UPS to close down Portland facility...

[Graveyard]

This is a very interesting thread and great use of this forum. Where else can we voice our concerns without fear? Nowhere except here!

With UPS’s CEO & CFO past statements, new UPS Agreement, the IBT’s PR to get the contract passed, continued layoffs and increased use of AI leaves little doubt that when O’Brien made public statements that he “stopped the robots” he was considerately less than truthful.

TDU has proven time and time again that it has no intention of using its resources to call out this administration’s failures or false promises with its current see no evil, hear no evil, report no evil policies.

Someone on this thread asked why no one was running against OZ. Thinking most of that question is answered in the first topic of the Open Forum “Sticky: 1 VP and 3 Old Teamsters file IDO (Independent Disciplinary Office) (Complaint) against OZ.”

The complaint outlines numerous examples of O’Brien’s track record of retaliation. When coupled with mergers and other actions to consolidate power, I think the question is more in line with, why would anyone want to commit “Teamster Suicide?”

It has been almost a year since TeamsterLink.org and the IBT VP filed the IDO complaint. The complaint draws attention to the basic belief that “…the entire point of the 1989 Consent Decree, the adoption of the rank-and File elections of officers and the creation of your office (IRB-IDO) was to foster democracy in the union by allowing members to engage in political activities without fear or intimation.” Perhaps I missed the IDO’s decision, likely not, as I am sure this site would have updated.

With TDU abandoning their core belief of publishing truth to power when there is misconduct at the highest levels at the IBT, the IDO slow walking or ignoring a valid complaint, visible support for the anti-union presidential candidate by most of the current IBT Leadership, and now Local Unions telling (OMG) active members that it will not grieve Article 6, Section 4 of the UPS National Master Agreement that gives the Teamsters the right to negotiate with UPS over new technologies and their effects on employees, or does it?

Negotiate what? Impact?

All this happened under the strongest union supporting US presidential administration.

What will happen under the anti-union administration with O’Brien’s wink and nod support? Hint, don’t expect much and you will not be disappointed.

Speaking of the anti-union-proven track record of 47, where are his stanch supporters, Mr. Teamster, Dana Cos, others? One would think they would be shouting from the roof tops that their side won! Instead, they seem to have vanished. Perhaps they have buyer’s remorse?

Too bad, they bought him, they own him, they should either continue to support him, or apologize to us for promoting. Not to do so is a sign of weakness!

[WTF891]

Preach my Brother! Bad things happen to people when they remain silent.

[TheMilitantTeamster]

Yep yep this post is some TRUTH

[Tony R Cochran]

Local 162 has formally declined to process the grievance.

[TheMilitantTeamster]

UPS still hasn’t got permits….
local has time to act
Waiting to see if Benny Vedass will grow some balls

[TheMilitantTeamster]

So Vedass said “I’m not going to file the grievance”

great way to lose support of everyone

everyone vs Teamsters’s leaders

[The Direct Line]

GV-Grande Vista. UPS is dissolving combos. No protections.
image.png

[Tony R Cochran]

Yes, I expect something similar will happen at Swan Island without action.

[Tony R Cochran]

GV-Grande Vista. UPS is dissolving combos. No protections.
image.png

Not only is there no resistance by local unions, there is active facilitation of UPS's plans.

[TheMilitantTeamster]

Talking to folks and even people that supported Mark and Ben in the past — and one steward that surprised me — don’t trust em anymore! Mark better grow some balls or he’s going to be looking for work in a couple years

[working396]

He's figuring you folks will be gone in a couple of years.

[Faust]

They can both go back to UPS.

[TheMilitantTeamster]

Some of us who signed the grievance have 20-29 years of seniority. We aren’t going anywhere.

Mark was a part timer. He can come back and bid to be driver. I don’t think he could handle it ????

[Tony R Cochran]

Ben will likely just retire. Matt, Bobby and Elijah can come back to UPS. The entire slate will lose after this debacle.

[TheMilitantTeamster]

One question is why we are the only hub to not get warn act yet
even Baltimore has had one and that’s not till August

[TheMilitantTeamster]

Hillsboro is doing 15k a shift ????
ups thinks they can handle Swan Island

[Tony R Cochran]

Indeed, UPS clearly added us to the list at the last minute. Speculation says it's Danny Wright's spite; I would say it's a combination of spite, arrogance and testing the Local.

[Tony R Cochran]

1. Notification and Planning:
   • When did Local 162 first learn of UPS’s plans to shut down Swan Island for automation?
   • Was the union notified at least 45 days in advance of the Hillsboro Twilight schedule change as required by Article 6, Section 4?
   • If notification was received, why was this not used to anticipate broader network changes, including Swan Island?
2. Contract Enforcement:
   • Why has Article 6, Section 4 not been invoked in this case, especially given its explicit language on technological changes that diminish workforce numbers?
   • What steps, if any, have been taken to convene the National Teamster/UPS Technological Change Committee as required by the contract?
3. Union’s Role in Facilitating Transfers:
   • Why is the union facilitating employee transfers to Hillsboro before any bargaining has occurred about the Swan Island shutdown?
   • Are there guarantees for employees transferring to Hillsboro about seniority, building attachment, and protections against future layoffs?
4. Grievance Timing and Strategy:
   • Why was the initial grievance filed by a member regarding Swan Island’s closure tabled instead of processed within the required 20-day timeline?
   • What is the union’s plan to ensure grievances addressing the automation and shutdown are timely and effective?
5. Classification of Shutdown:
   • Why is the Swan Island closure being referred to as a “change of operations” rather than a technological change under Article 6, Section 4?
   • Does the union believe the provisions of Article 6, Section 4 do not apply in this case? If so, why?
6. Transparency and Member Involvement:
   • What efforts has Local 162 made to communicate with and involve members in addressing Swan Island’s closure?
   • Why were employees not informed about the contractual mechanisms, like Article 6, Section 4, that could be used to address the shutdown?
7. Broader Implications:
   • What is Local 162 doing to address the potential precedent set by allowing UPS to automate and close facilities without adherence to the contract?
   • How will the union ensure stronger enforcement of contract protections against automation in the future?

[TheMilitantTeamster]

Lots of ppl gone to Hillsboro… still no info from union

[TheMilitantTeamster]

Half the building is shut (west side) and they keep saying volume isn’t being diverted lol lol bs

[TheMilitantTeamster]

This won’t stop any layoffs as tony noted at the pcm read the damn thing but it shows they want us out sooner than July much sooner

[Tony R Cochran]

Dear President Davison,

I am writing to formally address Local 162’s decision to table my grievance related to the announced shutdown and automation of the Swan Island facility. Unfortunately, I must reiterate that if this grievance—or an appropriate Class Action grievance under Article 6, Section 4 of the National Master Agreement—is not pursued within the required timeframe, I will have no choice but to file Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) charges against Local 162 and UPS. Concerns Regarding Union Representative Matt Konz’s Interpretation of Article 6, Section 4


Union representative Matt Konz’s suggestion that Article 6, Section 4 only applies to "humanoid robots" as a threshold for meaningful technological change is entirely unreasonable and inconsistent with the contract’s language. The provision explicitly addresses any meaningful technological change that results in diminished numbers of workers, alterations to work conditions, or significant operational changes. Suggesting that only extreme scenarios like "humanoid robots" are covered renders this vital clause meaningless.

This misinterpretation fails to reflect the protections negotiated under Article 6, Section 4. If the union adopts this interpretation, it raises serious questions about its commitment to enforcing the contract. Opposition to Federal Involvement in Union Matters


I want to make it clear that filing ULP charges is not an action I take lightly. As a union member, I believe in resolving these issues internally whenever possible. However, the stakes in this case are extraordinarily high. The livelihoods of hundreds of Swan Island workers hang in the balance, and the union’s refusal to act has forced me to pursue every available legal remedy to ensure our rights under the contract are upheld. Potential Financial Liability for the Union


Local 162’s inaction could expose it to financial liability for failing to enforce the contract. Under the NLRA, unions have a Duty of Fair Representation, which requires them to represent members without arbitrariness, bad faith, or discrimination. Should it be determined that Local 162 breached this duty, it is conceivable that affected members could seek damages for lost wages or other harm resulting from the union’s failure to act. Why Federal Action is Necessary


The announcement of the Swan Island shutdown and automation constitutes a clear violation of Article 6, Section 4. February 1st marks six months prior to the planned shutdown, yet there has been no meeting of the National Teamster/UPS Technological Committee as required. Additionally, Local 162’s solicitation of transfers to Hillsboro undermines any effort to bargain over the effects of this closure.

Finally, my grievance was filed well within the contractually-mandated 20-day window following the public announcement of the closure, which occurred on January 2nd. The refusal to process my grievance—or file an appropriate Class Action grievance—risks forfeiting a critical opportunity to enforce the contract and protect our members. Closing


This letter was prepared in advance because Local 162’s response to my grievance was anticipated. I hope this situation can still be resolved internally, but if not, I will be filing ULP charges against Local 162 for failure to fulfill its Duty of Fair Representation and against UPS for failing to adhere to the National Master Agreement.

I urge you to reconsider the decision to table my grievance and take immediate steps to enforce the protections guaranteed under Article 6, Section 4.

Sincerely,
Tony Cochran

[Faust]

This won’t stop any layoffs as tony noted at the pcm read the damn thing but it shows they want us out sooner than July much sooner

Are the Portland and Swan Island Hub(s) the same building or two separate buildings?

[TheMilitantTeamster]

Are the Portland and Swan Island Hub(s) the same building or two separate buildings?

Swan Island is the Portland hub — main one biggest in the area - smaller hub automated by airport is Alderwood, new 2022 Hillsboro automated hub is in the suburbs and some small local buildings in Tualitin and Vancouver Washington across river