ABF ROAD CHANGE OF OPERATIONS

Discussion in 'ABF Freight System' started by Seamus20, Dec 28, 2017.

  1. canaryinthemine

    canaryinthemine Retirement....The Job I Was Born To Have!

    Messages:
    3,097
    Likes Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Bro. LTL Anonymous has been posting on here for a while, Brother. We’re pretty sure he’s very pro-Union.

    And you’re right.........what’s been done to the noble idea of Unionism is no joke. It’s been done deliberately, systematically,..........and the method used is envy , and people’s lack of courage of conviction.

    Union membership is a First Amendment right,.........a Free Speech right,..........and many of the non-Union people who claim to be patriotic citizens,......and can quote the Second Amendment,..........are virulently opposed to Unions, and call them “ Communist”, and “ Socialist”.......showing a distinct lack of education about what the Constitution stands for.....
     
  2. TurnCoat

    TurnCoat I'd rather be golfing, fishing, hunting, etc.

    Messages:
    529
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Them 2 guys go to the city board with 20 yrs. seniority, they didn't lose their job, just their UE run. With 20 yrs. they're probably doing a P&D run, so they're going to be working for a living for a change. It will be good for them, builds character. They were not forced to bid over from linehaul to UE, it was a choice they made in the original change of operations. It was made perfectly clear there were NO retreat rights for linehaul drivers that bid into UE (city) operations and their seniority would dovetail into the city boards, also, UE could be added or abolished without a COO as business determined. It is what it is, you can't have it both ways. :crybaby:
     
    Rollin62 likes this.
  3. TurnCoat

    TurnCoat I'd rather be golfing, fishing, hunting, etc.

    Messages:
    529
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Deregulation decimated our Union. At the speed that technology is evolving, autonomously operated trucks will eliminate the over the road driver in 10 years. The new equipment ABF is purchasing has the basic systems installed already. City drivers and dock workers will be needed to efficiently load, unload, and pick up and deliver the freight, but linehaul will be easier to automate. Union will have some serious adjustments to make to protect these jobs. Will linehaul drivers be given an opportunity to bid to yard, dock, and/or city operations? These autonomous trucks are not going to hook themselves! The times....they are a changing!
     
  4. canaryinthemine

    canaryinthemine Retirement....The Job I Was Born To Have!

    Messages:
    3,097
    Likes Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Good post, except for one thing.........Art. 3, sec.7 allows companies to expand the "use" of the UE......( i.e: more UE runs..)....But it doesn't allow the company to REMOVE UE runs without a COO. Remember,....the original way they sold the UE language.....AND, the Art. 18, "Other Services" precursor to the UE in the last contract,....was that UE work was all about expansion of NEW work,.....overnight, crossdock, and such.

    Once NEW work was created,....it would have to go somewhere, once the company decided to......"abolish"....a UE "run". I think, if you'll check,......there hasn't been a UE run cancelled without a COO,.....shifting NEW work created to either a different existing UE board,...or to the road board. Our small terminal had two UE runs......Both were eliminated over time by a COO,....shifting one run to another terminal,.....and the other run to existing linehaul boards.

    Art. 18,.."Other Services"........the original "Premium Services" language,..........segregated certain freight, and designated that freight as "RPM", "Premium Services",....along with a special class of employees to handle such.

    Art. 3, sec. 7,.....eliminated that freight segregation,......and created a new employee class that could cross jurisdictions with impunity......UE "freight".....became whatever the company designated at the time,....and it could change that designation terminal to terminal,...at their discretion.
    That's an important distinction,........because the sales staff was supposed to solicit "NEW" work to justify the creation of Utility Employees.

    There is no such thing as "UE freight".......or "UE runs", for that matter.........Art. 3, sec. 7 changed all that, and made "Utility Employee" all about the EMPLOYEE. The company can designate ANY freight,....on ANY given day,....with ANY employee,....as linehaul,.....OR ......"freight that has to be handled by a Utility Employee because it must cross jurisdictions quickly to make service."

    This is a very important distinction we all have to keep in mind as the contract talks proceed.

    That was the reason there was no retreat rights for road drivers bidding into newly created UE positions.....It was an expansion of NEW work that ABF traditionally did not solicit........One and Two day service. It is VITAL to keep track of where this "NEW" work is shifted to,......hence the need for a COO to spell out where the NEWLY CREATED work goes once the company decides to eliminate a UE..."run"....
     
    wheelman1857 likes this.
  5. TurnCoat

    TurnCoat I'd rather be golfing, fishing, hunting, etc.

    Messages:
    529
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    28
    In the Southern Region they can....and do...abolish and/or establish UE runs with 2 weeks notice to the affected terminal(s) for bidding purposes. City drivers bid on runs established, or bottom of the board gets laid off if there is not enough business to absorb the UE driver into the city board. UE driver may or may not get laid off according to his seniority on the city board. No COO required. That's why the announcement of the abolished UE runs was implemented in 2 weeks nationwide and the Road changes are taking over 30 days to implement. Road requires a COO. I'm a city driver, bid into a UE (classification) run, but my run was not abolished at this time, but can be, at any time with 2 weeks notice. If a UE (class) job is posted at your terminal and no qualified driver bids it, it forces from the bottom to affected qualified drivers. The road was given a one-time opportunity to follow the work when the UE classification was created in the 1998 contract. I think it was 1998...hmmm (scratching grey head) anyhow, it's been a while back.
     
  6. TurnCoat

    TurnCoat I'd rather be golfing, fishing, hunting, etc.

    Messages:
    529
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    28
    An HVXP report is created at 18:30 each evening. All shipments picked up by 16:30 that are next day or 2 day points are designated to go with our UE run. If those shipments don't fill 2 pups they are filled with other available freight that can be cut and ready to roll by 20:00. UE runs by design do eliminate road schedules, dock workers, and hostlers, and they do improve service, but I don't haul all the freight my terminal generates, just most of it. 2 pups out, 2 pups in, I'm not Superman!
     
  7. TurnCoat

    TurnCoat I'd rather be golfing, fishing, hunting, etc.

    Messages:
    529
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    28
    It was the 2008-2013 NMFA that created the UE classification...I was only off by 10 yrs. https://teamster.org/sites/teamster.org/files/2008-2013_NMFA.pdf The language is on page 21 about the Road bidding into UE (city) operations and establishing a UE Review Board to hear any changes, which basically is a rubber stamp to change UE operations as the company deems necessary. I like to get my facts straight.:6799:
     
    canaryinthemine likes this.
  8. canaryinthemine

    canaryinthemine Retirement....The Job I Was Born To Have!

    Messages:
    3,097
    Likes Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Likewise the Ol’ Grey Head...........in 1998 , the Art. 18, “Other Services” language,.....created the PSE, or Premium Service Employee .........

    In 2008, the Art. 3, sec.7 language created the Utility Employee.

    Don’t forget this is all national language, so it should be the same for you and I,...........unless your regional Joint Council negotiated separate language allowing them to move Utility Employees around and give away new work without a COO. The force from the bottom language is universal,......and unique to Utility Employee bids.


    And,...... If I remember correctly, the language says " create, modify, and change" UE runs and work without a COO. Notice the missing word "cancel".....

    I went around a few times with the TM on that missing word,....and the reason for it not being there,........

    And the upshot was that any UE run we had removed, was done by COO. Now, that didn't keep the TM from modifying the runs when we had them.......it was just that he couldn't cancel that bid without a COO, like he could with a city bid.

    Let me re-read the contract, too,........just to make sure,..........but I remember distinctly having conversations about this.
     
    Delta Dude likes this.
  9. SAC75

    SAC75 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,976
    Likes Received:
    1,707
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They just cancelled 42 of them on the 14 of January. It’s canceling a bid. Just like any other city bid can be cancelled.
     
  10. canaryinthemine

    canaryinthemine Retirement....The Job I Was Born To Have!

    Messages:
    3,097
    Likes Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well,.....I know they did. But, did anyone hold them to the contractual language in Art. 3, sec. 7? Or.....are they taking advantage of new leadership in the freight division, and just unilaterally doing whatever is the company interpretation of the contract?

    I know for a fact that our UE runs were cancelled by COO's. And,.....many other guys on here have said the same thing. And,......many guys on here have said just what you have said:......The company can cancel UE bids as they wish,.........Apparently, they are........

    The language on page 23 of the current ABF NMFA ,........fourth paragraph, says : " Subject to the approval of the National Utility Employee Review Committee, or the Committee Chairman, or their designees, the Employer may ESTABLISH and MODIFY Utility Employee positions and bids without the approval of a Change of Operations , or other union approval."

    Notice that nothing is said concerning cancelling that Utility Employee bid permanently. At least, ....doing it without a COO.

    The last paragraph in sec. 7 says that the company can lay off Utility Employees,....in seniority order,....and then re-bid that position.

    There is nothing in Art.3 , sec. 7 that says they can cancel a UE bid without a COO. Imagine what would happen if they could cancel road board bids without a COO.

    This is my opinion,....but I think the company is taking advantage of the Union's perception that UE work,....crossing jurisdiction and taking road work, as it does,.......can be "cancelled" like a city bid,......and unlike a road bid ( which also crosses jurisdictions...),.....without a COO,........DESIGNATING WHERE the NEW WORK CREATED BY UE GOES.........

    I think that the new work created by the UE,....at the expense of the road board,...........is now being diverted into Purchased Transportation.

    IF,...IF....the company had to file a COO,....cancelling 42 UE positions,....the Company would have to DESIGNATE WHO would handle that work that was performed by Union UE employees whose bids were being cancelled.

    I think the Company bled work from the road boards,....into the UE ,...."technically" a city board,...not subject to COO's when a local manager cancels bids,.......and that work will now be performed by Purchased Transportation,.......because there is no accounting,....in the companies' eyes ,....of UE work,....the same as if it were road board work.

    An "end run" around the COO accounting of who follows work when bids are cancelled.

    Anyone who had a UE run that got cancelled should ask,......and you have the right to ask,......where that (..UNION...) work went? Who is handling it? What road board added positions to pick up what the cancelled UE runs did?

    WHAT? You mean NO road board added jobs to handle the cancelled UE bids? Well, then..........What Purchased Transportation company,.....in VIOLATION of the contract,.....is handling this UNION work?

    I hope I made it clear why a COO to eliminate UE jobs is so important........
     
    One pup, Grumpy and Retread like this.
  11. SAC75

    SAC75 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,976
    Likes Received:
    1,707
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They did not cancel on a change of operations. Our hearing for a change is the 30th of January. They canceled the runs on the 14. The change is moving road drivers back to break bulks. Nothing to do with UE.
    I do agree with you that the company is taking Advantage of the UE work. It’s absolutely taking away road work and making it a city job. UE’s in my opinion is against everything the union Stood for. We are supposed to be paid the highest wage For the work. The highest wage prevails. A dollar more than hourly wage isn’t 36 dollars an hour for driving in my book.
     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2018
    canaryinthemine likes this.
  12. Rollin62

    Rollin62 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,247
    Likes Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    63
    you don't want your brothers to haul the freight, but it's ok to have contractors move it? Hmm whatever
     
  13. vongrimmenstein

    vongrimmenstein Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,097
    Likes Received:
    1,808
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Exactly how it happened @ 050 Indy. von.
     
  14. canaryinthemine

    canaryinthemine Retirement....The Job I Was Born To Have!

    Messages:
    3,097
    Likes Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I don't think that is what he's saying, Rollin..........As you well know,.....this is a Union board,........and you've purported to be an ABF Union employee after you've left Con-Way,.....

    I can't think of a single Union man phrasing your postulation in any way similar to what you said there.

    C'mon! You wanted the benefit of the doubt to be included in the discussions here and to make debateable comments,.......not just stir the pot with inflammatory statements.....
     
  15. LTLAnonymous

    LTLAnonymous Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    361
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I don't quite follow how one equals the other. I don't think he ever mentioned outside employees, he was just questioning which ABF employees should haul it.

    Is ABF over-reaching its limits on purchased transportation? Probably. YRC just took a hit for doing the same thing. But ABF employees should always be hauling ABF freight, in a perfect anti-Judy world.
     
    canaryinthemine likes this.
  16. Rollin62

    Rollin62 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,247
    Likes Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    63
    That's all I was saying. Abf employees should be hauling the freight reguardless of their classification. As far as the road board; they had the opportunity to follow the ue work with the exception of forfeiting their road seniority and dovetailing on a city board. So with that being said, I'm not sure why we're complaining about who's hauling what and who has the unions permission to haul it. We all know the contract because we signed it. Get the freight down the road
     
    TurnCoat likes this.
  17. canaryinthemine

    canaryinthemine Retirement....The Job I Was Born To Have!

    Messages:
    3,097
    Likes Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I'll agree with you that ABF employees should be hauling the freight. As far as their classification goes,.......we've just seen the results of the Premium Service/ Utility Employee experiment in that the ability to cross jurisdictions indiscriminately,.. hurt the.....road classification.

    And,.......there is a good chance that,...using the provisions of Art.3, sec.7,...the company was able to bleed a good bit of Union work over to Purchased Transportation......without the contractual limits of a COO to protect work for the Union employees.

    I think the bulk of our complaints should be with short-sighted and lazy IBT negotiators....(....OR complicit....Either they were incompetent,..or they were complicit...A terrible thought...)....To allow ABF to "terrorize" their workforce by spreading a rumor of an impending sale to a competitor,.....WITHOUT slamming the IBT "foot" down on the negotiations brake, to get to the veracity of the rumor,......is unconscienable, in my eyes,......Even someone as notoriously spineless as Frank Fitzsimmons would've halted negotiations mid-stream to clear the air of rumors....

    James Hoffa Sr.......warts and all...........would've literally kicked in the door of the negotiating room and overturned the table,....and castigated the management team soundly for allowing the slightest hint of a breath of a rumor of a sale,.....to be released the way ABF did....

    ...(...I'd've paid money to see that....)......
     
    Retread, Grumpy and Trucker 206 like this.
  18. Trucker 206

    Trucker 206 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    885
    Likes Received:
    881
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Agreed. I would’ve given a chunk of change to see that too. Give Jimmy Sr. his due.
     
    canaryinthemine likes this.
  19. vongrimmenstein

    vongrimmenstein Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,097
    Likes Received:
    1,808
    Trophy Points:
    113
    20 years back the outfit negotiating for the union companies told Hoffa JR in advance they wanted to start having the employees pay weekly towards their medical. Hoffa told them that will never come up for discussion. First day of the meetings, they brought it up. Hoffa reminded them what he told them earlier. They said it needed to be dealt with before anything else. Hoffa said Deal with this. And the entire delegation walked out. Someone from the Union side told the companies that they would return when assured that medical payments will not ever come up for discussion again. End of the second day of stalemate, the company representing all the carriers surrounded the issue & never spoke about it again.
     
  20. TurnCoat

    TurnCoat I'd rather be golfing, fishing, hunting, etc.

    Messages:
    529
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    28
    UE Review Board hears the UE changes. When they're approved affected UE positions get 2 weeks notice of adding, cancelling or modifying. That's probably not changing in the new contract and their are no grievances to be filed. That's the rules now. UE runs that cancel return some work to the respective hubs they service, however, most that I have seen abolished were due to the freight levels, so essentially it's not creating the efficiency. When the road can move it more efficient it goes back to the road. I think these recent changes are going to create some lay-down runs to position road drivers at end of line in some lanes, so pack you some extra underwear. If the run I'm bid on into ATL/086 was abolished it would move by 086 road, usually a day late. Just kidding, but, however, I am able to get freight due for service that the road cannot, it's just the way it works. There are no contractors on our lane.
     
    troubleman84 and vongrimmenstein like this.

Share This Page