Yellow | Here is what the company is going to put up for vote?

[bandersnatch]

If you "yes" voters get your way, we will be gouged again and again. So you're saying that with all the cuts the company is trying to shove down our throats, that mowing lawns, cleaning pools, walking dogs, painting houses and baby sitting wouldn't be a better gig? You're wrong! This place would be 10 times worse than the jobs that ANYONE can do that i just mentioned. And no harassment from management, you would be your own boss.

Go ahead and vote yes, you will be in the minority.

So much that our Brothers and Sisters sacrificed over the years, and guys like you are willing to just give it all away. I'm sure your children will be proud that Dad bowed on his knees and quietly gave it all away. Thata boy. NOT!

Try and convince us again how a
yes vote would be best for all.

I don't have a crystal ball. All I can do is vote on what is put before me and cross bridges when I get to them. Supposing this passes and YRC comes back asking for more concessions later I will look at them again and figure out how I plan to vote.

That's exactly what I'm saying. People who mow lawns, clean pools, walk dogs, paint houses, and babysit don't get comprehensive health and welfare benefits, any sort of overtime, or even a quarter of the pension that we do. It's also been a hell of a long time since I cared what management said to me - I show up, do my job, and go home.

As for our Brothers and Sisters of ages past, I'm sorry. Hopefully my paying into a pension that I'll never get eases some of that pain. And for my kids? They're totally cool with it. This job was a big source of upward mobility for my family. The kids are first generation college graduates and have advanced degrees from some of the best schools in this country. I worked this job and made sure that they could do better. So while I raised them to work hard and never cross a picket line I'd prefer that they become management rather than join the IBT. They know I'm better off at YRC rather than doing anything else at this point.

I asked you to convince me to vote no, and you recommended babysitting as an alternative. First I'm concerned about the parents who want 60 year old ex-truck drivers that they don't know to babysit their kids. Second, surely you can do better. How does this round of concessions make things so terrible that any of those things are viable alternatives from a financial standpoint? Even if I never got another second of OT I don't see how any of those numbers would make sense. And finally, what kind of harassment do you have to put up with? Do they call you names? Hide your lunchbox? It has to be bad if you would rather walk dogs than have to work near them.

 

[Doubleclutcher]

Bankruptcy is possible whenever liabilities exceed assets. Here's some grist to mill up. How many here want our wages, benefits, and work rules decided by a federal judge?

Here's what is baffling me with what the company is proposing. They have made it quite clear that they want and need these concessions and extension to appease the lenders. I fully understand that an extension will give the" illusion of stability " or labor peace, however you want to call it. What I don't understand is that the company states that the lenders want to see operating efficiencies and savings, but how do they put any kind of real or imagined value on paying OT after 40 hours, not paying H&W on short hours and sub contracting local and line haul work. They can only put a ficticious estimate on these things at best, even if they have some sort of plan on what they intend to do, they can only base it on minimum forecasts of freight volumes and hours worked or miles run. This only leads me to believe that all this is just another attempt to extort money and work rules from the working people without having to put any thought or real effort into changing the operation or the way they operate to turn the company into a true money maker. Maybe it's just me being paranoid but I don't think so.

 

[BIG R GUY]

Here's what is baffling me with what the company is proposing. They have made it quite clear that they want and need these concessions and extension to appease the lenders. I fully understand that an extension will give the" illusion of stability " or labor peace, however you want to call it. What I don't understand is that the company states that the lenders want to see operating efficiencies and savings, but how do they put any kind of real or imagined value on paying OT after 40 hours, not paying H&W on short hours and sub contracting local and line haul work. They can only put a ficticious estimate on these things at best, even if they have some sort of plan on what they intend to do, they can only base it on minimum forecasts of freight volumes and hours worked or miles run. This only leads me to believe that all this is just another attempt to extort money and work rules from the working people without having to put any thought or real effort into changing the operation or the way they operate to turn the company into a true money maker. Maybe it's just me being paranoid but I don't think so.

Not to be a smart a$$, but instead of being paranoid, wait till this weekend to see what the actual proposal is? May be all of your post, or none of it?

 

[Doubleclutcher]

Not to be a smart a$$, but instead of being paranoid, wait till this weekend to see what the actual proposal is? May be all of your post, or none of it?

Oh I'm not really being paranoid. I'm just stating that what the company is apparently proposing( I know nothing has been officially been presented to the membership) cant really have any real estimated dollar value on it to present to the lenders to show cost savings which makes me believe they only want more from us. For all we know right now they may actually already have a negotiated agreement with the lenders and are hoping for a wind fall from the employees before they announce it.

 

[albag]

Doubleclutcher, I can't say I disagree with your thoughts. Having said that there are no garuntees here. Could there be additional negotiations if we reject this proposal maybe. Could the lenders pull the plug and liquidate maybe. Or any combination of events between those two scenarios. What troubles me the most is all the "just vote no" demands. The BS about our forefathers is just that BS. It's 2013 and decent paying jobs with decent benefits are few and far between for UNSKILLED labor. And don't delude your self, any dummy can be taught to drive a truck. This is not meant to denigrate or offend any of our employees, rather it is an observation on how easily we can be replaced. Overall the men and women who bounce up and down the road in our worn out equipment DESERVE better. But frankly I don't believe that YRCW has anything more to give!
I suggested that the "no" people pool some money and hire an accountant to review YRCW's SEC filings. I haven't seen much interest in that idea.

 

[Lager]

I don't have a crystal ball. All I can do is vote on what is put before me and cross bridges when I get to them. Supposing this passes and YRC comes back asking for more concessions later I will look at them again and figure out how I plan to vote.

That's exactly what I'm saying. People who mow lawns, clean pools, walk dogs, paint houses, and babysit don't get comprehensive health and welfare benefits, any sort of overtime, or even a quarter of the pension that we do. It's also been a hell of a long time since I cared what management said to me - I show up, do my job, and go home.

As for our Brothers and Sisters of ages past, I'm sorry. Hopefully my paying into a pension that I'll never get eases some of that pain. And for my kids? They're totally cool with it. This job was a big source of upward mobility for my family. The kids are first generation college graduates and have advanced degrees from some of the best schools in this country. I worked this job and made sure that they could do better. So while I raised them to work hard and never cross a picket line I'd prefer that they become management rather than join the IBT. They know I'm better off at YRC rather than doing anything else at this point.

I asked you to convince me to vote no, and you recommended babysitting as an alternative. First I'm concerned about the parents who want 60 year old ex-truck drivers that they don't know to babysit their kids. Second, surely you can do better. How does this round of concessions make things so terrible that any of those things are viable alternatives from a financial standpoint? Even if I never got another second of OT I don't see how any of those numbers would make sense. And finally, what kind of harassment do you have to put up with? Do they call you names? Hide your lunchbox? It has to be bad if you would rather walk dogs than have to work near them.

You missed the point, as I knew you would.

I'm not sure you understand what being a Teamster is. By your post, you don't.

 

[COLKID]

Doubleclutcher, I can't say I disagree with your thoughts. Having said that there are no garuntees here. Could there be additional negotiations if we reject this proposal maybe. Could the lenders pull the plug and liquidate maybe. Or any combination of events between those two scenarios. What troubles me the most is all the "just vote no" demands. The BS about our forefathers is just that BS. It's 2013 and decent paying jobs with decent benefits are few and far between for UNSKILLED labor. And don't delude your self, any dummy can be taught to drive a truck.
I suggested that the "no" people pool some money and hire an accountant to review YRCW's SEC filings. I haven't seen much interest in that idea.

you ever stop & think before unions there were NO decent paying jobs with benefits? Drivers are a skilled position too.to suggest any dummy can have the safety records most all of us have here is delusional at best.i don't need to read sec filings to know how much money they continue to **** away daily.

 

[Lager]

Don't worry, albag, triplex, and the "kook" will come to your rescue. Hahaha.

 

[albag]

you ever stop & think before unions there were NO decent paying jobs with benefits? Drivers are a skilled position too.to suggest any dummy can have the safety records most all of us have here is delusional at best.i don't need to read sec filings to know how much money they continue to **** away daily.

I did not say ANYTHING about safety. What you and many others here fail to recognize is the balance of power has shifted. In order to regain some leverage we will NEED to survive FIRST! No YRCW, means the END of teamsters in LTL freight. Because brother when YRCW is gone ABF will be too!

 

[Triplex]

You missed the point, as I knew you would.

I'm not sure you understand what being a Teamster is. By your post, you don't.

Lager, being a good Teamster can take different forms. Trying to preserve a major Teamster job for over 20,000 employees can also be considered "being a good Teamster". Trying to keep all those folks employed as Teamsters instead of having most of them go to non-union jobs (if YRC shuts down) seems to me a good way for a Teamster to behave. This isn't the 1970's with loads of Teamsters working in LTL. Preserve this job and fight for better conditions when they recover and have something to offer. I'm not at all in favor of concessions, but if the alternative is a shutdown, that's a different story.

 

[bubbadog121]

I did not say ANYTHING about safety. What you and many others here fail to recognize is the balance of power has shifted. In order to regain some leverage we will NEED to survive FIRST! No YRCW, means the END of teamsters in LTL freight. Because brother when YRCW is gone ABF will be too!

Thats why YRC buying ABF would be bad. All the unions under one roof! Way to easy to do away with them all in one shot.......Then again they seem to be doing a good job of it now!

 

[longblade]

hope I can put this so people get my point .
there are some here that say that our %15 is not real money and they cant pay bills off with it .
on that same line then how could gouging for more give backs like no ot after 40 not paying pension for less than full weeks and all the rest of it .
how could that be a reason for the banks to refinance if there would be nothing in it for them but savings and no more money ???????
because that saving would be considered NOT REAL MONEY .!!!!!!!

 

[Triplex]

hope I can put this so people get my point .
there are some here that say that our %15 is not real money and they cant pay bills off with it .
on that same line then how could gouging for more give backs like no ot after 40 not paying pension for less than full weeks and all the rest of it .
how could that be a reason for the banks to refinance if there would be nothing in it for them but savings and no more money ???????
because that saving would be considered NOT REAL MONEY .!!!!!!!

If your bank refinances your mortgage and your monthly mortgage payments are reduced by 15%, that means you then have that 15% available to spend elsewhere for food, etc. Or, if your expenses still exceed your income, lowering your expenses still helps you continue to survive. Same with YRC.

 

[longblade]

same as the 15% is not real money this is not real money and no help to the company only a loss to the teamsters .you cant have it both ways .

 

[Triplex]

same as the 15% is not real money this is not real money and no help to the company only a loss to the teamsters .you cant have it both ways .

Of course it's a help to the company. If your mortgage payment was cut by 15% wouldn't that be a help to your own financial situation? The company is paying 15% less to employees. That means the company is reducing it's cash outlay just the same way as you would reduce your cash outlay if your mortgage payment was reduced by 15%. It's not rocket science.

 

[jimmy g]

Longblade- it is Real Money saved from within the pile of income they had. It is NOT Real Money given to you and taken back. That would be additional money and additional spending, requiring a new pile of money that neither they had to give you, or a pile that you actually had and could spend.

 

[cellblock309]

time for new thread for Friday on actual new mou

 

[longblade]

real money or savings does it really matter if they are just going to **** it all away on discounts and bonuses .
the rich get richer and the teamsters take it in the butt

 

[$outh$side $tre$$]

US inflation has been at a historical average low over the past couple of years.

Everyone seems to be voting based on things that aren't on the table. Half of the people here are voting based on a pension that we've already sacrificed. The other half are voting based on wage cuts they're afraid we'll be asked for 10 years down the road. You should look at the concessions on the table and consider: Can I continue to live with a reasonable quality of life under these concessions? Is this the best economic opportunity I currently have? If the answer to either of those questions is no, then by all means vote no. Otherwise, you should really consider voting yes and crossing other bridges when you get there.

As far as principle is concerned, that's ridiculous. Most of us work for the paycheck, not to support some legendary teamster history, the labor movement, or the structure of the LTL industry. I still remember when belonging to the union was aimed at preserving and protecting jobs rather than punishing management at all costs.

What about gas prices?? In 08 they were around 2.25 now you are lucky to find a price lower then 3.10. And how about the price of beef? Do me a favor and find me a sales add that has any type of steak ( tbone strip, etc) under 7.99 lb???? Look at the price for a retirees insurance. My ol man was paying 456 a month in 2009 for my mom, straight out of his penaion check. Now it is in the 650 range.so if that price hike is an average of 1% then i must not be half polish....... i guess im `A 100% POLLACK!!!!!!!!

 

[Triplex]

What about gas prices?? In 08 they were around 2.25 now you are lucky to find a price lower then 3.10. And how about the price of beef? Do me a favor and find me a sales add that has any type of steak ( tbone strip, etc) under 7.99 lb???? Look at the price for a retirees insurance. My ol man was paying 456 a month in 2009 for my mom, straight out of his penaion check. Now it is in the 650 range.so if that price hike is an average of 1% then i must not be half polish....... i guess im `A 100% POLLACK!!!!!!!!

If you are half as you say, you can at least capitalize "Polish". Shame on you!