UPS, Help me understand

J. Prescott jprescot at PRIMENET.COM
Tue Aug 5 10:34:53 MDT 1997


pardon me, but this reasoning seems to be void of any.  in order to apply
your logic, you must first establish the NEED for a union.  once you can
make that establishment, THEN you can argue for whatever structuring or
implementation you desire.  WITHOUT such an establishment, all your
arguments are in vain, & can be easily dismissed from the mere LACK
thereof.

the simple fact of the matter is that if there was any genuine need for
unions today, the unions would simply be able to make their presence known
& people would flock TO them.  but instead, they resort to thuggery
tactics, which displays to me that even THEY know they serve no legitimate
purpose - outside of their own self-serving interests.

jp

----------
> From: Gary Freitag <gfreitag at GREATBATCH.COM>
> To: RUSHTALK at athena.csdco.com
> Subject: Re: UPS, Help me understand
> Date: Tuesday, August 05, 1997 9:11 AM
>
> cas writes:
>
> >        Okay, forgive me but I am just sharing my frustrations and I
> >hope someone will
> >help me understand.  As I have stated before, I am the plant manager of
> >a small
> >factory.  We totally depend on UPS to move our stuff in and out.  Now
> >my local
> >UPS drivers say they are happy with what is being offered, but the
> >Teamsters
> >won't let them vote on the contract.  Can someone explain this to me?
> >This is
> >what I think I understand.  The Teamsters are a union group that has
> >several
> >companies in their union, one of which is UPS.  For some reason the
> >Teamsters
> >have decided that they do not like the contract being offered and
> >therefore
> >have decided to go on strike.  What I don't understand is, if the
> >company
> >agrees, how does the union have the power to override them?  Am I
> >stupid?  Is
> >there something I am over looking?
>
> I certainly understand your plight, but your dealing with a government
> legislated monopoly, where exclusive rights on labor are given to the
> union, even above its members - a most dangerous situation.
>
> It has been suggested that unions are no longer needed as in the past.
> I disagree.  I think unions should be opened up to competition,
> allowing workers to join the union of their choice, or to choose not to
> be represented by any.  It would help balance the forces in the
> workplace.  It would remove corruption.  It would prevent the cost of
> labor being raised well above the market at the cost of those
> unfortunate to be on the outside.
>
> gary
> gfreitag at greatbatch.com



More information about the Rushtalk mailing list