What's new

Yellow | 318 drivers get the jam in Chicago consolidation

albag said:
When Roadway consolidated those terminals and created 318 company seniority should have been applied. Why it was not is still a mystery!
Click to expand...
At the time the company was at war with 705. I think they didn't want 705 drivers flooding to terminal.
 
Union doesn't seem to be working for the common man anymore.
They are looking out for their own interests period.
I am sure there are some good people that have good intentions.
Where are they I don't know.
At our barn the union is... Believe it or not... More concerned where people park. They will not even let people with handicap placards Park out in the front of the building starting Monday without proof from the Dr that the placard is theirs. This is not the company it's the union doing this. Lannnis Shepherd from 745 Dallas... You have been called out.
It's his fault people have to park in the lot which is half a football field away from the terminal. And we have some crippled up people. But they can still perform their duties.
This is what the union does best. Nothing to do with the job. Pitiful.
I know this will anger people but we cannot strike. Withdrawal cards is our only weapon in right to work states. These people need to be voted out also. They have become comfortable and complacent.
One man's opinion. Mine.
Kind of off topic... Sorry.
 
Quasi said:
Thanks albag. I appreciate it.
I don't know if I'll get anywhere, but it's worth a shot.
Click to expand...
I'd like to hear how you make out but I'm not very optimistic about your success.
 
Wrench97 said:
So it's now the companies fault the Chicago area locals once had a policy that dropped transfers to the bottom of the list?
The way I see it the international needs to step in and have them use the company seniority date not the current terminal date
Click to expand...
This is how they did it to all the mechanics that I know of. Thirty year men went to the bottom of the list or into lay off.
 
Quasi said:
That's part of the problem. There's nothing in writing that we've seen. The BA was at the barn explaining what was going to happen on Thursday, the vote started on Friday, yet they want us to bid in a week with absolutely nothing in writing.
What he said was we will move with an 07 seniority date and layoffs will use the 07 date as well. We were forced here when Bolingbrook 318 was opened in 07 yet now when work is leaving we have to keep the 07 terminal seniority of Bolingbrook if we want to bid to another barn. In my case 304 is getting 3 positions worth of work. I live 4 miles away. A 30 year man who travels 60 miles one way has to pass 304 on his way to 318 because his 07 terminal seniority will not guarantee him from getting layed off. Total BS.
We were forced there yet we can't exercise our company seniority to leave.
I believe article 5.1 states our seniority shall not be violated yet there's also a provision I can't remember the exact article off hand, but I think its article 8 that states all decisions are binding from the change committee, so do I risk losing 16 years of my seniority to follow work to a barn 4 miles away?
Click to expand...
Well file a grievance to have the bidding event delayed.til you all get clarifications
 
bigtruk_us said:
Well file a grievance to have the bidding event delayed.til you all get clarifications
Click to expand...

It will cost you but maybe all concerned should pool their resources and hire a good labor lawyer to look into a "Duty of Fair Representation" lawsuit against the local. That kind of action usually gets their attention pretty quickly.
 
Quasi said:
That's part of the problem. There's nothing in writing that we've seen. The BA was at the barn explaining what was going to happen on Thursday, the vote started on Friday, yet they want us to bid in a week with absolutely nothing in writing.
What he said was we will move with an 07 seniority date and layoffs will use the 07 date as well. We were forced here when Bolingbrook 318 was opened in 07 yet now when work is leaving we have to keep the 07 terminal seniority of Bolingbrook if we want to bid to another barn. In my case 304 is getting 3 positions worth of work. I live 4 miles away. A 30 year man who travels 60 miles one way has to pass 304 on his way to 318 because his 07 terminal seniority will not guarantee him from getting layed off. Total BS.
We were forced there yet we can't exercise our company seniority to leave.
I believe article 5.1 states our seniority shall not be violated yet there's also a provision I can't remember the exact article off hand, but I think its article 8 that states all decisions are binding from the change committee, so do I risk losing 16 years of my seniority to follow work to a barn 4 miles away?
Click to expand...
File on article 8 protesting seniority date. 30 days from the date they post it.
 
troubleman84 said:
File on article 8 protesting seniority date. 30 days from the date they post it.
Click to expand...
Article 8 Section 6. Change of Operations
Change of Operations Committee (a) Present terminals, breaking points or domiciles shall not be transferred, changed or modified without the approval of an appropriate Change of Operations Committee. Such Committee shall be appointed in each of the Regional Areas, equally composed of Employer and Union representatives. The Change of Operations Committee shall have the authority to determine the seniority of the employees affected and such determination shall be final and binding.

Because of "white paper" agreements in effect when Bolingbrook (318) was created, normal "dovetailing" did not occur. As a result the 318 Local Cartage seniority list was and is a mess with regards to seniority. A labor attorney was retained at that time (2007) and a lawsuit was initiated. As a result of the above cited article and section, that litigation was eventually dismissed.

The current COO had an opportunity to correct the injustice. And rule that company seniority NOT classification or terminal seniority prevail in the "dovetailing" of transferees. Obviously they choose not to.
 
albag said:
Article 8 Section 6. Change of Operations
Change of Operations Committee (a) Present terminals, breaking points or domiciles shall not be transferred, changed or modified without the approval of an appropriate Change of Operations Committee. Such Committee shall be appointed in each of the Regional Areas, equally composed of Employer and Union representatives. The Change of Operations Committee shall have the authority to determine the seniority of the employees affected and such determination shall be final and binding.

Because of "white paper" agreements in effect when Bolingbrook (318) was created, normal "dovetailing" did not occur. As a result the 318 Local Cartage seniority list was and is a mess with regards to seniority. A labor attorney was retained at that time (2007) and a lawsuit was initiated. As a result of the above cited article and section, that litigation was eventually dismissed.

The current COO had an opportunity to correct the injustice. And rule that company seniority NOT classification or terminal seniority prevail in the "dovetailing" of transferees. Obviously they choose not to.
Click to expand...
Good information but totally disheartening about our union. When and how will our slaughter cease and desist?
 
G2IsFwS.jpg


Teamster pension plan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top