Another Post-negotiation Changing of the Guard
Print this article
More experienced UPS Teamsters might recall the last time a UPS CEO announced his retirement alongside a fresh labor deal. It was ten years ago, when Jim Kelly gave way to Mike Eskew, right on the heels of a UPS contract widely hailed as a victory for the labor movement.
A decade later Kelly’s successor, Mike Eskew, is announcing his departure from the world’s largest, most profitable package delivery company. Eskew’s successor, by the way, is a number-cruncher named Scott Davis.
When Jim Kelly left UPS’ helm in 1997, some of my union brothers and sisters joked that our victorious strike had chased him into retirement. After all, we’d just won an unprecedented contract that promised to alter the predominance of part-time employment at UPS, as well as offer generous pay raises that even included catch-up provisions for part-timers whose pay had lagged behind for years.
Mike Eskew, the outgoing boss, leaves on the tails of what many see as a different kind of contract negotiation. So here’s the question: Will Eskew’s departure be seen as the retreat of a beaten man, or as the triumphant exit of a champ who retired undefeated?
Filed under: 2008 UPS contract criticism, 2008 contract, Article 22.3, UPS, unionism
Sadly, this new deal doesn’t even compare to 97. That the leadership is selling this contract so aggressively should tell you how unattractive a deal it really is. If the proposed contract is such a win for us, then the best parts must be written in invisible ink.
No, this deal doesn’t appear to have many gains in it at all.
I’m still waiting to see what the local supplement offers, but no matter how phenomenal the supplement may be, I don’t like the idea of voting yes on a contract that needs to be rescued by its supplements.