Sam Gindin’s recent article in Jacobin on the new UPS Teamsters contract provides a good roadmap for socialists organizing in the workplace as to what to fight for going forward. But as a concrete analysis of the context and outcomes surrounding the contract, it falls short.

First, it’s not true that the contract didn’t address part-timers’ concerns. Talks broke down on July 5 specifically over part-time wages, and that was the big sticking point when it came time for the settlement — the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT) leadership was going down to the wire to address the core issue that part-time UPS workers cared about. There were other part-timer issues addressed as well, including stiffening the penalties on supervisors working (stealing bargaining unit work, a big workplace issue) and strengthening transfer rights between facilities to make it easier for part-timers to keep their jobs when they move.

Gindin’s discussion of tiers is misleading too. He is correct that the new contract leaves intact the part-time/full-time divide that has been in place since 1982. But as I wrote previously, no UPS contract since the divide was introduced in 1982 has done more to reduce that divide than the 2023 contract. Even with the creation of the new tier for new part-time hires, no UPS contract has brought up the bottom of the UPS wage distribution more than the current one. And while there are wage increases across the board for all job classifications and seniorities, the biggest wage increases are concentrated among the lowest-paid workers.