Forums | MacLife

Kev, next to Jayhawk, you're the most intellectually dishonest person I've had conversation with on this forum. In this thread alone you have both lied about what you said and you have deliberately misrepresented what I have said. You insult people and their ideas and get upset when others do it, I've had issues with you before over your threats of invoking mod powers over just that issue because I called you "glib" and I am not the only person with whom you have had similar issues. and quite frankly, it's not that I obsess about this stuff, it's just that I have a good memory.

There's no chip here, kev. My life's pretty good and I'm happy with it, thanks. I do, however, recognize an unabashed liar when I encounter one.

Last edited by isaly (2008-01-23 6:48 pm)

isaly wrote:

resedit wrote:

It was with the union that I signed the agreement with, and it was either sign it or not be allowed to join the union - in which case I would not be allowed to work for UPS. If that's not signing under duress, what is?

so, If I sign an agreement that I don't like with a private company because I need a job, is that signing under duress as well?

Maybe not - but when you are forced to sign a contract that says they get your money or you don't work - the Union isn't benefiting the employees.

I think there actually a class action going on with respect to the retirement fund, I heard about one anyway - so maybe I'll get a portion of it back.

Doesn't change the fact that I as a worker was dicked by the union, and that the union dicked a ton of us. Not just the union dues, the union dues were a pittance compared with what they took from us for our "retirement" fund.

If a union wants to give extra benefits to a vested member - fine.
But to take money from non vested members and not give it back is bull smurf.

isaly wrote:

Farmerkev wrote:

I said I was sorry for forgetting I used one real life example I currently know of and said I shouldn't have used it.

Kev, read what I wrote. This is not just about this thread. This isn't about hatred or anger or the fact that you and I don't agree. this is just about frustration trying to communicate with someone who short circuits the process. . . repeatedly.

I'm letting it go. It's not worth it to continue arguing. Let's just forget it.

I read what you wrote.
I don't think you are really grasping what you are saying or the hypocrisy of it.

Addition-
I've said nothing and used no mod powers or even insinuated anything mod related in this thread even with your goading as hard as you could to get me too so cut the bullsmurf.

resedit wrote:

isaly wrote:

resedit wrote:

It was with the union that I signed the agreement with, and it was either sign it or not be allowed to join the union - in which case I would not be allowed to work for UPS. If that's not signing under duress, what is?

so, If I sign an agreement that I don't like with a private company because I need a job, is that signing under duress as well?

Maybe not - but when you are forced to sign a contract that says they get your money or you don't work - the Union isn't benefiting the employees.

I think there actually a class action going on with respect to the retirement fund, I heard about one anyway - so maybe I'll get a portion of it back.

Doesn't change the fact that I as a worker was dicked by the union, and that the union dicked a ton of us. Not just the union dues, the union dues were a pittance compared with what they took from us for our "retirement" fund.

If a union wants to give extra benefits to a vested member - fine.
But to take money from non vested members and not give it back is bull smurf.

res. Kindly pay attention.

I. . . do. . . not. . . think. . . everything. . . unions. . . do. . . is. . . good. on the whole, though, unions are pretty good. They can and do get better wages and benefits for employees.

You were a part time employee benefitting from collective bargaining by the union by getting what were likely pretty good wages, and likely some benefits eh. . . likely a LOT better than working part time at the school food service or McDonalds, Wal Mart, Home Deopt or whatever, eh? Obviously, it was good enough that you took it despite the free choice to work wherever else would hire you.

Having to sign away something because you want something is not a good situation but THAT IS NOT THEFT. In your estimation it sucked less than the alternatives. You could have chosen not to take it, or to work somewhere else. You did not, you took it.

Our contract stipulates that we would get back our contribution plus simple interest if we left before having vested.

resedit wrote:

isaly wrote:

resedit. . . I doubt the teamsters "stole" your retirement fund.

Those are generally plans where you contribute a set amount each pay. You "vest" in a given number of years. . . commonwealth of PA used to be 10, it changed to 5 during the Ridge admin.

I had no choice - the money was taken out of my paycheck whether I wanted it taken out or not. It was money I worked for, money I earned, and I can't have it. Teamsters has it.

I was a part time employee. I was a college job and I knew I wouldn't be there for 5 years, but it still had to come out of my paycheck and I still can't have it. I don't know how many of us were working there, there were three shifts (twilight, night, morning) - two sort aisles, 5 belts off main sort aisle and I think 3 belts on secondary sort aisle (I worked first sort aisle - one of our belts fed secondary sort aisle) - but my guess is that between all three shifts, the unloaders, sorters, and loaders - there were probably 1,000 part time employees - many of us college students who would never get a teamsters job again - and those who had been there the longest usually were seniors who started as freshmen, and there were not money.

Do the math - Teamsters took a hell of a lot of money from us that we earned.

That's theft in my book. That's big time theft in my book.

After you vest you're entitled to an annuity or a lump sum and a smaller annuity. If you leave before you vest you get whatever you contributed plus the simple interest to your date of termination. There is a set procedure for getting your money plus interest, may take a couple of months.

Nope - the only way I can ever get my money back is if I work a teamsters job again to get my 5 years. Trust me - I tried. I tried several times.

Meanwhile, my uncle will have 2 pensions when he decides to retire, because besides having one from his time working in a grocery store as a youth, he has the super sweet civil servant pension from working for the DoD.

dvpierce wrote:

JakeTheTall wrote:

resedit wrote:

Nope - the only way I can ever get my money back is if I work a teamsters job again to get my 5 years. Trust me - I tried. I tried several times.

Most pension funds are like that.  I'm sure somewhere in the papers you signed when you were hired, there was a note that it doesn't vest until 5 years of employment.

If a current employer takes back the 401(k) deductions made to your account because you quit after 8 months, are they stealing that money, too ?

I thought they could only take back the matching funds, not the deductions from your check?

Or does that vary?

Er, right, that's what I meant.  So one's account shows the total amount, but the money from the 3rd party isn't really "yours."

I doubt Mr. Resedit really had money stolen.  To copy what he always says, "if this is true, why didn't he sue ?"   Or, actually, the California Labor Dept. is pretty good at getting money due to workers (i.e. skipped paychecks, etc).

Seriously, the California Labor Board (I think its title) is there for just this sort of thing.  Stuff that's a legal slam-dunk, and small (less than five thousand) sums of money.