IPA Elections
10-11-2009, 06:42 PM
#101
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Leftof longitudinal
Posts: 1,899
On this we agree. I'm repeating myself, but when a company is overstaffed it usually reduces staff to meet business demand. No problem so far. I'm against a forced confiscation of earnings to buy these jobs (pay ransom). I've NEVER said I was against the voluntary MOU (in principle). If people want to work less and be compensated less I have no problem. I am against the non-contractual aspects of conflict bidding, VAC, how trips are placed into a separate RDG bid bypassing seniority, etc...
As far as MAP... I've never considered it a charity. To me it's simply purchasing short term insurance, with a return of partial premium aspect. It's a simple financial decision, no more.
I'm astounded at how a number of folks act like they're the only ones to ever face a potential furlough. Yes, I've been unemployed... as have HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of others across the globe. Was it fun? Nope. Did I survive? Yep. Never a question in my mind, but it is apparently in doubt for some here by the way they talk.
As far as MAP... I've never considered it a charity. To me it's simply purchasing short term insurance, with a return of partial premium aspect. It's a simple financial decision, no more.
I'm astounded at how a number of folks act like they're the only ones to ever face a potential furlough. Yes, I've been unemployed... as have HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of others across the globe. Was it fun? Nope. Did I survive? Yep. Never a question in my mind, but it is apparently in doubt for some here by the way they talk.
Am sure that there is much more that we would agree. The 'anonymous' environment doesn't always lend to a complete and productive discussion. Being a mid 90's hire, was impressed by the generosity and overall team environment in the IPA crews.
We have grown, and believe the IPA leadership has failed to maintain and grow that unity, communication and education necessary to avoid the bitterness we face currently. As a midterm IPAbaby <g>, see both sides of the lines (88-89's and the 05-07's). Both have legitimate points. The senior folks seem to fail to realize that many of our junior crews are well experienced in furloughs and surviving and taking care of families. The argument that they only want a handout misses the reality that they sought this UPS job for the same reason most of us did: Stability. They have the same experience as our 88-89 folks. They share this industry fact of being furloughed and broken career expectations. The difference: The IPA was perceived as better than most unions. We did take care of our own. Always point out how folks like you helped make whole the dead crews families from previous contracts. It was voluntary, the IPA Foundation is voluntary, etc , etc. In all this generosity, is it unrealistic that junior crews should expect a voluntary drive to take care of LIVE crews families?
Our presentation and discourse is not effective though. The basic fact: Our friction is a great boon to the Labor folks who are masters in exploiting that advantage, almost with scientific precision, to take our eye off the ball by blaming and ranting against each other. Even in disagreement, the basic IPA member is better off standing with other IPA crews. Hope we never lose sight of that fact. We should ask others to remember that Labor reality. UPS dreads our success in that venture.
Regarding the MOU, the EB could have gone a few routes, they have explained why they chose the MOU route. Once that route was chosen, it was a 'seat of the pants' run against the clock (furlough). It was complicated with alot of moving pieces that certainly wasn't ideal. However, it did succeed in many elements regarding unity. Voluntary was OK, the negative came when some of the more junior volunteered to much and the question of 'what did you give?" became something that only Labor loved to hear being asked. It is devisive, there are some very 'rub it in your face' senior folks. No wonder they engender a vitriolic response. The reality, it is the 1%'s who don't care who poison the well for the 99. Myself, believe ignoring the 1% is the ideal.
Good luck to us all, but am optimistic that leaders will look to lead. Hopefully, that is the majority in this forum once reminded.
10-11-2009, 07:09 PM
#102
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 222
On this we agree. I'm repeating myself, but when a company is overstaffed it usually reduces staff to meet business demand. No problem so far. I'm against a forced confiscation of earnings to buy these jobs (pay ransom). I've NEVER said I was against the voluntary MOU (in principle). If people want to work less and be compensated less I have no problem. I am against the non-contractual aspects of conflict bidding, VAC, how trips are placed into a separate RDG bid bypassing seniority, etc...
As far as how the RDG lines are built, I agree I wish they were built differently, and I understand that VTO bidders might be getting short changed in the process. I'm sorry but this is a small price to pay to save 300 jobs. The IPA EB did the best they could with the limited time frame they had to work with. Remeber the MOU was the IPA's idea not UPS's
10-11-2009, 07:09 PM
#103
New ride...
Joined APC: Apr 2005
Posts: 534
Voice of Reason
Avg Joe,
Am sure that there is much more that we would agree. The 'anonymous' environment doesn't always lend to a complete and productive discussion. Being a mid 90's hire, was impressed by the generosity and overall team environment in the IPA crews.
We have grown, and believe the IPA leadership has failed to maintain and grow that unity, communication and education necessary to avoid the bitterness we face currently. As a midterm IPAbaby <g>, see both sides of the lines (88-89's and the 05-07's). Both have legitimate points. The senior folks seem to fail to realize that many of our junior crews are well experienced in furloughs and surviving and taking care of families. The argument that they only want a handout misses the reality that they sought this UPS job for the same reason most of us did: Stability. They have the same experience as our 88-89 folks. They share this industry fact of being furloughed and broken career expectations. The difference: The IPA was perceived as better than most unions. We did take care of our own. Always point out how folks like you helped make whole the dead crews families from previous contracts. It was voluntary, the IPA Foundation is voluntary, etc , etc. In all this generosity, is it unrealistic that junior crews should expect a voluntary drive to take care of LIVE crews families?
Our presentation and discourse is not effective though. The basic fact: Our friction is a great boon to the Labor folks who are masters in exploiting that advantage, almost with scientific precision, to take our eye off the ball by blaming and ranting against each other. Even in disagreement, the basic IPA member is better off standing with other IPA crews. Hope we never lose sight of that fact. We should ask others to remember that Labor reality. UPS dreads our success in that venture.
Regarding the MOU, the EB could have gone a few routes, they have explained why they chose the MOU route. Once that route was chosen, it was a 'seat of the pants' run against the clock (furlough). It was complicated with alot of moving pieces that certainly wasn't ideal. However, it did succeed in many elements regarding unity. Voluntary was OK, the negative came when some of the more junior volunteered to much and the question of 'what did you give?" became something that only Labor loved to hear being asked. It is devisive, there are some very 'rub it in your face' senior folks. No wonder they engender a vitriolic response. The reality, it is the 1%'s who don't care who poison the well for the 99. Myself, believe ignoring the 1% is the ideal.
Good luck to us all, but am optimistic that leaders will look to lead. Hopefully, that is the majority in this forum once reminded.
Am sure that there is much more that we would agree. The 'anonymous' environment doesn't always lend to a complete and productive discussion. Being a mid 90's hire, was impressed by the generosity and overall team environment in the IPA crews.
We have grown, and believe the IPA leadership has failed to maintain and grow that unity, communication and education necessary to avoid the bitterness we face currently. As a midterm IPAbaby <g>, see both sides of the lines (88-89's and the 05-07's). Both have legitimate points. The senior folks seem to fail to realize that many of our junior crews are well experienced in furloughs and surviving and taking care of families. The argument that they only want a handout misses the reality that they sought this UPS job for the same reason most of us did: Stability. They have the same experience as our 88-89 folks. They share this industry fact of being furloughed and broken career expectations. The difference: The IPA was perceived as better than most unions. We did take care of our own. Always point out how folks like you helped make whole the dead crews families from previous contracts. It was voluntary, the IPA Foundation is voluntary, etc , etc. In all this generosity, is it unrealistic that junior crews should expect a voluntary drive to take care of LIVE crews families?
Our presentation and discourse is not effective though. The basic fact: Our friction is a great boon to the Labor folks who are masters in exploiting that advantage, almost with scientific precision, to take our eye off the ball by blaming and ranting against each other. Even in disagreement, the basic IPA member is better off standing with other IPA crews. Hope we never lose sight of that fact. We should ask others to remember that Labor reality. UPS dreads our success in that venture.
Regarding the MOU, the EB could have gone a few routes, they have explained why they chose the MOU route. Once that route was chosen, it was a 'seat of the pants' run against the clock (furlough). It was complicated with alot of moving pieces that certainly wasn't ideal. However, it did succeed in many elements regarding unity. Voluntary was OK, the negative came when some of the more junior volunteered to much and the question of 'what did you give?" became something that only Labor loved to hear being asked. It is devisive, there are some very 'rub it in your face' senior folks. No wonder they engender a vitriolic response. The reality, it is the 1%'s who don't care who poison the well for the 99. Myself, believe ignoring the 1% is the ideal.
Good luck to us all, but am optimistic that leaders will look to lead. Hopefully, that is the majority in this forum once reminded.
Great post! As always, you are a voice of reason in this back-and-forth. And as posted on the B & G, we could use YOU as our president.
10-11-2009, 07:20 PM
#104
Banned
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: On Food Stamps
Posts: 937
10-11-2009, 07:25 PM
#105
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Posts: 135
10-11-2009, 07:37 PM
#106
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 120
So that I can go to that Cesspool that you call the B&G and read how bad the guys that were hired here in 88-89 had it and still have it? Or is it to see a good and a genuine stand up guy's name be dragged through the mud for $hit he didn't do three years ago based on someone's hidden agenda's. No thanks I let you and your buddies do that!
Would a Hello Kitty lunchbox make you feel better?
10-11-2009, 09:09 PM
#110
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Brown 747-400
Posts: 524
I'm astounded at how a number of folks act like they're the only ones to ever face a potential furlough. Yes, I've been unemployed... as have HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of others across the globe. Was it fun? Nope. Did I survive? Yep. Never a question in my mind, but it is apparently in doubt for some here by the way they talk.
Wow...I have to say...your smug attitude is only eclipsed by your arrogance.
It may be news to you, but many of your union brothers in the bottom 300 haven't just faced "potential furloughs," they've already been furloughed from more than one airline for multiple years. Many of us already have that t-shirt. I consider myself lucky that I only have one furlough for 2.5 years under my belt (so far).
Let me ask you this, when you were "unemployed," as you stated above, was it the result of an airline furlough? Have you ever gone from making a solid six figure salary to making nothing? We're not talking about hundreds of millions of others across the globe, or when you were layed off from Walmart making $8 an hour, living at your parent's house, and eating your Mom's pot roast. We're talking about being an adult professional, making good money, with full benefits suddenly being kicked to the curb. We're potentially talking about your union brothers with wives, kids, mortgages, living expenses, etc. Something leads me to believe that you haven't experienced this kind of unemployment in your lifetime. It's your lack of empathy and respect for your co-workers that leads me to this conclusion. When I read your posts, you give off the impression that you wouldn't give us the time of day if we were starving in the gutter.
Here's a hypothetical question for you...if the bottom 300 were furloughed, would you vote to have the union provide for our medical/dental benefits for the duration of our furlough? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
