“Not My Problem” Is the Problem
Print this article
“In Germany, they came first for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
and then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
and then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
and then… they came for me… and by that time
there was no one left to speak up.”
- attributed to Martin Niemoller
This past week in the Willow Grove UPS hub, some disturbing things have been happening. While we’ve known for a while about layoffs, the new developments revolve around the company reportedly trying to redefine some key terms in our contract.
The company announced, on rather short notice, plans to layoff certain inside workers. While any layoffs are disturbing in their own right, these layoffs are structured quite differently than past staffing reductions. In particular, these layoffs have targeted higher seniority, Article 22.3 employees, who have been kept from their guaranteed work hours while lower seniority employees have been permitted to keep working in the same operation.
On Friday, February 6, 2009, several Article 22.3 workers were kept out of work in this fashion. Inquiries made to the Local Union were met with claims that the Union had no involvement in the layoff selection process, which is in itself a serious violation of contractual rights. Furthermore, Union officials maintained that they were “completely against” what was happening.
How did the company get away with laying off full-time workers while junior employees were allowed to work in the same operation? Good question. Maybe it’s because they attempted to redefine seniority by insisting that Article 22.3 employees are in a totally separate classification from any part-time employees (even when full and part-time employees are both doing the same exact work).
While that may seem like a gross violation of the terms or our contract, it gets worse when you find out the company also claims the displaced employees have no right to bump. And how do they get away with that? Apparently, they do it by claiming that each day laid off is its own separate layoff. You see, in our supplement, most laid off workers with seniority have the right to bump after a specified number of layoff days. If the company is only laying off for a day each week, they will claim the count of days laid off is reset every week, even if their intent is to maintain a reduced work schedule for several weeks at a time.
Perhaps the company feels this is ample justification to deprive Union employees of some of their most basic rights, but it’s pretty clear the spirit of the contract doesn’t mean what they want it to mean.
The question now is, what are we going to do about it?
I say “we” because, aside from concepts we’ve already discussed in this post like seniority and bumping rights, there is an equally important concept we all need to embrace for our Union to be as effective as it needs to be:
SOLIDARITY
Solidarity is the one word answer to any misguided Union member who feels that violations committed against other Union members don’t affect them. It’s the one word retort to anyone who sees a Union brother or sister being violated and responds by saying, “It’s not my problem.” And it’s the only effective way to answer injustice that will otherwise spread to effect all of us.
And it will spread. What you mistakenly believe is someone else’s problem today will someday become your problem, too. And that day may come sooner than you expect. The only way to be ready for it is to stand by your fellow Union members.
Otherwise, it may turn out the way it did for people like Martin Niemoller (quoted at the top of this post), who mistakenly believed it wasn’t their problem when the Nazis went after other groups of people.
As I type these words, I know there are people in our Union who believe that what’s happening to others isn’t their problem. Because they don’t see themselves in the line of fire right now, they keep quiet — maybe because they don’t think the company’s sights will ever be turned on them, or maybe because they’re afraid that by standing up for others, the company will target them next. Whatever the case, if we don’t stand by our fellow Union members, who exactly do we expect will stand by us when it is our turn to be targeted?
Management depends on this kind of foolish indifference and apathy. They hope we’ll selfishly let them pick off our brothers and sisters so it will be even easier to target the rest of us in the future.
Think about it — before it’s too late.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Filed under: 2008 contract, Article 22.3, I.B.T., Teamsters Local 384, UPS, exposing anti-union propoganda, rights, solidarity, unionism
How do we show solidarity, I mean practically?
I agree with everything you wrote, but what do we do about it realistically?
For one, we can file grievances for violations that make it easier for the company to lay people off — supervisors working comes to mind. That’s something that we’re engaged in doing right now.
Another way to show support for our fellow workers is to reach out to our Union officials to let them know what’s happening and to tell them something needs to be done. It’s great that a few of us get up on our soapboxes and rant about these things, but when we come out in numbers, they know it’s more than just a handful of people asking for action.
This is most disturbing as management has a history of re-interpreting contractual language. This practice must be stopped at all costs as it violates one of the fundamentals of unionism. . . seniority.
Especially in a time of economic turmoil, management will try anything to cut costs by downloading their financial woes onto the workers. Going after the most senior could be “sold” as a retirement incentive as well.
Unions will need to file appropriate grievances in every circumstance when these “lay offs” occur. Perhaps by inundating with new grievances for every instance, i.e. for each day they allow junior staff to get hours, they’ll get the message.