|
Post by bluelu on Feb 9, 2012 11:24:06 GMT -5
The uaw will keep the team leaders job the same. That means teams will not go down to 10 jobs per team. The union used to stand for seniority and bring in new membership. We will not be bring in about 100 new hires and now team leaders wont be making over 31 dollars a hour. Why because the company wanted to make the jobs, bid jobs and the union said no. Thanks Scott. No leadership at all.
|
|
|
Post by readyandaimedatyou on Feb 9, 2012 13:23:58 GMT -5
Nothing new is it? They say one thing and do another.. And our "leaders" roll us over and stick it in, while smiling at their desk watching Youtube videos up stairs.
|
|
|
Post by ScottR@KTP on Feb 9, 2012 14:33:54 GMT -5
LMAO...I know none of you can possibly be shocked?
|
|
|
Post by ScottR@KTP on Feb 9, 2012 14:35:21 GMT -5
I had heard about them still being elected, but is it fact the team size and pay are staying the same?
|
|
|
Post by bluelu on Feb 9, 2012 15:29:19 GMT -5
Scott I was told everything will stay the same. The problem is once you allow the company to keep it the same, you will never get those 100 jobs back. The local is saving ford 100 of thousands of dollars per year and we the union is losing union dues because of this. Vote no for the local contract.
|
|
|
Post by gocards on Feb 9, 2012 16:48:50 GMT -5
wow you really didnt expect anything different did you. It is what the people and company wants. Voting on Team Leaders and Senority meaning nothing. At least that is what Scott thinks.
|
|
|
Post by thintwowin on Feb 9, 2012 16:51:19 GMT -5
It's how it has been done here for the last 20 years?
|
|
|
Post by dtptolap on Feb 9, 2012 17:24:55 GMT -5
Wow, turning down 100 jobs!
|
|
|
Post by tryingtomakeit on Feb 9, 2012 17:48:26 GMT -5
Somebody help me out here. Were the jobs/raises/team sizes not contractual? And if they were, how, WHY? would our local shoot down the oppourtunity to CREATE bid jobs, and put some more money in a members pocket?
The last local got voted down the first time because the co/union wanted to grandfather in the TL's(not because they would be bid, as some would like you to believe). This one will probably get shot down, because they arent being bid out at all. I know Ill be voting no.
Question to the masses. What would we/local/building chair gain from not creating more bid jobs? I cant see a benefit from doing this. Can anybody out there see one?
|
|
|
Post by thintwowin on Feb 9, 2012 18:32:06 GMT -5
I would like to have a 100 more peeps under me. I would also like to have more bids. BUT do you realize what a cluster Fuk bidding team leaders would be? We are supposed to be a team concept here. How is a new team leader gonna cover me while I piss? How is he gonna repair the part I didnt get put on? They would have to train 200-300 new people on thousands of jobs and that person would have to be able to hold them all. They could have bid them and said you have to be on the team now to get the job, but that would Fuk seniority again. You can vote no all you want it will never happen in my opinion. The company will never spend the money to train that many people NEVER. Plus all the people who will get bumped and rolled off their team and have to be retrained . Cluster Fuk
|
|
|
Post by lapwasktp on Feb 9, 2012 19:33:17 GMT -5
Not trying to be a smart ass, but that is exactly what LAP has done.. They call them Upgraders.. Same as Team leaders, they know all the jobs on the team and their BID jobs... It just takes time.... The bad news is some Upgrades are much better than others and you can't vote them out...
|
|
|
Post by brizzel on Feb 9, 2012 19:41:26 GMT -5
If we can ignore this part of the national agreement, let's also ignore the part about no raises. KTP makes the most profit so pay us more.
|
|
|
Post by kessinger on Feb 9, 2012 19:49:32 GMT -5
Ok lets get some reality to this argument. First off the teamleader here to my belief would be almost zero. The raise in the national contract is above the VAT rate in the NATIONAL. Our teamleaders already make that. This will bring everyone else up to what you as teamleaders have been making for years.
As an example we will use the 2008 LOCAL contract pay rates (pg44) a VAT started at 28.12 then if they got full ARPS 29.76 and if you become teamleader you goto 29.40 thats $1.28 to be teamleader. Our Local contract already gave you the pay the national is giving to other plants, because the national didn't recognise teamleaders.
Also VAT's at this plant start at a higher rate than VATs at traditional plants. I am pretty sure that makes up your whole $1.50. So no teamleader raise was ever coming, or not much of one by my math.
And before i hear "You used that to sell the contract" every one that I talked to I told we doubted we would goto that due to the issues this plant has with bid teamleaders. Think I even posted that here, but i may be wrong.
Second Grandfathered teamleaders. You can claim that was what got it shot down, but bidding them at all was the issue. And as far as grandfathering, the company still wanted the old teamleaders to be grandfathered. So what you claim you will vote it down for would be the same either way.
We asked the membership if bid teamleaders is what they wanted by putting it in the contract last time and they answered loud and clear that they did not.
As to "tryings" question as to what benefit is there to us by not doing it? None other than giving the plant a contract they want. We believed the bid teamleaders where the way to go so we tried it. The membership clearly said no thanks on that issue so we moved forward with what the membership wanted. May not have been what you wanted, but the mebership disagreed with you.
If the membership wants bid teamleaders they can vote this one down to. But, I don't think that will be happening. But, i was wrong about that last time WHEN I THOUGHT THEY WOULD VOTE FOR BID TEAMLEADERS.
You haven't seen it and already hate it, but I think most will like what they see.
|
|
|
Post by nvsked1 on Feb 9, 2012 20:32:21 GMT -5
Ok lets get some reality to this argument. First off the teamleader here to my belief would be almost zero. The raise in the national contract is above the VAT rate in the NATIONAL. Our teamleaders already make that. This will bring everyone else up to what you as teamleaders have been making for years. As an example we will use the 2008 LOCAL contract pay rates (pg44) a VAT started at 28.12 then if they got full ARPS 29.76 and if you become teamleader you goto 29.40 thats $1.28 to be teamleader. Our Local contract already gave you the pay the national is giving to other plants, because the national didn't recognise teamleaders. Also VAT's at this plant start at a higher rate than VATs at traditional plants. I am pretty sure that makes up your whole $1.50. So no teamleader raise was ever coming, or not much of one by my math. And before i hear "You used that to sell the contract" every one that I talked to I told we doubted we would goto that due to the issues this plant has with bid teamleaders. Think I even posted that here, but i may be wrong. Second Grandfathered teamleaders. You can claim that was what got it shot down, but bidding them at all was the issue. And as far as grandfathering, the company still wanted the old teamleaders to be grandfathered. So what you claim you will vote it down for would be the same either way. We asked the membership if bid teamleaders is what they wanted by putting it in the contract last time and they answered loud and clear that they did not. As to "tryings" question as to what benefit is there to us by not doing it? None other than giving the plant a contract they want. We believed the bid teamleaders where the way to go so we tried it. The membership clearly said no thanks on that issue so we moved forward with what the membership wanted. May not have been what you wanted, but the mebership disagreed with you. If the membership wants bid teamleaders they can vote this one down to. But, I don't think that will be happening. But, i was wrong about that last time WHEN I THOUGHT THEY WOULD VOTE FOR BID TEAMLEADERS. You haven't seen it and already hate it, but I think most will like what they see. How can this local use phrases like believe on one hand and then state show me where the contract states that.... Pay rates are defined in the national agreement. What does the national agreement define the pay rate to be for team leader? As far as bid opportunities and "elected"... maybe just maybe the plant culture is changing as seniority of the plant changes over the years... If the contract DEMANDS not request but demands...sorry play on words... What were the demands turned into the leadership.... should be a paper trail of the request turned in. (there I softened the language) The request would spell out the will of the membership as approved at the membership meetings.. You know democracy... UAW And Then...Its up to the leadership to carry out the will of the membership, not go cut a deal and see if you can push it through... As far as the members who say "they'll never go for that" I'm glad you weren't negotiating the contracts way back when... The UAW would have nothing.... Its not a request fest... It's called negotiate, demands etc Scared money never wins.... What did the membership demand, that's the starting point for negotiators.... I believe LOL
|
|
|
Post by 30yearpace on Feb 9, 2012 20:37:06 GMT -5
Hey if we should be making 29.70 I think I got some back pay coming.....sooo i'm assuming it should be 28.70
|
|
|
Post by dtptolap on Feb 9, 2012 20:49:55 GMT -5
At Dtp when a team leader job is open, Only someone on that team can bid on the job, if no one bids on it then it opens up to everyone. Most all the time someone on the team wants it, which that person knows most jobs so it cuts down on training. It's all done by seniority.
|
|
|
Post by nvsked1 on Feb 9, 2012 21:04:46 GMT -5
At Dtp when a team leader job is open, Only someone on that team can bid on the job, if no one bids on it then it opens up to everyone. Most all the time someone on the team wants it, which that person knows most jobs so it cuts down on training. It's all done by seniority. Johnny come lately person comes on here using words like seniority... You ain't in Kansas anymore Toto. just kiddin dude but seriously watch out using the s word
|
|
|
Post by gocards on Feb 9, 2012 21:46:47 GMT -5
Nobody likes senority unless you have it. So thats why nobody cares.
|
|
|
Post by brenteskridge on Feb 9, 2012 23:00:18 GMT -5
The local contracts will be passed out tomorrow. I like what I see in the local. We may not agree on everything but I will try to answer any question that you may have. Also, go to the UAWsite that I have on the bottom of this message and look at the national contract pages 38A-47A to see where it talks about team leaders, teams and how this process will work. I would have loved to see the company agree to the 10/1 ratio but that isn't going to happen because, let me just say it like this because if I was at the table doing the negotiation for this local I wouldn't agree with the company on letting them hand select a team leader. It would either be put up for bid or stay as it is. Our guys did a good job on this local and I will be supporting it. www.uaw.org/members/uaw-bargaining/ford-hourly
|
|
|
Post by trinitus on Feb 9, 2012 23:13:59 GMT -5
\Well I kinda figured something about the Team Leader's would be in the local contract. I just didn't see it turning out this way though. I NOW truely believe our leadership both local and International together have no clue as to what this membership want's. Oh and food for thought, management alway's have and alway's will want to hand select the Team Leader's. If they were to be put up for bid, they wouldn't be able to hand select but they could DQ the one's they don't like. Doesn't mean they will then be able to pick the new ones either, they would have to go back up for bid.
|
|
|
Post by kessinger on Feb 10, 2012 0:15:53 GMT -5
NVS asked: Pay rates are defined in the national agreement. What does the national agreement define the pay rate to be for team leader?
Answer: in the new language it does not give a rate it says on letter 047A "a common teamleader classification and wage rate will be made available once the roles and responsibilitys have been implemented"
I said "my belief" and then listed why I believe that. I do not know why that bothers you so much , but ok. I listed THE FACTS about the situation except for the differnce between level 0 ARPS and traditional plant VAT pay (that is why it ws a belief and not a fact.) That is not written in the contract so I could not provide that information. But, as the folks from LAP can tell you when they arrived they got a raise just for showing up.
NVS also said this: "Its up to the leadership to carry out the will of the membership, not go cut a deal and see if you can push it through."
answer: I know its fun to claim everything your union does is a deal cut. But, what deal do you invision being cut? The company WANTED Bid teamleaders. Do you think they gave us gifts or money to NOT do bid teamleaders even though they wanted it? Just wondering? I don't follow your train of thought. Other than maybe you just hate unions and have a need to claim everything is a scam.
Then NVS stated this: As far as the members who say "they'll never go for that" I'm glad you weren't negotiating the contracts way back when... The UAW would have nothing....
answer' WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Did you even read my post? Where did I ever say "they'll never go for that?" You claim you don't want me negotiating yet quote something I didn't even say.
|
|
|
Post by kessinger on Feb 10, 2012 0:24:16 GMT -5
trinitus said: "I NOW truely believe our leadership both local and International together have no clue as to what this membership want's."
answer: that remains to be seen trinitus. Bid teamleaders got the last local shot down by I think more than 80%. That was the only thing we changed for the revote and it passed by 80%+.
If i turn out to be wrong we will swap it and vote again. It won't bother me, that change is quick and easy. But, i am confident the membership will like the local. We fixed alot of things that have needed to be fixed for years.
|
|
|
Post by tryingtomakeit on Feb 10, 2012 2:12:10 GMT -5
Kess, once again thanks for coming on here. You stated that things that needed to be fixed for a while were fixed. Like what?
|
|
|
Post by laidoff on Feb 10, 2012 2:25:22 GMT -5
As a newly elected team leader in U trim, I feel team leader should be an elected position. My reason being, No one wants a shity team leader. If u all dont like the way it is at ktp you should all have went back to the promise land, but I hear it sucks there now. I think two years is too long. It should only be one year. I hope they bargained to get rid of that other speed bumo at gate zero.
|
|
|
Post by marcus on Feb 10, 2012 2:57:14 GMT -5
We asked the membership if bid teamleaders is what they wanted by putting it in the contract last time and they answered loud and clear that they did not.
On this vote was it a simple yes or no vote?Or was it going to allow team leaders to be grandfathered in? That would make a diff.
Also this plant needs more bid jobs,how many of you people want to still be working the line with 25 years its not going to be pretty.
|
|
|
Post by buckeyeinky on Feb 10, 2012 5:15:05 GMT -5
the reason this plant doesnt want bid teamleaders is because "all of the ohio people would get them".
|
|
|
Post by Ktp1989 on Feb 10, 2012 7:02:38 GMT -5
As a newly elected team leader in U trim, I feel team leader should be an elected position. My reason being, No one wants a shity team leader. If u all dont like the way it is at ktp you should all have went back to the promise land, but I hear it sucks there now. I think two years is too long. It should only be one year. I hope they bargained to get rid of that other speed bumo at gate zero. I worked at LAP for 6 years and KTP for 17 and have seen both sides of it...everyone at KTP says they don't want to bid team leader jobs because they don't want to be stuck with a 30 years seniority guy who doesn't do their job....but in my years at LAP i had many upgraders with 30 years and all were as good or better then the team leaders elected by clics and served the union brother in the department.....not the bosses...bottom line, like any bid job if the job is not being performed right...discipline and move to remove from the job. Sooner or later everyone that stays at Ford gets time in and want the seniority to matter....but when you don't have any it makes sense you don't want "your" job to be bid...one day you will have 25 years and stuck on the line because there are no longer any bid jobs....enjoy.
|
|
|
Post by marcus on Feb 10, 2012 8:08:24 GMT -5
agree ktp1989
|
|
|
Post by lapbrian on Feb 10, 2012 8:13:39 GMT -5
Just an idea. Make team leaders bid jobs and every two years they get graded by the team on their performance. If they get a favorable grade they keep the job if not it goes back up for bid. Isn't that the system now except TLs are picked from the team. Don't screw 90% of the people because of those 10% that are worthless.
|
|
|
Post by hoghead on Feb 10, 2012 8:29:27 GMT -5
Laidoff how could you possibly hear the upgrade position sucks at lap we havent even started production im an upgrade (not team leader) as i was for four years prior to going to ktp and as i see it so far it seem the same as it was 6-8 year ago. Im so happy to be back home
|
|