As I said, I was on both sides, and the Teamsters didn't really have UPS by the shorts like the UAW had the auto makers.
BTW, it has been a few years, and it may have changed, but when I started at UPS, it was closed shop, so my choice was to join or look elsewhere for work.
That is the problem I stated...if it were truly a free market, union would be a true choice...no closed shops, and employers would have the option to deal with the union or not. Once there is a contract, both sides should be bound to it unless mutually agreed upon renegotiation of said contract occurs. Once the contract is up, both parties should be free (there's that word again) to forge a new contract or renegotiate.
I don't so much have a beef with unions as with the government for unfairly promoting and protecting.
For those who mentioned execs and other salaried employees "d'in the dog", so to speak, absolutely they do. But when they get caught doing so, they are at much higher risk to finding themselves on the street than a union member. No one can deny this.
Look at the teachers' unions. There are teachers in NYC and other locales who have been mandated to stay away from children by the courts, yet they keep their jobs. The school districts have to rent out office space for these losers to have a place to go into work and maybe do a little paperwork, but mostly hang out, drink coffee, read the paper, and watch TV while drawing a salary and earning more pension time. Does anybody really think this is okay?
Check out the flow chart...Again, the unions couldn't protect people like this if not for the government.
Finally, anyone who thinks that the Teamsters promote choice in the UPS workplace should read this and think again.
