nlrb findings

Discussion in 'Oak Harbor' started by truckchick1, Dec 10, 2008.

  1. familyman8

    familyman8 Member

    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ok I agree it is not ok for that behavior, but oak harbor has been the one that started all this. because they have money they think they can treat their employees this way. If I recall the law allows you the opportunity to have third party representatives to deal with employers on working conditions. the vp brothers have ignored this fact by refusing to talk and allow the teamsters to represent the workers. that is wrong. period. The amount of money they have spent and wasted on this could have kept the union around for decades. as well as keeping the business profitable. we now know all those numbers on operating ratios were all liews , how do you explain the vast amount of money they had thrown away. what a foolish attempt to remove the members who want to be union workers. ed and dave are nothing more than whining cry babies that don't want to play nicely with the teamsters. how childish.
     
  2. silvertooth

    silvertooth Member

    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Since I don't work for Oak Harbor Freight Lines and have not for over five years, personally I never have had anything to worry about.
    I have been on the line, and I have seen union officials discouraging unlawful behavior, the ability of a few union officials to control the actions of hundreds of pissed of members is somewhat limited. If the company wants to file charges, they should be filed against the individuals who committed the alleged infractions.

    An Union official that commits infractions would warrant a ULP, but not an individual. I assure you that no business rep or any official of Local 174 or 81 would go to someones home and threaten them. The actions of strikers on this line have been no different than any other strike. The video's on youtube, the supposed name/address gathering of line crossers/replacements is not the work of, or funded by, or sanctioned, by the Teamsters or any official representing them.

    Oak Harbor has taken hundreds of hours of videotape in the hopes that they might capture something, anything, they could use to fight the Teamsters in the court. I never heard of anyone getting followed home.........
     
  3. Day Tripper

    Day Tripper Member

    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Whining cry babies! You are the biggest whiner I have ever heard. Play nice with the Teamsters, aren't you funny. The teamsters are nothing but a bunch of lying common criminals. Don't get me started.
     
  4. familyman8

    familyman8 Member

    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    ed and dave are two spoiled little brats playing with daddy's money. I'll bet they never even worked a hard days work or even earned a decent days wage. they have had it handed to them and because the don't want to play with us anymore they ran away. and like I said they do not want to play nice. (I know this is hard for you to understand all these big words and all) ed and dave run a business yes but they still have to obey laws regarding treating their employees this way. For those with less mental capacity let me explain. ed and dave do not care about anyone but themselves. they are stubborn little children that go crying to their mommy when things go wrong. Lets use the the banks that give them support during this as "mommy". because the teamsters (individuals with families that worked for them for years) do not want what they offer they went running to a big bad lawyer to push us around. Instead of trying to NEGOTIATE. all they had to do was keep things the way they were and we would all still be working and ohfl would still be the powerhouse of the ltl business in the pacific northwest. now all they are are bottom feeding suckerfish. now they are trying to do what they can to turn the tables around so they can claim ulp's against us how childish. if you can not see that, than there is really no hope for you sorry i burst your balloon. Im sure ed and dave have some more, have them blow it up because they are nothing but hot air.
     
  5. silvertooth

    silvertooth Member

    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Just playing by the:Rulz:, .....

    So called anti-union lawyers that defend the companies then support the free choice act to drum up work. Retarded working people that are so simple minded that they can't visualize the bigger picture, sometimes its important to remember how insignificant we all are in the big picture, to gain prospective on the smaller issues.

    You can call me what you want I don't really care what you think, the union members are on the right side of this fight and we will win one way or another.

    The owners are simply greedy and that is the only real reason for this whole mess. They just wanted more money in their pockets, that is why there is a strike. No other reason.

    They are, to quote familyman8 "bottom feeding suckerfish" just like you.
     
  6. happyltlguy

    happyltlguy New Member

    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    You have the right words just replacce the word "owners" with the words "teamsters union." the company did not force the strike, they offered 8 different proposals that all had improvements to address issues brought up. Every item that they proposed has been accepted by the teamsters in other contracts with other carriers, why not them?
     
  7. truckchick1

    truckchick1 Active Member

    Messages:
    1,363
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Giving us back the pension that they will freeze was only a token.:bowdown: Forcing us into a company run medical that we will now have to pay for:duh::duh:, no sick leave and no senority is not a union company.
     
  8. happyltlguy

    happyltlguy New Member

    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Where do you get the senority part? the LBF had the same senority as in every other contract in the past. Your right, the pension was frozen at 3.21 for the 5 years. Try getting the trust to move the accrual rate off 1.2 (insted of down) The union stubbed its nose at 6% added to the wages and 6% match into a 401k. The company medical plan is as good or better than the teamster plan's and they gave you the 2 in the wages to cover what they asked you to pay. they converted sick pay into the wages so everyone got benefit, instead of just the few who abuse it.

    Your right, I would give up 5 months wages over those issues. I have heard from strikers who have gotten jobs elsewhere that they are upset because the jobs they got pay less, have worse benefits than what the company proposed.

    sorry for that I know you struck because of the ULP's
    1. formed a driver commiteed to look at ways to improve routing, they did not implement anything as a result of the committee.
    2. said teamsters could not go to a meeting that did not occur.
    3. made a process change to the bidding in auburn that impacted no one.

    Now that is the evil empire. It all makes sense.
     
  9. silvertooth

    silvertooth Member

    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    The concessions that you speak of may or may not be in other union contracts. But the nature of concessions is the company needs so the union gives. Not the company is cashing in so the union gives. The standards in Oak Harbors contract were poor to begin with and in this industry the contract is sub standard. We will not lower our standards just so some Rich kids who never worked for anything in there life can become even more prosperous.

    The medical issue is about not letting the VP's control the plan, it is my fear and the fear of others that they would sacrifice care to save money.

    This company has crazy attendance policies that do not respect the employees private lives. The company's financial state at the time of these negotiations did not warrant concessions of any kind.
     
  10. happyltlguy

    happyltlguy New Member

    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    that is right, the Union is better at acting in your best interest. like lower the accrual rate on your pension to 1.2 or lower. I might also add that the union has modified the healthcare plan as it sees fit to make it finanicially work for them.

    you have no idea about how much the company has made, accept for the lies that the union gave you about 118 million profit in a year that the company posted 153 million in revenue. check your facts.
     
  11. silvertooth

    silvertooth Member

    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    We don't know what the company has made is due to the Vanderpol's unwillingness to open the books as part of negotiations. Is that somehow the unions fault?

    Why would anyone expect concessions in a time of prosperity? Why should union members give more than their fair share if a company is thriving?

    The pension accrual rate varies year to year in poor economic times it trends down, this is to protect the fund so that it will be there for retirees. It is a great fund and an excellent investment when compared to a 401k.
     
  12. familyman8

    familyman8 Member

    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    STUPIDITY at its best. do not know how to read?
    if the 2% increase in wages was to cover the cost of the medical premium that they wanted me to pay, I would be ok with that IF it was a fixed amount. something I could plan on a regular basis, say 50 bucks a month. ok! but it was not, it was 2% of gross that would be a fluctuating amount depending on how much I worked how absurd. DO NOT START WITH ME ON SICK PAY!!!!!!!!!!!! they do not want to pay time loss benefits to us when we take family leave for birth of baby period!!!!!!!I am not whining here I am pissed off. It has nothing to do with a few who abuse it that is NOT the reason. I could have lost my wife from complications because they would not pay me my "sick" pay when my wife had our 7th child c-section. I could not afford the time off without that pay and in their so thoughtful and caring ways they said NO. I had to return to work 4 days after surgery as a result. Would you want your wife to get out of bed after that and take care of your family in those conditions?????I do not think so! you would want to be there to help and make sure she was recovering with as little discomfort as possible. so do not go there I known the rules and regulations regarding this in detail so dont try to feed us this line of b*&^%&*# until you have actually lived it then we'll talk!:angry2:
     
  13. truckchick1

    truckchick1 Active Member

    Messages:
    1,363
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I have my own 401 but I still want my pension. Have any of you seen our parents trying to survive with out a pension? Trust me they tried to save. They are from the depression era. I still see me mother saving coins under her bed. But it will not take care of her future. Shall we all become wards of the state? How long do we allow the rich to get richer while we work 50 to 60 hours a week to just drop. I thought our grandparents fought to change these work conditions. TEAMSTERS STAND STRONG!
     
  14. livlly909

    livlly909 Friendly Trucker

    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Speaking of Libel...... :GrowUp:
     
  15. mrbg7698

    mrbg7698 Member

    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    The company pushed for this strike for the last two years atleast! They have been planning this since the last contract was signed. If you had any clue what you were talking about you could see that.
    I guess you would prefer that every one just roll over every time some greedy company owners decided that they are more important than every one else, forgetting the ones that worked hard to make a company profitable. With the company's so called proposals we would actually have lost money , quality of benefits, and working conditions in several aspects. (not including economic times)
    Just where exactly do you think we would all be if every one did that? Realisticaly for a change if you do not mind actually put some of your own thought into this one.
     
  16. buckaloo

    buckaloo New Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    .i would love for one of these so called brothers to even try and follow me home.:nutkick::clap:
     
  17. imported_8ball

    imported_8ball Member

    Messages:
    56
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    This is rediculous, first off in our society, who has 7 kids anymore. That is being looked at as a burden on society, the average house hold size for the nation for the last 30 years or so has been around 2.3 kids. The reason is that we as a people have a responsiblity to supply for our family. It isn't an employers fault that you have so many kids or their responsibility. It is yours and your wifes, you should not have them if you can't care for them. Your priorities are all backwards. It wasn't " I could have lost my wife because they wouldn't pay me sick pay" If anything were to happen, the right thing to have done was to take the time you needed regardless. You already have that right granted to you by our government.
     
  18. happyltlguy

    happyltlguy New Member

    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    here is the short version of the history on that.

    at the last contract negoatiations the first contract agreed to by your negotiation committee was squashed by the IBT before it could even be shown to the rank and file. the second one the Negotiation committee signed and asked to be the ones to sell it to the rank and file was undermined by the local leadership that were not on the committee. the company then got a mediator involved because it was clear that the negotiation committee was not good on thier promises and the union told the company that if they did not give them what they wanted, (big pension incereases, to help the trust, if you remember they gave up the retro for that and then lowered your benefit levels so you made less than before in benefit.) then they would strike the company and they knew the company was not ready. The company agreed however they asked that the term be 3 years. You are right, the company did not want to caught in that position again, so they made sure that they were ready if the teamsters were to pull that Gun again.

    I guarantee these are my thoughts. I know them to be true. Check out my facts. you will find they are absolutely accurate. Ask Mr. H, or Mr. T, they were there.
     
  19. imported_8ball

    imported_8ball Member

    Messages:
    56
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    This is rediculous, first off in our society, who has 7 kids anymore. That is being looked at as a burden on society, the average house hold size for the nation for the last 30 years or so has been around 2.3 kids. The reason is that we as a people have a responsiblity to supply for our family. It isn't an employers fault that you have so many kids or their responsibility. It is yours and your wifes, you should not have them if you can't care for them. Your priorities are all backwards. It wasn't " I could have lost my wife because they wouldn't pay me sick pay" If anything were to happen, the right thing to have done was to take the time you needed regardless. You already have that right granted to you by our government.
     
  20. familyman8

    familyman8 Member

    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    you have pissed me off now!!!!!!I do not give a s%$ what you think. you are obviously a numbers guy, 2.3 children, thats whats so stupid, its either 2 or 3 MORON. you cannot have a .3 of a child. numbers guy for sure. I know averages right who cares!!! I have never expected anyone else to be responsible for my family, as far as a burden on society the only burden here is stupid, ignorant people who can't think for themselves but think they can tell me what to do. If you want to live in a communist society get the H%$$ out off this country and move to China so you can be told how many kids you can have. I for one live in a country that was founded on Christian principles and the freedoms to do what I want and when. When laws that are to protect people are spit upon by the likes of you and the vp's, people like me with b*#@s enought to fight them, need to. My first priority is to God, and my priciples regarding my Faith. I am Catholic, birth control is not an option and me and my family have been doing just fine up to this point without the help of "society". I am perfectly capable of caring for my children. always have. People with your kind of mentality regarding "society" is exactly the reason society is so screwed up. What ed and dave have done here is not Christian, they are directly responsible for the suffering of many. They have acted unfairly hence "unfair labor practices" so it is their responsibility to obey the laws. Oh thats right they think they are above the law! As for being home with my wife the LAW gave me the right for my sick pay and they refused to pay me what I had available, you just don't get it. You would not have liked it if it happened to you. If something did happen I would have left work to be home that is not the point. I had a right to get paid and stay home. Because they just do not care about their employees, they kept me from staying home when my family needed me.
     

Share This Page