media and very hard to ignore the failures of Gegare and the geniuses that didn't deal with the 25 and out or the overall fund, or
In la la land UPS was going to pay every penny to keep the fund up, continue the liability, be held responsible as the largest contributor to the plan further arguing their position for pension reform and the elimination of multi employer pensions plans
Hmmmm, I like the option Hall and Hoffa took, it was a very difficult position and these are tough times. Instead our members that were involved in those negotiations ended up with contractural wage increases, pension increases, A new pension for some that was an improvement, 12,000 new members organized as well as hundreds of contract changes.
I love to fight but I don't think it's right to put everyone in harms way for a political propose, that's what is wrong with the politicians in this country.
#6
Posted July 31 2011 - 02:51 PM
IBBadDude, on July 31 2011 - 12:27 PM, said:
Because the Central States was falling apart UPS took a position to offer a far superior plan to the members. The 25 and out was not funded when it went thru like our PEER in the West They paid to withdrawal and it was very smart for Hall and Hoffa to negotiate what they did. Let's talk about what would have happened had they not moved out of Central States:
UPS would have given a last and final offer with there superior Pension plan in it and the members would have been forced to vote on it. It would have passed with no $6 billion buyout. Puff, gone, see ya, bye bye for free, or
We would have called a national strike over the Central States and taken a position the encourage members not to consider the companies superior plan. Wonder how the members nationaly would have responded? Wonder if the entire nation would have witnessed a national strike showcasing Gegares failure to run the Central States. It would have been all over the media and very hard to ignore the failures of Gegare and the geniuses that didn't deal with the 25 and out or the overall fund, or
In la la land UPS was going to pay every penny to keep the fund up, continue the liability, be held responsible as the largest contributor to the plan further arguing their position for pension reform and the elimination of multi employer pensions plans
Hmmmm, I like the option Hall and Hoffa took, it was a very difficult position and these are tough times. Instead our members that were involved in those negotiations ended up with contractural wage increases, pension increases, A new pension for some that was an improvement, 12,000 new members organized as well as hundreds of contract changes.
You continue to prove yourself to be a moron. Ups would have had to pay the withdrawal liability in any event. What Huffa and Hall did was fuck every other member in Central States by allowing UPS out of the fund. And don't say that stupid shit that Gegare let them out. Huffa and Hall met with Gegare at the Detroit airport with UPS management and told Gegare they were going to allow UPS out of the fund because UPS was going to put a DVD video out on Huffa. Gegare told them not to allow it. Why don't you ask Huffa and Hall about that meeting. And the UPS pension for these members is the worst pension of any of the funds including Central States. More Huffa lies. You won't win the election like that.
I love to fight but I don't think it's right to put everyone in harms way for a political propose, that's what is wrong with the politicians in this country.
#7
Posted July 31 2011 - 07:31 PM
Gegare did let them out and the fund would have had to sue UPS to get their money, that would have taken a few years, you think? Oh, minus the money UPS put in where would the fund be? Hmmmmm, can you say defunkt at the hands of UPS and Gegare. That would make great headlines for our union, who's the moron?
I don't care where they told him and your lie is that the central states has a better benefit than the UPS plan, that is a fact! I hate it, I don't like to admit it but that transaction saved the fund. Do you think the battle would have had a better outcome?
So let's stop the name calling and talk facts. The great thing about our union is we can debate this after the fact because of strong leadership. Had Hoffa and Hall not done what they did Gegare would be plastered as the man that drove the fund into the ground and the UPS strike killed it. Don't think he would have ran for GP in that case, lol. See they saved your guys ass and he doesn't have the sense to see it. Check my logic, look at the numbers in the fund, take out what UPS put in and see where it would be while it was trying to capture it's withrawl liability in court. we all know UPS wouldn't have wrote that check freely.
#8
Posted August 01 2011 - 04:05 AM
IBBadDude, on July 31 2011 - 12:27 PM, said:
#9
Posted August 01 2011 - 04:17 AM
IBBadDude don’t know what he is talking about but like all Hoffa supporters they think because they keep saying things that are not true that our members will believe it. I have news for all of you Hoffa supporters GEGARE wins in a landslide because of UPS and FRT and waste management and US foods and Kroger and super valu and all of the other companies HOFFA and HALL have screwed in the last 5 years.. The members will remember in November!
#10
Posted August 01 2011 - 06:52 AM
Look into the history of how multi employer plans have collapsed, very sad situations. Obviously we can agree to disagree.
Monday morning quarterbacking is what you call it.
#11
Posted August 08 2011 - 01:17 PM
Barking Dog, on August 01 2011 - 04:05 AM, said:
#12
Posted August 08 2011 - 02:01 PM
Barking Dog, on August 01 2011 - 04:05 AM, said:
-Barking Dog-
Seems like every Teamster that ever approaches the subject tends to forget what a bad deal it is for the part-timers in who's name contributions are handed over to the multi-employer funds. Damn few will see even a penny of those contributions returned....whereas, if they could be placed in some sort of 401K plan, they could follow the P/T'er as he follows his career chain.
Granted, I realize why Teamsters appreciate - and want - contributions being made in the names of P/T'ers, in that it represents yet another form of welfare; those who DIDN'T earn it receive benefit of the contributions of those who DID earn it...but will never receive it.
May be legal. May be in the contract. But the way the way the Teamsters treat their P/T members in that regard is pretty reprehensible.
-scb-
#13
Posted August 08 2011 - 04:07 PM
scb, on August 08 2011 - 02:01 PM, said:
Seems like every Teamster that ever approaches the subject tends to forget what a bad deal it is for the part-timers in who's name contributions are handed over to the multi-employer funds. Damn few will see even a penny of those contributions returned....whereas, if they could be placed in some sort of 401K plan, they could follow the P/T'er as he follows his career chain.
Granted, I realize why Teamsters appreciate - and want - contributions being made in the names of P/T'ers, in that it represents yet another form of welfare; those who DIDN'T earn it receive benefit of the contributions of those who DID earn it...but will never receive it.
May be legal. May be in the contract. But the way the way the Teamsters treat their P/T members in that regard is pretty reprehensible.
-scb-
#14
Posted August 08 2011 - 04:35 PM
Barking Dog, on August 08 2011 - 04:07 PM, said:
-Barking Dog-
I've "gone out west"....and I've talked to the those who are representative of the 50 or 60 short-term P/T'ers who exist for each one of the "20 plus yaer [sic] part timers"...and who don't receive any pension at all. Nor do they receive a penny of the money that was deposited in THEIR name for hours THEY worked in the Teamster funds...money that could be disbursed upon termination of THEIR employment and used to fund THEIR retirement, instead of serving as a welfare subsidy to a chosen few. Think the Teamsters give their money back to them? Yeah....right!
As for how UPS "traets [sic] them", I think UPS "traets" them exactly as they had reason to expect that they'd be treated when they hired in. And any time they don't like how they've been treated, it seems that they're allowed to go elsewhere....a freedom which is represented in that fact that there are 50 or more short-term p/ter's than there are 20 year retirees (as a side note: I think I've made my position clear here over the years as to just how much "respect" I have for those who make a "career" of P/T work at UPS in the first place. In a word, it's not much).
The union has sold the p/t'ers down the river in two ways; first, by sacrificing their wages to benefit the full-timers. Secondly, by encouraging them to hang around year after year (at low ages) waiting for a full-time position at a time when they should be actively seeking a career...a CURRENT career. Then one wonders why, in the "RTW" states, such a small percentage of the P/T'ers maintain union membership. Big mystery that.
Think about it; as much as UPS is castigated, it seems to be the best that a Teamster can hope for....and they'll literally wait around for years to be subjected to MORE of what they decry as "crap"! Make sense to you?
As for who's to blame...well, from my perspective, it's systemic. Doesn't matter who the Teamster "leader" is; their impact will be the same. Due to the nature of the membership - a membership that keeps its head buried in the sand without once ever venturing to lift it up to take a look around at reality - any and all potential "leaders" of the union have to bend. They can't be honest and be elected. They can't serve in the best interests of the membership because the members themselves won't let them. They can't pass on more than the merest glimpse of the reality the union faces and maintain any hope of staying in office. The result? Well, exactly as can be seen; a union that has lost close to half it's card-caring members....and well OVER half of the members jobs in the organization's core industry. Hoffa, TDU, Pope, etc.....all the same. All they can do is make promises they can't deliver and tune themselves to the emotions of a rank 'n' file which is absolutely out of touch of the economic environment they're functioning it. Sad really.
Off pulpit now....
-scb-














