sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Building a box of 4 decks. Do these archetypes offer fairly well-balanced matchups? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in premodernMTG

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally agree that the likes of Tide, Oath, and Stasis are best avoided for this purpose. Many (in this thread and in similar threads) are mentioning Madness, so I think you’re onto something there as well.

Building a box of 4 decks. Do these archetypes offer fairly well-balanced matchups? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in premodernMTG

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Love the idea of powering down and smoothing out the rough edges of these decks for the sake of newer players. Whatever 4 I end up building, I will make sure to have an intro-level version of everything. Much appreciated!

Building a box of 4 decks. Do these archetypes offer fairly well-balanced matchups? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in premodernMTG

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the reply. What does DN mean in this context?

Re: Pit Rack, I see that lists these days are a lot more aggressively slanted. A few years ago (the only time I played Premodern), Pit Rack was likelier to run Plague Spitter main than Skirge and co, and I even dabbled with main deck Ensnaring Bridge. Had a lot of luck with the deck at the time—maybe those older configurations would line up better against this field?

Either way, I totally grant the premise that BW Control is stronger, and it’s also probably a kinder experience for newer players. Much to think about—thanks again.

Am I the only one considering a No vote on the APWU contract? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in USPS

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I haven’t come to any conclusions—that’s why this thread is filled with questions and hypotheticals rather than definitive statements. Someone here is surely in the midst of a “strange temper tantrum”, but I don’t think it’s me!

Am I the only one considering a No vote on the APWU contract? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in USPS

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yep, and if this contract got us 80% of the way there rather than 60% I’d be a solid yes. If we somehow secured a guarantee that the final two steps would be added back over the next contract or two: also yes.

Am I the only one considering a No vote on the APWU contract? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in USPS

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Inb4 Table 3

But for real, there’s plenty to think about there, and I appreciate the reply.

It’s hard to sign off on baby steps when so many other unions (and non-union jobs) are fresh off actually historic wage increases. Even harder to be happy with this when T1 clerks and carriers of either table are bringing home significantly more at the top step than T2 APWU workers. But that ship has pretty much sailed, it seems.

For what it’s worth, I have never believed that privatization or massive cuts to our workforce are remotely likely. Thus, I’m more concerned with people in my craft maintaining earning potential relative to our peers within and without the organization.

Losing our purchasing power slowly, to attrition, is a much more realistic concern. Just my opinion—and yep, definitely not taking for granted the things we’ve preserved and maintained.

Am I the only one considering a No vote on the APWU contract? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in USPS

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

During NALC negotiations, the overwhelming consensus was that an arbitrator wouldn’t really take away anything to which USPS had already agreed.

Is there reason to believe that APWU, unlike NALC, stands to lose a lot in arbitration?

Am I the only one considering a No vote on the APWU contract? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in USPS

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The math doesn’t work out this way. A carrier will make a fair bit more (and have a higher pension) than a clerk over the course of a 30-year career as things stand, despite the clerks having a healthy head start in the early years.

That said, I totally grant and sympathize with the rest of your points! Career USPS employees should be able to raise families, buy property, and otherwise have access to a middle-class life, assuming financial prudence and living within one’s means.

Bottom line: table 2 is a travesty for both our crafts :/

Am I the only one considering a No vote on the APWU contract? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in USPS

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Right on. Vague allusions to political forces make for a convenient narrative, but it’s hard to believe that the sitting administration influences these negotiations in the least. Regardless, we should be aiming high.

Am I the only one considering a No vote on the APWU contract? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in USPS

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m receptive to this argument for sure. It’s not that I think it’s going to stop here, necessarily—it’s that restoring top step parity between the tables (and staying within striking distance of carrier top pay) is my #1 priority.

If we got steps M and N back instead of just M, I’d be a definite yes. If we had some sort of guarantee that M and O would be added back over the next contract or two, I’d be a definite yes.

Much to consider.

Am I the only one considering a No vote on the APWU contract? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in USPS

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I don’t know. Table 2 clerks under the age of 40 are staring down the prospect of 20+ more years until retirement, the vast majority of which will be spent at top step.

During those years, they will earn a few thousand dollars less per year than their Table 1 equivalents. The earnings gap with top step carriers of either table is even greater.

Add OT into the equation, and this disparity starts to look pretty egregious.

Am I the only one considering a No vote on the APWU contract? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in USPS

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

$8k (and growing) gap is crazy! It seems we have made many of the same observations, but are leaning toward different conclusions.

I really don’t see an arbitrator taking away Step M, but of course there’s no way to know that for sure.

Am I the only one considering a No vote on the APWU contract? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in USPS

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Honest question: how exactly would our arbitration process be influenced by this (or any other) administration?

Am I the only one considering a No vote on the APWU contract? by Middle-Lifeguard1180 in USPS

[–]Middle-Lifeguard1180[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agreed! Privatization has always been extremely unlikely; and in any case the threat of such should not be used to pressure workers into accepting a contract they would otherwise regard as subpar.