What are you referring too exactly?
OK,let us know when your ready to retire and have a crummy 401k check left to survive on and pay huge out of pocket medical expenses.What terminal are you out of? and why are you so anti-union?If your gonna complain about it,at least put up a good argument with some facts...
Thanks for the clarification. Are you Line/or P&D/ or Sleeper? (Just asking)
"...If its auburn you might as well not be union. If you haven't figured it out yet the co. has the union in their back pocket. And we all know all those wanna be's are going to vote yes no matter what. Sincerely, Dinosaur..."
Auburn is @#$@ed the lines between manager and Teamster have been blurred, Local 174 favors the NMFA companies and Oak Harbor is left blowing in the wind. The attitude of some of the officers at 174 and former 741 seemed to be "you voted out of the NMFA, so too bad".Well, they do have a solid core of strong guys up there in Auburn, but I do agree, they also have a lot of scaredy-cats, and brown-nosers, and company snitches.
Enough of those guys stuck with the Portland employees and the Salem employees, and enough other employees at the other terminals took the time to get informed to make the difference in the last contract negotiations.
One good guy can make up for a lot of brown-nosers, if he steps up to the plate when he needs to...
Auburn is @#$@ed the lines between manager and Teamster have been blurred, Local 174 favors the NMFA companies and Oak Harbor is left blowing in the wind. The attitude of some of the officers at 174 and former 741 seemed to be "you voted out of the NMFA, so too bad".
Can you blame the guys up there for losing faith? The Teamsters are to blame, and Oak Harbor has capitalized on these lazy OG @#$%buckets. It’s a constant battle and the company is fighting hard, while 174 are not even showing up. In the whole time I worked there I can't think of one thing they did (except merge themselves) daily seniority violations were the norm, the company actually sending the Terminal Manager out to deliver freight, dovetails, wage discrimination. They did what they wanted, and the union reps were their yes men.
How do they get away with paying these union dock supervisors more than senior Teamsters? How can someone tell you what to do, tell on you, and discipline you, and be your brother Teamster at the same time?
I for one want these guys out. Out of our pension, out of our health plan, no newsletter, no card no nothing. Let them deal with the company for their wages. It’s not worth the 15 or so extra guys dues money. Kick them out; do something they are not bargaining unit employees. Therefore you have no responsibility to represent them.
This is a seriously slippery slope and the ramifications of letting these practices continue will be devastating.
I hope your thread speaks of the administration of local 174 under S.S . As the administration under D.S worked very hard to reverse that trend. Measures were put in place to start a new outlook and were working quite well. Unfortunately the D.S slate was voted out in the last election with the help of deep deep O.G pockets. Already the R.H administration is moving backward and it will make a up hill move even harder. But I am here to say it ain't over and I know people at the auburn barn who are working diligently towards bringing this travesty to a end.
Actually Silvertooth their is a reason and here it is. Your contract language allows it and not enough of the members will stand strong to get the changes needed. The pay difference isn't that much but the benefits package is better for them they get the best of both worlds. Changes can be made but it takes solidarity across the board unfortunately it just isn't happening yet So I am told.Is their some reason that we can't just remove these "Teamster supervisors" from our rosters? What is the pay difference? Couldn't a senior man grieve on the pay scale deviation? It seems so simple to me, kick them out problem solved. They can go on supervising, and we can go on working just like it’s supposed to be.
It's in the OHFL contract, not the NMFA. LOU I is where this language is to be found.
My personal opinion is that while I myself find this language rather abhorrent, there is some need for it in the smaller terminals.
An example would be Yakima or Pasco. They have Teamster operations managers, I believe. During the day, if there is work that needs to be performed such as will call, stripping a late trailer or something of that nature, would you rather have a non-union supervisor doing this work, or a bargaining unit supervisor? because one of the two will be doing this work at times during the day while all of the other drivers are out on the street. What if several guys call in sick at a smaller terminal? That freight will likely end up being delivered by a supervisor performing in an emergency capacity, so do you want them to be bargaining unit or non-union?
However in the bigger terminals like Portland or Auburn, I see no need to have Teamster supervisors, and at any rate, they should never be in or be put into a position to discipline or hire & fire. This would, in theory, eliminate conflicts with their Teamster oath. Note I said "in theory"... LOL!
Well, I don't disagree with you at all in principle. I think Teamster supervisors create more problems than they solve, but I have also seen the way this company deals with situations like I explained in my previous post.
In the smaller terminals in rural areas, they will just use a non-union supervisor and claim that the board was exhausted, or only hire a part-timer (i.e. a Utility B Sorter) who has no seniority, no benefits, and whose wages are at the bottom of scale. And then if they start working too many hours and come anywhere close to converting to Utilty A, they will just figure a way to cut them loose.
I've seen 'em do it.
It is a bit of a conundrum, which is why we are in the situation in the first place. And the reason you don't see this kind of behavior at other union LTLs is because they are all much bigger than OHFL, with considerably deeper pockets, and most if not all are under the NMFA, which definitely has very firm language about such things...:deal:
Not to make excuses for them, just laying out the facts...
Thanks,
I was just curious to see what FXF will give us this year, looks like another penny, lol.
We are at .5313 so I'm willing to bet we'll be .5425 or real close to that. can't wait to see if I'm right...
FM