"Business Examiner" said:Jul. 22, 2008 at 11:08am
Teamsters picketed freight company
A handful of retirees and union officials picketed outside Oak Harbor Freight Lines' headquarters in Auburn yesterday. At issue is contract negotiations that remain stalled after almost a year of talks. The sticking point is reportedly the regional trucking company's stance of eliminating health care coverage for all of its retirees.
"If Oak Harbor gets their way, our retirees – the ones who built this company -- will be orphaned with no health insurance," said Al Hobart, Teamster vice president and Joint Council 28 president. "We cannot allow that to happen."
The privately held company turned 90 years old this year and is one of the largest in the Northwest. Its annual revenue tops $150 million and boasts about 8 percent revenue growth in recent years.
The contract would affect about 70 people, of which the difference between shifting to the company plan as it proposes and the continued use of the union plan is only about $60 a month, corporate communications manager Mike Hobby said. The picketing came during a scheduled negotiation time using a federal mediator, when the company presented its seventh proposal and union officials failed to present a counter plan. They opted to picket.
"They were here as long as the television cameras were here," Corporate Communications Manager Mike Hobby said, noting that the story was wrapped by local television stations into a story about GM's contract negotiations with its auto workers.
The Teamsters represents about half of Oak Harbor's 1,300 employees who are spread out between the West Coast states.
What an ***....
What about all of the proposals the Teamsters came with, and Oak Harbor didn't have anything?
I usually agree with you but I gotta say it is a great idea to have gary as the retired teamsters spokesperson on the news...wouldnt you say that people would realize that things have really gone to hell when a devoted company centered man is complaining about what they are trying to do? I think it made a powerfull statement. As for him as a person, moral and respect sure was higher when he was in office, cant say as much for what bill has done since he has joined us. Just a thought.
He was one of the last grandfathered in teamster managers, and one of the better, thats all im saying. Bill does not respect us and considers us less of a person for doing what we do, you can gather this by the way he talks at their meetings. Like you said, he spoke well, and I think his message was effectively delivered...
He fired people, a sworn Teamster cannot fire another member, even to aid in the termination of fellow brother is a violation of the Teamster oath.
This is why a teamster should never be a manager. What
if the people that he terminated should have been terminated?
What if the suspensions were warranted? The conflict of
interest is way too great.
Are there any more teamster managers at OAKH?
This is why a teamster should never be a manager. What
if the people that he terminated should have been terminated?
What if the suspensions were warranted? The conflict of
interest is way too great.
Are there any more teamster managers at OAKH?
No Teamster should be terminated in my eyes, unless they steal freight, or create unsafe situations that threatens the health of other Teamsters.
A Teamster should never have even been a supervisor, never in a million years a Terminal Manager.
I believe they made all the Teamster supervisors go non in preparation for this contract battle.
I know of one operations manager that was told, by his
local, that he would be in danger of losing his pension if
he so much as wrote up a fellow teamster.
No Teamster should be terminated in my eyes, unless they steal freight, or create unsafe situations that threatens the health of other Teamsters.
Are there any more teamster managers at OAKH?[/QUOTE said:Nope. The last one withdrew from the union this year. Most likely to avoid fines in the event of a strike. A true turncoat who didn't even have the nutts to tell the memebers he works around.
What about unsafe situations that threatens the public or NON union employees, or showing up under the influence, or being caught using drugs, or failing to show up for work for days, or having repeated accidents. or faking an injury, etc, etc, etc.
It seems you would let someone get away with a lot of things, simply because they are a teamster, which is holding teamsters to a lower standard than everyone else. Once you start lowering your standards then what have you got left???
As a Teamster it is your duty to never knowingly harm a fellow member.No, unless? OK, so let's say that a teamster supervisor
watches as a teamster dock worker takes freight off of
the dock and loads it into his or her car. The supervisor
is the only person that sees this happen. The teamster
code evidently says that this supervisor can not turn
the dockworker in, but you are saying that for theft, he
should.
I know of one operations manager that was told, by his
local, that he would be in danger of losing his pension if
he so much as wrote up a fellow teamster.