What's new

Yellow | is this right

littlekorvette

littlekorvette

TB Lurker
Credits
0
if teamsters did not negotiate this extension, being dues paying teamsters are we not obligated to either vote no or not vote at all. I was under the understanding that we could not negotiate without the teamsters
 
The Teamsters are the soul bargaining agent for us. In my opinion when the representatives set down with the company and agreed to take a vote it in effect complied with the "soul bargaining agent" language....... whether they NEGOTIATED or not. :shrug:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is also my problem that you speak of. This is how it was explained to me; The company sat down with the Teamsters and told them this is the deal no other deal will be heard. The Teamsters said in no way will they endorse that. So Mr. Welch said fine will let the members decide. My problem with this is the union is sitting on their hands while YRC has a road show to tell us how important this is and why we need to vote yes. What I would like to see is another road show of the union telling us the out come if we do vote yes.

Like Forrest Gump would say "I'm not a very smart man" I would have to say I'm not that savvy with all the Intel of the companies going on. I do know this tho. The company needs to borrow more money because the prior executive board **** away the last four years of the money we gave them. So our new management team is requesting we just extend our giving's til the year 2019. The Banks want a five year commitment from the company before they hand over millions of dollars to a company that hasn't shown a profit in .......well, they've never shown a profit. Just for ***** and giggles I'd like to see that request, we're believing there is a request because Mr. Welch says there's one.

Anyway, what gets me is the Banks want a five year commitment. So just extend the one you're in why add all the new crap taking more things away from those you need to make this happen. One fellow said they need to show their going to make more money. BS they (YRC) are just trying to take away even more. If they (YRC) want to make more money they should go after the corporate accounts. So far we have easily rolled twice with the last concessions, it must be like taking candy from a baby.

I figured in my math their asking me for 150,000 over a five year period and taking my retirement at the same time. What's the accountability to them? NOTHING as a matter of fact the last management who blew our money got a 13 million dollar buy out. I got a problem with this.

In my opinion get more freight on the trucks that's what pays the bills, corporate freight. Not taking money from those you need to do the job. If this does go through and wages are lowered to those who work the dock I would bet a years salary the OS&D area at your barn will need more room. There are so money things wrong with this extension it's ridiculous. It's the company taking advantage of the time of year and the job market at the same time. I would think they laughed when this was put together.

What we need is something back, most of us just want our pension. We also need our pride back, putting on our shirts is a kick in the face. Driving these trucks down the road is an embarrassment to me anyway. This company wants to be a leader again yet they beat down, belittle the very same people they need.

For some reason our union won't say anything, that's a shame. All we know is they don't support it. If this were the early 70'ds do you think they'd be silent? I know times aren't the same, but many need a voice to say what they aren't saying. When you have your road show and they start talking don't let them talk down to you, they are not better than you.

And for God's sake DON'T DRINK THE JUICE.

GD
 
GeorgeDavid said:
This is also my problem that you speak of. This is how it was explained to me; The company sat down with the Teamsters and told them this is the deal no other deal will be heard. The Teamsters said in no way will they endorse that. So Mr. Welch said fine will let the members decide. My problem with this is the union is sitting on their hands while YRC has a road show to tell us how important this is and why we need to vote yes. What I would like to see is another road show of the union telling us the out come if we do vote yes.

Like Forrest Gump would say "I'm not a very smart man" I would have to say I'm not that savvy with all the Intel of the companies going on. I do know this tho. The company needs to borrow more money because the prior executive board **** away the last four years of the money we gave them. So our new management team is requesting we just extend our giving's til the year 2019. The Banks want a five year commitment from the company before they hand over millions of dollars to a company that hasn't shown a profit in .......well, they've never shown a profit. Just for ***** and giggles I'd like to see that request, we're believing there is a request because Mr. Welch says there's one.

Anyway, what gets me is the Banks want a five year commitment. So just extend the one you're in why add all the new crap taking more things away from those you need to make this happen. One fellow said they need to show their going to make more money. BS they (YRC) are just trying to take away even more. If they (YRC) want to make more money they should go after the corporate accounts. So far we have easily rolled twice with the last concessions, it must be like taking candy from a baby.

I figured in my math their asking me for 150,000 over a five year period and taking my retirement at the same time. What's the accountability to them? NOTHING as a matter of fact the last management who blew our money got a 13 million dollar buy out. I got a problem with this.

In my opinion get more freight on the trucks that's what pays the bills, corporate freight. Not taking money from those you need to do the job. If this does go through and wages are lowered to those who work the dock I would bet a years salary the OS&D area at your barn will need more room. There are so money things wrong with this extension it's ridiculous. It's the company taking advantage of the time of year and the job market at the same time. I would think they laughed when this was put together.

What we need is something back, most of us just want our pension. We also need our pride back, putting on our shirts is a kick in the face. Driving these trucks down the road is an embarrassment to me anyway. This company wants to be a leader again yet they beat down, belittle the very same people they need.

For some reason our union won't say anything, that's a shame. All we know is they don't support it. If this were the early 70'ds do you think they'd be silent? I know times aren't the same, but many need a voice to say what they aren't saying. When you have your road show and they start talking don't let them talk down to you, they are not better than you.

And for God's sake DON'T DRINK THE JUICE.

GD
Click to expand...

Very well said & I totally agree, but that's the common sense approach ( and the right one), common sense is not so common any more especially with the Welch regime (they need to go :wavey: ) FIGHT FOR THE PENSION!!!:draw:
 
wolf said:
The Teamsters are the soul bargaining agent for us. In my opinion when the representatives set down with the company and agreed to take a vote it in effect complied with the "soul bargaining agent" language....... whether they NEGOTIATED or not. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Employer/Union Rights and Obligations | NLRB

What rules govern collective bargaining for a contract?
After employees choose a union as a bargaining representative, the employer and union are required to meet at reasonable times to bargain in good faith about wages, hours, vacation time, insurance, safety practices and other mandatory subjects. Some managerial decisions such as subcontracting, relocation, and other operational changes may not be mandatory subjects of bargaining, but the employer must bargain about the decision's effects on unit employees.
It is an unfair labor practice for either party to refuse to bargain collectively with the other, but parties are not compelled to reach agreement or make concessions.
If after sufficient good faith efforts, no agreement can be reached, the employer may declare impasse, and then implement the last offer presented to the union. However, the union may disagree that true impasse has been reached and file a charge of an unfair labor practice for failure to bargain in good faith. The NLRB will determine whether true impasse was reached based on the history of negotiations and the understandings of both parties.
If the Agency finds that impasse was not reached, the employer will be asked to return to the bargaining table. In an extreme case, the NLRB may seek a federal court order to force the employer to bargain.
The parties' obligations do not end when the contract expires. They must bargain in good faith for a successor contract, or for the termination of the agreement, while terms of the expired contract continue.
A party wishing to end the contract must notify the other party in writing 60 days before the expiration date, or 60 days before the proposed termination. The party must offer to meet and confer with the other party and notify the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service of the existence of a dispute if no agreement has been reached by that time.
How is "good faith" bargaining determined?
There are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of NLRB cases dealing with the issue of the duty to bargain in good faith. In determining whether a party is bargaining in good faith, the Board will look at the totality of the circumstances. The duty to bargain in good faith is an obligation to participate actively in the deliberations so as to indicate a present intention to find a basis for agreement. This implies both an open mind and a sincere desire to reach an agreement as well as a sincere effort to reach a common ground.
The additional requirement to bargain in "good faith" was incorporated to ensure that a party did not come to the bargaining table and simply go through the motions. There are objective criteria that the NLRB will review to determine if the parties are honoring their obligation to bargain in good faith, such as whether the party is willing to meet at reasonable times and intervals and whether the party is represented by someone who has the authority to make decisions at the table.
Conduct away from the bargaining table may also be relevant. For instance if an Employer were to make a unilateral change in the terms and conditions of employees employment without bargaining, that would be an indication of bad faith.
 
bubbadog121 said:
Employer/Union Rights and Obligations | NLRB
Click to expand...
Good info Bubba. I had assumed the original poster was implying that this process was trying to negotiate with each individual employee (or the majority) to circumvent dealing with the IBT. I sure wish I could find it, in one of the SEC filings YRC give NLRB rulings as a possible negative impact in its forward looking statements. Wonder if that's one of those normal "disclaimer" type things or something the company actually fears?
 
No company official(s) should contact any union member(s) without first having union representation present.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk
 
I am curious as to why you all get mail in ballots and UPS Freight gets to go to the union hall to vote on theirs? Are you guys big eaters and coffee drinkers, or what?
 
Well I think they are trying 2 different processes to see which one is easier to manipulate.........................................
 
GeorgeDavid said:
This is also my problem that you speak of. This is how it was explained to me; The company sat down with the Teamsters and told them this is the deal no other deal will be heard. The Teamsters said in no way will they endorse that. So Mr. Welch said fine will let the members decide. My problem with this is the union is sitting on their hands while YRC has a road show to tell us how important this is and why we need to vote yes. What I would like to see is another road show of the union telling us the out come if we do vote yes.

Like Forrest Gump would say "I'm not a very smart man" I would have to say I'm not that savvy with all the Intel of the companies going on. I do know this tho. The company needs to borrow more money because the prior executive board **** away the last four years of the money we gave them. So our new management team is requesting we just extend our giving's til the year 2019. The Banks want a five year commitment from the company before they hand over millions of dollars to a company that hasn't shown a profit in .......well, they've never shown a profit. Just for ***** and giggles I'd like to see that request, we're believing there is a request because Mr. Welch says there's one.

Anyway, what gets me is the Banks want a five year commitment. So just extend the one you're in why add all the new crap taking more things away from those you need to make this happen. One fellow said they need to show their going to make more money. BS they (YRC) are just trying to take away even more. If they (YRC) want to make more money they should go after the corporate accounts. So far we have easily rolled twice with the last concessions, it must be like taking candy from a baby.

I figured in my math their asking me for 150,000 over a five year period and taking my retirement at the same time. What's the accountability to them? NOTHING as a matter of fact the last management who blew our money got a 13 million dollar buy out. I got a problem with this.

In my opinion get more freight on the trucks that's what pays the bills, corporate freight. Not taking money from those you need to do the job. If this does go through and wages are lowered to those who work the dock I would bet a years salary the OS&D area at your barn will need more room. There are so money things wrong with this extension it's ridiculous. It's the company taking advantage of the time of year and the job market at the same time. I would think they laughed when this was put together.

What we need is something back, most of us just want our pension. We also need our pride back, putting on our shirts is a kick in the face. Driving these trucks down the road is an embarrassment to me anyway. This company wants to be a leader again yet they beat down, belittle the very same people they need.

For some reason our union won't say anything, that's a shame. All we know is they don't support it. If this were the early 70'ds do you think they'd be silent? I know times aren't the same, but many need a voice to say what they aren't saying. When you have your road show and they start talking don't let them talk down to you, they are not better than you.

And for God's sake DON'T DRINK THE JUICE.

GD
Click to expand...

They say life is like a box of chocolates....NO, it is like a jar of jalapenos, what you do today, will burn your *** tomorrow!....Don't be Fooled...VOTE NO!.....KK

 
ABFer said:
I am curious as to why you all get mail in ballots and UPS Freight gets to go to the union hall to vote on theirs? Are you guys big eaters and coffee drinkers, or what?
Click to expand...

I'm a UPSF employee and one of the biggest and best coffee drinking donut eaters you ever saw! LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
If the union didn't like this agreement, why didn't they hold a meeting like Welsh did and tell the members to vote no. They should of said if you are going to vote yes then abstain from voting like YRC's gurus did.
 
ABFer said:
I am curious as to why you all get mail in ballots and UPS Freight gets to go to the union hall to vote on theirs? Are you guys big eaters and coffee drinkers, or what?
Click to expand...

A lot of us like hot sauce, beans & beer...unless they need the hall fumigated , better we stay home!
 
I was thinking that maybe you guys ruined it for the UPS Freight guys. All the bellyaching the IBT has to endure on here when they can just hold one quick and done meeting and move on.
 
hairs2u said:
If the union didn't like this agreement, why didn't they hold a meeting like Welsh did and tell the members to vote no. They should of said if you are going to vote yes then abstain from voting like YRC's gurus did.
Click to expand...

The union wants to stand in the background and take your dues money and be able to say "You voted for this, We didn`t endorse this giveback" You can`t blame us.
 
Teamster YRCW employees should call their locals and tell them to contact Tyson Johnson and James Hoffa and tell them UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES do you want the company sending you any propaganda mailers, robo calls, text messages, e-mails, etc to your private home address, phone, or computer! Make the IBT stop the threats and harassment of Teamster YRCW employees into voting Yes for this joke of a MOU extension! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top