SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Center for American Progress reports
The Teamsters union represents the 280,000 UPS employees who voted overwhelmingly in favor of going on strike[paywall] if a deal is not reached before the current labor contract expires on August 1. More than 90 percent voted for a strike.
Issuing a strike authorization vote does not necessarily mean UPS workers will order a work stoppage, but it does give the union leverage over management to win their negotiations.
[...] Since UPS began offering regular Saturday delivery service just a year ago, [demands on its labor force] have increased. While the company hasn't announced plans for Sunday service, the union claims UPS has made several proposals to expand weekend deliveries.
[...] The shipments [which] UPS transports comprise an estimated 6 percent of the United States GDP. A labor strike among the company's workers would have a sizable effect on the economy and would be the largest U.S. labor strike in decades. Three bargaining sessions ago, in 1997, UPS workers went on strike for 16 days, and there were 180,000 Teamsters at UPS at that time. There hasn't been a bigger strike since.
Coverage by the World Socialist Web Site is skeptical about the union's efforts and what will be the outcome. Not surprisingly, that article closes with:
There is no progressive answer to the continual lowering of living standards outside of the transformation of industry, communications, and transportation monopolies into publicly owned utilities under the democratic control of the working class.
Also covered at Fortune in UPS Has 260,000 Union Workers and They've Just Authorized a Strike:
The labor talks are proceeding amid discussions on pay and work schedules, as UPS looks to increase warehouse automation to keep up with surging demand from e-commerce shipments. The union has proposed increasing the part-time starting wage as well as improving the overall pay structure, according to a statement on its website. It's also pushing the courier to increase contributions to health and welfare and pension funds.
A previous "big" thing (39,000 workers): Largest Labor Action in 5 Years Slated for Wednesday, April 13 Against Verizon
(Score: 2) by dry on Saturday June 09 2018, @05:40AM (2 children)
Are you seriously suggesting decreasing profits instead of working the workers harder for the same (or ideally less) pay?
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Saturday June 09 2018, @11:42AM (1 child)
Actually, neither. I'm suggesting keeping profit levels the same or maybe increasing them a bit by hiring more people to handle the increased business. Remember the Walmart philosophy: profit through sheer volume. Honestly, I don't know what kind of screwed-up company wouldn't welcome increased business.
(Score: 2) by dry on Saturday June 09 2018, @05:21PM
I guess I left out my sarcasm tag. I agree that the sane thing is to hire more people, unluckily management (and the stock market) seems to be stuck in this idea that the fewer workers, the better, and have forgotten all the studies that show productivity drops of after 7-8 hours of work generally.
Ones that can jack up their price and profit margin without losing too many customers. Examples include my cell provider, where I have basically 2 or 3 crappy choices that increase their prices in tandem or the gas stations (maybe actually the refineries) where even with close to a dozen competing companies, prices go up in tandem.