Roberto

ChevyDog,

Thanks for the info. I was wondering where the limiting seats are, so I will keep an eye on that one and any others that are identified.

Roberto

say that again

I know, isn't it great! We're saving the company a ton of money on all that money they used to pay out in over time! Now the FQS are actually doing what they get paid to do!

And to answer your next question, no, I am not management.

Buck92

If UPS keeps this up, they'll start missing service and losing long-term customers. Poppin pimples on their funny nose with a hatchet...

JustUnderPar

I think this may be the point of the IPA doing this. The FQS are now doing work that Union workers once did. UPS is getting ready to cross a line.

They want FedEx to unionize their drivers, but they dont want their own pilots unionized(the FQS's).

Guess we shall see how it plays out.

JustUnderPar

Roberto,
I think if you look at how much OT is out there, the company will have a hard time covering it. It's never as simple as it looks. The last 45 days or so the reserve usage in ANC is way up. There was almost NO OT in the system to start with when the furlough was announced. Now things are different.

Short sighted many believe this is what the company wants, maybe. OT/JA bans dont work, maybe. But long term when we show what the FQS's are doing. Taking our jobs. We will win.

The next couple of months will be interesting to say the least.

JUP

Roberto

I believe UPS will have a counter argument that they have not replaced any IPAers (do you see managers awarded any lines?). They will have ample statistics showing an over-manning situation, numbers which the IPA has mostly concurred with.

What the managers are doing has been a contractual provision for over 21 years and 3 UPS/IPA contracts (past practice). No managers have been hired as a result of the impending IPA furlough.

If the managers are used in greater numbers, it will only be after IPAers voluntarily refrain or decline from flying patterns that they have a long history of accepting. If the IPA wants the flying, they can have it. No replacement there.

turkeydrvr

Roberto,

The company has never flown FQS (most don't manage anything) during a furlough have they? We know you don't think the ban is worth anything and you disagree with it. The EB sees it differently, but you already know that. As others have said, we will have to see how it plays out, but I will let the EB speak for me.

Ernst

Maybe UPS did not write a big enough check to the anti-oxidant lobby to combat all of these free radicals in the NLRB?

... President Barack Obama announced Saturday he would bypass a vacationing Senate and name 15 people to key administration jobs, wielding for the first time the blunt political tool known as the recess appointment.

... The 15 appointees to boards and agencies include the contentious choice of union lawyer Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board. Republicans had blocked his nomination on grounds he would bring a radical pro-union agenda to the job ...

Freightpuppy

Hmmmmm, maybe Obama will do at least one thing right while in office.....

SaltyDog

Roberto,
You miss the most important element of the contractually allowed JA/OT ban:

Union solidarity.

Shows UPS management where we stand with the first 54, then the rest of the 170, right on up to the 300. As a leader, I know you comprehend this principle.

We can quibble on tactical results (and do counter that increased flying while we have union crews furloughed proves class and craft, and 6th District Court proved that they are 'supervisors' not managers.)

Too many of us get distracted by the tactical element and lose sight of the strategic necessity, but that is the essential element of the OT/JA ban. How are you voting? I am with the EB and IPA. It isn't simply altruism, we all get better benefits by staying together long term. Something FQS don't enjoy. They rely on the IPA for a reference point for compensation and have no real job protection. Something they have the opportunity to enjoy going forward.