What's new

Anti-union propaganda in LA?

I often hear the ol' million dollar mark being thrown around in regards to the company pension plan by management.

Funny thing is, though... no one ever has gotten anywhere close to that. I know quite a few guys who have worked here for more than a decade under the Oak Harbor plan who literally have under $150K in their pension account.

So let's say a guy works here for thirty years and only has $300K in his Oak Harbor pension plan (which is a very reaonable and real-world number, by the way). Then he starts pulling it out in regular intervals. What happens if he runs out of money before he runs out of life?

Will the Oak Harbor pension keep on paying him retirement money, even though his account is dry?

Because the Teamster pension will keep paying... and paying.. and paying. Won't do you much good to worry about leaving money to your kids if you run out of retirement funds long before your death. Not to mention, the Teamster pension has many, many survivor benefits that are lucrative.

And what about early retirement? Many of the guys who start here in their early twenties can retire under the union pension in their late forties or early fifties.

As to the contributory percentage, I will agree that the company has a generous percentage compared to many companies out there. But the point I want to get at is how you cut the rate from the 15% rate to 12% for the new hires. Those employees have no guarantee that you won't cut it again for new hires or even existing employees, do they? There is no contract, therefore there is no guarantee. If it happened once, it can happen again. At least the union side gets a fair chance to negotiate these issues on a relatively level playing field.

The real issue here is that we (and by this I mean everyone in the middle class in America) are being sold a bill of goods here. The 401(k)-type defined-contribution savings plan (which is essentially what the Oak Harbor pension plan is) was never intended to be a primary retirement savings vehicle. It was intended to be a supplementery retirment vehicle! That is what the designers intended it for! Only corporate America saw a chance to shift the entire monetary risk for retirements from themselves to their employees. Better deal for their share valuations, and that makes for happy shareholders, right? Only it's become an epidemeic, and there is going to be a whole generation of Americans who are going to retire realizing they got royally screwed.

And speaking of retirement... do the non-union guys have cheap retiree healthcare, like the union side does? I know the answer... do you?
 
I also want to mention that a Teamster who starts pulling his pension will get back every cent ever contributed under his name in an average of thirty-six months! After that, you're still pulling money out, but it's money that was generated by earnings, interest and dividends.

Something to think about the next time you are being told you could pass all of that money on to your kids...

I heartily recommend 401(k)'s, by the way... just not as a primary retirment vehicle...:rolleyes1:
 
I have been reading this thread with interest. I have never seen the owner of a company come out and just tell everyone who he is. That takes guts.

can't resist a couple comments -

1) Being lied to - if its that bad, leave. No doubt in anyone's mind that a truck driver shortage exists and if you are a qualified driver with a clean record, you can have your pick of jobs. Can never understand that thought process.

2) Defined Benefit Pension - I do not know much about Western Conf., but I do know about Teamster's Central States. If I were a Teamster, I'd much rather have my own money in a 401 K than in these plans. Central States is underfunded big time. What has been promised today, might not be there tomorrow. try asking someone who worked for United Airlines, who's pension went belly up in Chapter 11. They were promised a big monthly pension, but that's not what the PBGC is paying them now.

The new Pension Reform Act that just got signed into law has some provisions that reduce the protections that existed for these plans in the past.

If promises paid the bills, we would all be rich!
 
shifterknob said:
I often hear the ol' million dollar mark being thrown around in regards to the company pension plan by management.

Funny thing is, though... no one ever has gotten anywhere close to that. I know quite a few guys who have worked here for more than a decade under the Oak Harbor plan who literally have under $150K in their pension account.

So let's say a guy works here for thirty years and only has $300K in his Oak Harbor pension plan (which is a very reaonable and real-world number, by the way). Then he starts pulling it out in regular intervals. What happens if he runs out of money before he runs out of life?

Will the Oak Harbor pension keep on paying him retirement money, even though his account is dry?

Because the Teamster pension will keep paying... and paying.. and paying. Won't do you much good to worry about leaving money to your kids if you run out of retirement funds long before your death. Not to mention, the Teamster pension has many, many survivor benefits that are lucrative.

And what about early retirement? Many of the guys who start here in their early twenties can retire under the union pension in their late forties or early fifties.

As to the contributory percentage, I will agree that the company has a generous percentage compared to many companies out there. But the point I want to get at is how you cut the rate from the 15% rate to 12% for the new hires. Those employees have no guarantee that you won't cut it again for new hires or even existing employees, do they? There is no contract, therefore there is no guarantee. If it happened once, it can happen again. At least the union side gets a fair chance to negotiate these issues on a relatively level playing field.

The real issue here is that we (and by this I mean everyone in the middle class in America) are being sold a bill of goods here. The 401(k)-type defined-contribution savings plan (which is essentially what the Oak Harbor pension plan is) was never intended to be a primary retirement savings vehicle. It was intended to be a supplementery retirment vehicle! That is what the designers intended it for! Only corporate America saw a chance to shift the entire monetary risk for retirements from themselves to their employees. Better deal for their share valuations, and that makes for happy shareholders, right? Only it's become an epidemeic, and there is going to be a whole generation of Americans who are going to retire realizing they got royally screwed.

And speaking of retirement... do the non-union guys have cheap retiree healthcare, like the union side does? I know the answer... do you?
Click to expand...

It is very important that one gets his or her facts straight. Under our current program for retirees based on the following criteria of 12% input from the company, $45,000 annual wage (+ 3% inc annually), with a six (6) percent rate of return there should be $600,000 in your account after thirty (30) years. If one elects to put that into an individual retirement account which gave a 6 % return investment, they will receive $36,000 annually from that account without invading the principal, which by the way will be there to give to whoever or whomever you choose to give it to when you die. This is no guarantee but I believe I have put in very conservative numbers in here especially the annual wage. Some of our line drivers are averaging $80,000 + annually which would have a very positive effect on this type of account. You also have the ability of a personal 401 account where you can stick into the account whatever you want to stick into it - the company does not match that amount.

Everyone is looking for a guarantee. There are no guarantees other than those promised in the Bible. A contract has a beginning date and an ending date - there is no guarantee after that.
 
The problem is, David, is that no one is seeing those numbers. I don't know what to tell you, but those are the facts. There far more city drivers in this company than line drivers who aren't making anywhere close to the $80K mark you mentioned. See, you keep throwing out "best case" scenarios, but they aren't indicative of the average or even the median of employees in this company. I know this by personal experience, and I know this by having talked to many, many drivers in this company.

We can dispute this till the cows come home, but the interest in the Teamster's Pension is one of the prime motivating factors in the non-union drivers wanting to go union. Those are also the facts.

And there is a guarantee with the Teamster's pension. You can make all of the allusions to nothing being guaranteed you want, but I have full faith and confidence in the trustees of the Western Conference Pension. It is the largest private multi-employer pension in the world, with over $29 billion dollars in assets. It is a model pension system that other pension trusts around the country and even the world look to as an example.

The numbers show that this this country, the average American who is halfway through his working career has only roughly $28 in his 401(k) retirement account. That is what I refer to when I say that there is a crisis looming in this country where a whole generation is going to wake up one day and realize they do not have the security in retirement they thought they had.

And by then, it will be far, far too late.

Like I said, David, for what the non-union pension is at Oak Harbor, it is relatively generous by today's standards and in comparison with other companies. It's just no match for the Teamster's pension, and the majority of your employees either already know that, or are starting to figure that out...
 
Hockey Puck said:
"...I have been reading this thread with interest. I have never seen the owner of a company come out and just tell everyone who he is. That takes guts.

can't resist a couple comments -

1) Being lied to - if its that bad, leave. No doubt in anyone's mind that a truck driver shortage exists and if you are a qualified driver with a clean record, you can have your pick of jobs. Can never understand that thought process.

2) Defined Benefit Pension - I do not know much about Western Conf., but I do know about Teamster's Central States. If I were a Teamster, I'd much rather have my own money in a 401 K than in these plans. Central States is underfunded big time. What has been promised today, might not be there tomorrow. try asking someone who worked for United Airlines, who's pension went belly up in Chapter 11. They were promised a big monthly pension, but that's not what the PBGC is paying them now.

The new Pension Reform Act that just got signed into law has some provisions that reduce the protections that existed for these plans in the past.

If promises paid the bills, we would all be rich!"
Click to expand...

Whether it's guts or desperation, I at least applaud him in being willing to be a human pinata on here.

Your first assertion is one I get so tired of hearing, Hockey Puck. Clearly you do not put much time into understanding anyone's though process. Your employer undoubtedly appreciates your lack of interest in improving your job and your livelihood. Makes their job much easier, I'm sure.

If you don't like it, just leave!

Well, hell... if everyone had that attitude, we would all be standing around unemployed and looking at each other with sheepish looks on our faces. For that matter, we would still be a colony of Great Britain's and still paying obeisance to the Queen!

Who hasn't worked for a company that needed improvements? Every company needs improvements. I have yet to hear of the perfect job, unless it's working for oneself, and even then sometimes you end up arguing with the boss.

This country was founded on the ideals of optimism and change, as well as liberty and justice. We have the rights to form unions in this country, and we have the right to collectively bargain. Time and again, we see the statistics which prove that union workers on the whole enjoy higher wages and better benefits. Do you suppose this just fell in their laps, or instead do you suppose they had to negotiate and fight for every scrap that they could?

I feel that one could hop from job to job to job, and never be any happier than if one stayed put, and fought to make their company a better place. Perhaps this is just evacuating my bladder into the wind here, but it's a worthwhile cause.

As to your second assertion, not all defined-benefit pension trusts are created equal. Central States has issues, but they are not the issue facing the Western Pension Trust. We are very healthy, unlike what the company and David are telling the non-union employees, and they are getting even more healthy every day. Even Central States is in the act of fixing their problems, and I am indeed critical of the way they let things go. It reflects badly on us, but it is not indicative of every Teamster pension plan in the entire country.

The point about United Airlines is a valid one, but again, comparing apples to oranges. United Airlines is a single-payer pension system, and their management did not perform due diligence in socking money away in the good years to save up for a rainy day. Why? To increase shareholder value. Who paid that price? The employees. Who is ultimately to blame? Management, for failing to do their jobs and placing their shareholders above their responsibilities to their employees.

And shame on our Congress, who passed a weak and inferior Pension Protection Act which harms far more than it helps.

If you want to rely on a 401(k) to retire on as your sole means of retirement, more power to you. I have a more critical view of my retirement needs, and I know enough about this issue to make good judgements on secure and safe options versus pie-in-the-sky promises. I do stick a significant portion of my pay into my 401(k), but that's not my primary retirement vehicle. It's just one leg of the tripod that my retirement is going to be based on.

I'll tell you what, Hockey Puck. Look me up after you retire and I retire, and we'll compare our retirement nest eggs, and then we'll see who is laughing and who is crying, okay?
 
I'm still not sure why David is even on here but,I think Shifterknob put it into perspective,David, quit beating around the bush and tell us how much you hate the unions! I think you might be worried because
your corporation loving right-winged ilk are about to get thrown out of office and then some of these anti-labor laws that the Crawford coward and such have rammed down our throats are gonna go away! That's just my opinion of course,OK i'm done ranting and here's a couple of questions.
1.One of your previous posts you said the company does'nt want a third party(teamsters) involved in the communication link,How come you guys hired a "third" party consulting firm to interoggate employees about working conditions in Portland?

2.How many non-union employees(not management) are currently enjoying the illustrious 401k plan on retirement?
 
You know I have one question to ask any union member here bashing an owner who would some of this board, identify himself and then get slammed.

1. If you owned a company, would you like a third party attempting to run your labor.

Anyone who says that a labor union is not a third party is very wrong. The union's main objective is to better the union. Sometimes there are sacrificial lambs. Just look at USF Red Star.

The IBT knew that they did not have the support of the rank and file to authorize a strike. SO they called it a job action, an informational picket.

Was that job action in the best interest of the Red Star drivers ??

When you have a company that has been successful and takes care of its employees it is a slap in the face of ownership to try and force a labor union down their throats.

The labor is entitled to organize. Ownership is entitled to try and protect itself from outside interferance as well.

Why is it that the union preaches facts and the company always lies ?? You guys really need to fair and open minded and realize that the company's success is dependant on all team members, not just management and not just labor.

I think Mr VP should be commended for coming on here to try and discuss his position. Most executives would not do that.

That includes union executives as well. I have never seen a post here from a high ranking union official trying to answers questions that the rank and file may have.

They use press releases just like the Bill Zollars of the world.

My hat is off to you Mr VP, its nice to see someone give a crap.
 
:wacko:
Friend of the frog said:
You know I have one question to ask any union member here bashing an owner who would some of this board, identify himself and then get slammed.

1. If you owned a company, would you like a third party attempting to run your labor.

Anyone who says that a labor union is not a third party is very wrong. The union's main objective is to better the union. Sometimes there are sacrificial lambs. Just look at USF Red Star.

The IBT knew that they did not have the support of the rank and file to authorize a strike. SO they called it a job action, an informational picket.

Was that job action in the best interest of the Red Star drivers ??

When you have a company that has been successful and takes care of its employees it is a slap in the face of ownership to try and force a labor union down their throats.

The labor is entitled to organize. Ownership is entitled to try and protect itself from outside interferance as well.

Why is it that the union preaches facts and the company always lies ?? You guys really need to fair and open minded and realize that the company's success is dependant on all team members, not just management and not just labor.

I think Mr VP should be commended for coming on here to try and discuss his position. Most executives would not do that.

That includes union executives as well. I have never seen a post here from a high ranking union official trying to answers questions that the rank and file may have.

They use press releases just like the Bill Zollars of the world.

My hat is off to you Mr VP, its nice to see someone give a crap.
Click to expand...
:wacko: Yeah,another company man! congratulations,what terminal did you say you work out of? Do all of your types have the same copy of the corporate handbook or what! I never said the company did'nt have a right to protect it's interest,just don't lie! state the facts to the employees.The multi employer pension of the west is in great shape,don't believe me? call and ask for the print out and do you homework.Remember Enron and all those people who got screwed?
SINGLE EMPLOYER PENSION!!!
 
I do not work for your company. And I know that if I was an owner I would like to deal directly with my employees.

As far as the company "lying" I am not ignorant and that may well be, but do you think union official always speak the truth ??

If you say yes, then you can tell me who is drinking the Kool Aid.
 
davidvp. hats off to you for even comeing on here and speaking, you seem to have at least a open mind, and are at least trying here. i'm from the east coast, new penn motor express, i'm sure you've heard of us. from our begining, EH ARNOLD, the owner had a union company. and over our years of operation, we have been if not the most profitable ltl, at the top of the list, best o/r in the industry, best in claims, and on and on. before the roadway/ yellow deal. so let me say, it's not the or all the union that brings these companys down, or puts them out of business. we are living proof. management has to take reponsablity in that also. on the other hand, before the big buy-out, i can tell you this company did more work and moved more freight with less people than any i know of, the men were treated with respect, but most worked hard to keep us the best in the business. they were proud to work for npme. did more than they had to, worked when it was needed and there was really no bullshit, we were all includeing management working togather for all of us, but yes we were union and under the master freight aggrement.after that strike in 93-94, when i went back in the city, i needed another hand to count the customers that said to me, we didnt even know npme was a union company. management has since changed , additudes have also, we have supervisors with additudes worse than any or as bad as any teamster i have ever met, .it's a constant pissing contest. piles of grevienses, we still are good, but can't help but think how we could really be good if managements additude would'nt have changed. npme doesn't have total control over npme like it used to. men that remeber how to work are retireing, and can't find help, just hireing lots of body's, actually in my opion morons with know kind of work ethic, peroid. i know about your company, because of SHIFTERKNOB, who has taken the time to write it down, and provide news of your company. i see a comparison of your family co. and what npme used to be. while SHIFTERKNOB might seem like your, lets say, enemy, here. from his posts over the years, union or not, he probably cares more for your company than any dozen supervisors you could pick and your biggest non-union terminal combined. i say dont fear the union, these men have a right to decent pay and pension just as you do, they work hard like you do, npme is as flexable as any non-uniom company around, and even though all have tried, they still cant do over-night in the north-east consistantly like us. you still have total control over your company, and while you do listening and working with men like SHIFTERKNOB, who still care , and only want good pay and secure future and retirement, and respect, will benifit you and all of you in the end. if all your energy could be put into working the freight, management and employee's, instead of fighting the union, or each other at this point, think how much freight you left coast guys could really move.
 
Allnightrain44 really hit the nail on the head with his post. Great job, guy!

You know, I don't really consider myself anyone's enemy... but I do believe in fighting for my rights and livelihood, and for those of my fellow employees. That's anywhere I ever worked, union and non-union. I've just had much better luck in union shops getting a fair and square deal, and that's why I prefer to be union.

Let me spill the beans on why management doesn't like the union. It's not a personal issue, in most cases. It just comes down to pure business.

It's about the preception of flexibility, or the lack thereof, in the case of a unionized shop. At Oak Harbor, we are not Master Freight (haven't been since David's dad asked us to give him a break back in '85 so he could survive, which we did... that's called us employees being flexible), we are in a white paper contract. It's not the best contract around, but it isn't the worst by far, either. The owners of this company, of which David is one, have plenty of flexibility... up to a certain point. Certainly they have not had to pay out the best wages or benefits, or at least not up until this last contract, where we did play a pretty good game of catch-up.

But there's always room for improvement!

We do have language in our contract that forces management to play by certain rules, and it also forces us to play by certain rules. The one thing we have is that guarantee that if the language is there, the language must be followed and respected or there will be consequences... both parties under the Oak Harbor labor agreement are subject to this.

Over the years, they have made mistakes, and so has the union. We have survived and prospered as a company, and our contracts are starting to achieve the goals we want to see achieved, especially in this last contract. We expect to see more achievements met both in negotiating our succeeding contract next year, and in organizing those who want to be organized.

David and his borther and the rest of senior management have every right to try and propagandize all they want, so long as they do not stray over certain lines into Unfair Labor Practice territory. And the union (including the employees of Oak Harbor who are union) have every right to fight them back, within the limits set out by the National Labor Relations Act, and other state and federal laws.

And so we will. Here, on the street, and on the road. By every and any means necessary. The union can't call mandatory meetings like the company can. The union can't force them to sit there while a union official tells an employee he would be personally offended if they don't go union. But the company can-- and has.

The union cannot promise the things the company can, and they have to be very careful about talking numbers and such because if they get it even a little bet wrong, you can bet Big Bob the Retired Teamster Milkman will come calling with a ULP complaint against the offending local.

We don't want to see this company fully unionized because we hate or even dislike the family. Far from it. We simply want to see more of our non-union fellow employees get a better situation for themselves while at the same time improving our strength and leverage at the negotiating table. I mean, it's no big secret or anything.

We are not looking to break this company's back or push them off of a bridge or anything. We want to see them survive and compete. We simply want a fair share of the gain that our labors have contributed to in the course of building this company up to what it is and wants to be.

Most of us here on the front-lines want to see this company succeed, because we believe in it. But it's going to be on our negotiated terms, not on the dictates of the owners. This last contract saw significant advances because of the actions of a few locals who stood together, as well as the employees. We have all seen what that gained us, and you can count on the fact that you will see more of that at the next negotiations...

:USA: :USA: :USA: :USA:
 
A suggestion to you all about improving conditions in the industry. Have a card signing party at the many non union competitors with inferior wages and benefits which drive the price of our services down. Even if you don't get them organized you, the owners of these companyies hopefully will have to raise their wages and benefits to the same levels as ours and then we can compete on a level playing field. I am not necessarily talking about Con Way or Fed Ex because they normerly are not the price leaders, talk to your terminal account and sales people, they will give a list of carriers who are constantly cutting our prices making it more tough for us to stay even in the game.

David Vander Pol
Oak Harbor Freight Lines
 
David, you and I agree on this issue totally. We know who the bottom-feeders are as far as rate-cutting goes, and they are often the ones with the most inferior wages and benefits for their employees.

I know that the union has set it's sights on at least two of these "discount" carriers, but it takes time, money and effort to get them organized. And it also takes negotiating good contracts with those currently represented companies to set the bar and to use as examples of what a union can do for the employees.

Like I said, the union isn't looking to push any company off of a cliff, so long as they play fair. We understand that unless a majority of the industry is unionized, there are created cost disparities that can eventually back a company into a corner.

But even you have to admit there will always be bottom-feeders in this industry that pop up, steal a little freight, and disappear again back into the primordial ooze from whence they came. We can all thank deregulation for that and other evils. The union is never going to be able to organize every single carrier, especially since a lot of these "gyppo" carriers are operating on a shoestring at best, and don't exactly play by any rules.

One thing I would point out is that as the driver pool continues to shrink, these carriers will have a much more difficult time finding qualified, insurable drivers with decent driving records who will meet the bar the government keeps raising on us all, not to mention security, Hazmat and other issues. Small comfort right now, perhaps, but in time, this will become a hard obstacle for these companies to overcome without raising wages and benefits to match those of the better-paying carriers.

We've all seen the foreshadowing of this, because practically every carrier out there right now is screaming for drivers, and they aren't finding them. Not the gyppos, not the unionized big boys... they are all having a struggle finding drivers.

Those that have attractive packages to offer will be able to pisk and choose from the ever-shrinking pool of good, qualified drivers, while the rest will have to either lower their standards and pay another kind of price, or raise wages and benefits to match the competition.

Welcome to the future...!:shades:
 
What you said is so true Shiferknob, to say the least you expressed it well. I am sure all agree with you or most of us do.


shifterknob said:
David, you and I agree on this issue totally. We know who the bottom-feeders are as far as rate-cutting goes, and they are often the ones with the most inferior wages and benefits for their employees.

I know that the union has set it's sights on at least two of these "discount" carriers, but it takes time, money and effort to get them organized. And it also takes negotiating good contracts with those currently represented companies to set the bar and to use as examples of what a union can do for the employees.

Like I said, the union isn't looking to push any company off of a cliff, so long as they play fair. We understand that unless a majority of the industry is unionized, there are created cost disparities that can eventually back a company into a corner.

But even you have to admit there will always be bottom-feeders in this industry that pop up, steal a little freight, and disappear again back into the primordial ooze from whence they came. We can all thank deregulation for that and other evils. The union is never going to be able to organize every single carrier, especially since a lot of these "gyppo" carriers are operating on a shoestring at best, and don't exactly play by any rules.

One thing I would point out is that as the driver pool continues to shrink, these carriers will have a much more difficult time finding qualified, insurable drivers with decent driving records who will meet the bar the government keeps raising on us all, not to mention security, Hazmat and other issues. Small comfort right now, perhaps, but in time, this will become a hard obstacle for these companies to overcome without raising wages and benefits to match those of the better-paying carriers.

We've all seen the foreshadowing of this, because practically every carrier out there right now is screaming for drivers, and they aren't finding them. Not the gyppos, not the unionized big boys... they are all having a struggle finding drivers.

Those that have attractive packages to offer will be able to pisk and choose from the ever-shrinking pool of good, qualified drivers, while the rest will have to either lower their standards and pay another kind of price, or raise wages and benefits to match the competition.

Welcome to the future...!:shades:
Click to expand...
 
David,

That was a very sore subject when I worked for USF. The IBT was constantly pushing to organize Dugan. It would have been nice to see them use that same energy to go after other union free outfits, instead of pounding the daylights out of Dugan.

Sort of even the playing field so to speak. Sometimes I feel the unions are looking to pick the low hanging fruit.
 
The reason that the IBT wanted Dugan organized was so that USF would a completely unionized company, giving you better leverage at the bargaining table. Dugan was considered a very ripe target due to a.) the fact that many of it's employees wanted the union, and b.) it had inferior wages and benefits compared to many of the other units of USF, and parity was desperately needed. I would also point out that they were trying to organize Bestway and the parts of Reddaway that are still non-union, nor have they given up on that.

It is in the whole a better use of a union's organizing budget to organize a carrier that will actually be around next year, and not just disappear into the woodwork when freight volumes drop or costs rise... or if the union comes calling.

What makes Oak Harbor such a prime target is a.) the desire of many of it's non-union employees to go union, and b.) the fact that we are already partially unionized, and those disparities make for difficulties between the union and the non-union side that shouldn't have to be there, and c.) we are a strong and growing carrier on the West Coast.

The motivating factors driving many of the Oak Harbor non-union employees to seek union representation are many, but they are not unusual, either.

The same old driving forces, you might say...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top