Avg Joe

My desire to not have more of MY earnings confiscated is now termed GREED? Wow. Your sense of ENTITLEMENT is stunning.

Freightpuppy

Wow!!!! is all I can say to you. If you couldn't find it in your heart for an opportunity to show the company union solidarity by giving up $150-$240 (one hour of sick time), that's pretty sad. We might all be able bodied but if you take a look outside your selfish little bubble, you might see that there are no jobs out there. You must not have a family either because, able bodied or not, a lot of these guys have CHILDREN! If you didn't want to help a fellow UNION member, you'd think (if you were a father) that you would at least help for their children's sake. If you are a father, and you still didn't help, I dearly hope you don't teach your children your values and views.

I don't know if you are a captain or FO but boy oh boy, I just can't wait to fly with you. You sound like a peach! Karma's a you know what and I'm sure you'll get it back two fold....just remember that.

navigatro

freightpuppy,

you said exactly what I was thinking.

Freightpuppy

I didn't want my earnings confiscated either but I did it for my fellow union brothers and sisters. It's called having feelings and empathy....something you clearly lack.

Shaggy....I'm totally with you!

UPSAv8tr

Ladies and Gents,

It appears that any doubts about Scott Farely's leadership ability stem primarily from the Atlanta Instructor thing. I suggest we all view W.L. response on the thread from S.E. on the B & G. This should put this issue to bed. After all, the issue itself centers around W.L. (Scott Farely, the Union, UPS, etc.) and what guidance he gave the instructors, Scott Farely included.

If, after reading that response, any ill feelings toward Scott Farely have not been changed (at least as it pertains to this issue) then it is clear to even the most casual observer that you were in the tank for your repective candidate from the beginning. Scott Farely could have been God himself and that would not have swayed your opinion.

Cheers,

Shaggy1970

My sense of entitlement is zero! You either lack the ability to read or just dense! No matter how you term it, a GREEDY BA$TARD is all I see and so are the rest of guys like you who gave nothing, reference my earlier post! When they invoke article 14H and you get moved to where UPS wants you, without any say, then your earnings will really be confiscated! Not by me or any of the furloughies but rather by taking a line out of anchorage, if you can hold one, which will require you to work 16 days a month ( cause without 4-to-5hundred off property and a open time ban the company will build every line to the contractual limit 89 hours I think) and then commute 2 more days and then spend another 4 days waiting in between your next trips! That my friend is my reality and soon to be yours! Good luck with that one!

The thing that gets me if everyone on property would have just given 65 hours back to the company we would have met UPS goals as far as the savings went! NO Furloghs, no MOU, no issues, but be it that it maybe we have guys like you to thank for it! If thats not GREED with all capital letters then I don't know what is? Tell me something just for $hits and grins how do you and the rest of guys like you, look at yourself in the mirror in the mornings? I know I couldn't knowing that I could have done something to keep my brothers and sisters on property and didn't! I am just saying bro, I hope I never ever end up on a trip with the likes of you!

navigatro

They are too busy looking at their new boat and airplane and 4 cars to look in the mirror.

Commando

Shaggy, please wake up! Or open your eyes to reality. I don't know what world you live in. Our Union is not here to save the bottom 300. This is just the way it is. As it should be. I agree with BT that the MOU violates our Contract. Which is totally wrong and dangerous.

And I did participate in the MOU. Just so u know. But I doubt seriously I will in the future if it conflicts with a Contract it has taken 20 years to get. And from what I "Here" on the line, this is felt by many. I forsee much less participation next time. Hopefully the Retirement package is good, that is the only hope.

And it sounds like your Voting for Scott for one reason only. Which is really short sighted. Scott is not ready, just watch the Forum. It's obvious.

navigatro

Our union is here to "save" ALL jobs and protect the contract. Sometimes (i.e. now) those 2 goals may conflict. Therefore, tough decisions need to be made, and it comes down to priorities.

Those at the bottom see the saving of jobs as a higher priority than defending every last dot in the contract.

Some of those (not at the bottom) do not agree.

I can honestly say that If I was at the top, I would still put a higher priority on saving the jobs.

If you were in the bottom 300, would you honestly say that saving jobs should come second?

Swedish Blender

I read it and agree it clears things up. I think people just have their favorites and won't change.

I've been told by a committee chair (non EB) that RD is on full time trip drop but isn't really in the office that much.

BT's take on the MOU in his original post is troubelsome. It's not perfect but it's what we've got.

Farley is new and after watching the forum, I guess you can say he wants to protect jobs. Can that be a drinking game?

Will there be another forum or anything else to watch on the website? It will be hard to base a decision off watching just that.