BOOM: UPS Fires 250 Union Workers for Refusing to Work

[Jarlaxle]

How come here in the south we do just fine without them.. My husband makes a great salary , has great benefits and guess what his company which is a fortune 100 company is not unionized. There was a time and place for unions and that time has passed. They were good and passed many regulations that it will be impossible for them to go back to the 1920s now.

"Great" is relative.

Your husband is one of the lucky few working the register at Dollar Tree, lovebears.

You're dumb as a turd, boy.

 

[WinterBorn]

...by being the poorest population in the US. Yeah you guys are doing swimmingly

has nothing to do with the topic.

Uh yeah, she said that the south is doing fine without them. If by "fine" she means "poor as ****" then shes right.

So all the people living in the south are "poor as ****"? Or just the ones working for Honda, BMW, and Mercedes are "poor as ****"??

Your ignorance is showing rather clearly. Now, I am not arguing that there are not plenty of people who are "poor as ****" in the south. The union helped create several thousand of them in Tuscaloosa years ago.

But in this conversation we are discussing unions. So unless you have some info that shows that having unions in the south would improve things (you know, like they did in Detroit) try and stick with the facts and the topic at hand.

 

[WinterBorn]

...by being the poorest population in the US. Yeah you guys are doing swimmingly

I guess that explains why people and businesses are leaving places like calfornia and new jersey and moving south in droves. Poor? really? have you been to Atlanta, Charlotte, Houston, Birmingham, Memphis, Jacksonville, Orlando, Dallas, Baton Rouge? Sorry, dude, lots of big money and great jobs in those cities.

now, want to talk about poor populations--------check out Detroit, Newark, Chicago, Cincinnatti, Cleveland, LA, Boston, NYC. The poor are really poor in those liberal utopias, dumbass.

What you just said has nothing to do with the fact that the south are the poorest in the nation. Nothing

And that really has nothing to do with the topic. There is high unemployment in the south, which slants the numbers. That does not mean that those with good paying jobs are never in the south. The people working nonunion jobs can make a good living.

 

[WinterBorn]

What you just said has nothing to do with the fact that the south are the poorest in the nation. Nothing

standard of living is a much better measure than average income. You don't see people moving from georgia to michigan do you? nope. what you do see is a lot of people and companies moving south. Texas has a large net increase in population for instance, whereas new jersey and michigan have net decreases.

IF I lived in Georgia, I'd move to Michigan in a heartbeat.

I live in Georgia. I'd help you pack.

 

[bodecea]

we have laws on the books to protect workers from the abuses of the 20s and 30s. The unions serve no purpose but to collect money for the democrat party. That is their only function. The GM and Chrysler bailouts were done to save the UAW, not the companies or the workers. Wake up and smell reality.

So, you are saying we have no use for unions anymore because of legal protections in place? Agreed. No need for the NRA anymore either. We have legal protections in place.

there is an organized movement aimed at taking away 2nd amendment rights, NO ONE is trying to take away laws regarding working hours, conditions, safety etc.

another false analogy. but we get it, you lefties need the unions to steal wages from members and send it to the DNC.

There's an organized movement to take away union rights too. Correct analogy....can't help it if you don't like it.

 

[KingOfCars]

...by being the poorest population in the US. Yeah you guys are doing swimmingly

has nothing to do with the topic.

Uh yeah, she said that the south is doing fine without them. If by "fine" she means "poor as ****" then shes right.

You speak of what you do not know of. The non-union automobile manufacturers pay their employees very well, and they have no reason to need a union. Coincidentally, they also make a helluva automobile at those plants. Maybe because they can be fired for "poor performance" instead of the union auto workers who could be caught smoking weed and jerking off to child porn on their lunch break and still it would take a year to fire.

 

[jillian]

see... this is what happens when low information rightwingnuts get their "news" from the rightwingnut blogosphere....

reality:

The workers were protesting the dismissal of longtime employee and union activist Jairo Reyes, who was fired over an hours dispute, according to Gaut. The New York Daily News first reported on the firings.
Local politicians are threatening to cancel city contracts that give UPS millions of dollars in breaks on parking fines.

UPS fires 250 employees for staging a strike in Queens, N.Y.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Pathetic...cheering on people being fired because of partisan bias....what a low life.

They participated in an illegal strike. Even their union disowns them.

 

[SAYIT]

Personally?
I'd like to see UPS pack and go.
They are a pain in the ass. They are constantly blocking people in their parking spots and double park everywhere.
We have a constitutionally guaranteed post office as well.
The Money should go to them.

**** UPS.

While I agree UPS and FedX and USPS and busses and cabs and bikes and other drivers are all a pain in my butt the thought of a quasi-gov't monopoly gives me a headache.
Think bridge/turnpike commissions and their uncontrolled fees.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Wildcat strikes are problematic for the workers; they have no official protection. If the union is weak, the company can act with impunity as is the case here.

Lovebears is silly when he says unions are not needed. Corporate would return workers to the 1920s and 1930 if they could. They can't, thank heavens.

we have laws on the books to protect workers from the abuses of the 20s and 30s. The unions serve no purpose but to collect money for the democrat party. That is their only function. The GM and Chrysler bailouts were done to save the UAW, not the companies or the workers. Wake up and smell reality.

i laugh at that.....the Post Office violated anything they could violate and worried about the aftereffects later....and then after shelling out grievance money.....did it again....

 

[Politico]

Wildcat strikes are problematic for the workers; they have no official protection. If the union is weak, the company can act with impunity as is the case here.

Lovebears is silly when he says unions are not needed. Corporate would return workers to the 1920s and 1930 if they could. They can't, thank heavens.

we have laws on the books to protect workers from the abuses of the 20s and 30s. The unions serve no purpose but to collect money for the democrat party. That is their only function. The GM and Chrysler bailouts were done to save the UAW, not the companies or the workers. Wake up and smell reality.

Fortunately firing someone for refusing to come to work isn't abuse.

 

[The Professor]

These strikers deserve to be disciplined, but termination may not be the best way to go.

This whole mess started because of one Jairo Reyes, an employee and union activist who was fired because of a dispute over his work hours. Instead of using the negotiated grievance procedure to resolve the matter the local union leader told the company to shove it and called for a work stoppage.

"There was a grievance meeting being held related to discharge of employee. The local union leader chose to go outside dispute resolution procedure by inviting employees to walk out." According to Gaut, 250 out of 1400 employees followed him, and were warned they were overstepping the boundaries of their contracts before leaving the building.”

UPS To Fire 250 Queens Workers For Protesting One Employee's Dismissal: Gothamist

Although Reyes was fired, he had the absolute right to appeal the employer’s action. During my long life I have served as a union organizer, a union officer and an attorney representing unions and their members. I have negotiated union contracts and have never heard of a labor agreement that did not have a provisions which essentially said, “No employee shall be terminated or disciplined without just cause.” Most agreements also include a provision that effectively says, “All disciplinary actions shall be reasonable, just and equitable.” Reyes could have challenged his removal through the negotiated grievance/arbitration procedure and if the company failed to justify the termination Reyes would have been rehired with full back pay (sometimes, when the employee is not completely innocent, the removal is reduced to a lesser offense such as a suspension). Additionally, if his termination was because of his union activities Reyes could appeal to the National Labor Relations Board which has the authority to order his reinstatement with full back pay.

If the union truly believed the man was innocent of the company's allegations, they could have given him financial assistance while he was going through the proper appeals procedure. The union would have been reimbursed when Reyes got his back pay.

Here's the problem: If the union has the right to walk out whenever an employee is disciplined, the company won't be able to fire anyone for any reason and that is utter insanity. The negotiated grievance procedure allows an employee to challenge the employer's action, and to have his case heard before an impartial arbitrator. This is the route the union should have taken.

There is no doubt the employees violated the labor agreement; however, a termination is the industrial equivalent of the death penalty and should be used judiciously for the benefit of both the employer and the employee. If I were the CEO of the company, I would offer each employee who knowingly and willfully participated in the work stoppage a chance to resolve their termination with a short suspension – perhaps a few days or a week without pay. I would include a warning that the next time they would be terminated for such outrageous conduct regardless of their seniority. If they didn't accept my offer I would do my best to get rid of them permanently. But even if every striker accepted my offer I would not cut Reyes any slack because that would send the union a message that the company caved in because of their bullying. I would let Reyes go through the negotiated grievance procedure and leave his fate up to an arbitrator.

But that is only my humble opinion.

 

[bucs90]

I have no problem with companies that want to go non-union, or move to a right to work state........

IF they are doing that to survive, or, to provide a better service/product, or to lower prices for their customers.

But so many of these companies make that move....only to see the money saved from going non-union funneled right into the pockets of CEO's, board members, etc, etc.

If a company is profiting, someone is getting the money: Is it the very few at the top and only them? Or is it the very few at the top...and some for the little guys how make it happen too?

 

[bucs90]

Why is union greed bad, but CEO greed is good?

 

[Politico]

Does CEOs making money piss you off? If so yes it is good.

 

[Sallow]

What an elitist Scumbag view you have...

Did it hurt your precious sensibilities? Tough....The South is poor as shit, thats what she means by "we are fine" and shes Marie Antoinette saying everything is fine while ignoring whats happening

You can buy an entire row of homes in Detroit for one dollar, numbnuts........

Sounds interesting.

Link?

 

[Sallow]

Does CEOs making money piss you off? If so yes it is good.

Except they don't really do much that adds any value to society.

And additionally they use that money, in part, to insure that that political process is corrupted.

It should "piss you off" as well.

 

[bucs90]

Does CEOs making money piss you off? If so yes it is good.

Nope. But why does the right wing view a CEO being greedy and trying to milk all the money he can out of his contract with that company as morally acceptable.........but union employees doing the same thing as morally wrong?

I know it kinda fits in with the right wing's tendency to fall on their knees in front of the rich and....well, you know, worship them.

But I just don't understand why.

 

[Sallow]

So UPS then has less NYC business, and closes more offices/transit centers, and lays off people for no reason instead of firing people for breaking their contract.

Personally?

I'd like to see UPS pack and go.

They are a pain in the ass. They are constantly blocking people in their parking spots and double park everywhere.

We have a constitutionally guaranteed post office as well.

The Money should go to them.

**** UPS.

You're dumb as a terd, boy.

Note: UPS ships MANY things the post office won't!

Don't like the United States Constitution, eh?

I thought so.

 

[Politico]

Does CEOs making money piss you off? If so yes it is good.

Nope. But why does the right wing view a CEO being greedy and trying to milk all the money he can out of his contract with that company as morally acceptable.........but union employees doing the same thing as morally wrong?

I know it kinda fits in with the right wing's tendency to fall on their knees in front of the rich and....well, you know, worship them.

But I just don't understand why.

I would never make such a stupid claim. But I dunno, You should ask one of them.