Yellow | "Setting The Record Straight" by James

I can't believe nobody mention the fact that OUR UNION knew of this back on March 25th and then Hoffa sends out a letter of indignation this week.I guess Hoffa is like the big O,he wasn't aware of that happening at that time.lol

Believe it, NOBODY mentioned it.

Just out of curiosity, where is proof "...that OUR UNION knew of this back on March 25th?"

I just want to set the record straight.
 
I guess you wanna argue...just a point is all I was making.Read all of James notice,there will be a black dot next to each talking point,read the 2nd from the bottom black dot more than once and hopefully "the record will be straight".lol
 
I guess you wanna argue...just a point is all I was making.Read all of James notice,there will be a black dot next to each talking point,read the 2nd from the bottom black dot more than once and hopefully "the record will be straight".lol

Yeah whats your point it said they shared the letter DATED march 25. That was the date YRC sent the letter to ABF,he said they shared the letter during talks doesn't say when.The teamsters said they where told one month after the fact during talks. What record needs to be straight?
 
I can't believe nobody mention the fact that OUR UNION knew of this back on March 25th and then Hoffa sends out a letter of indignation this week.I guess Hoffa is like the big O,he wasn't aware of that happening at that time.lol

Believe it, NOBODY mentioned it.

Just out of curiosity, where is proof "...that OUR UNION knew of this back on March 25th?"

I just want to set the record straight.

I guess you wanna argue...just a point is all I was making.Read all of James notice,there will be a black dot next to each talking point,read the 2nd from the bottom black dot more than once and hopefully "the record will be straight".lol

"Discuss," what I want to do is discuss, not "argue." If, as some have proposed, there were to be legal proceedings regarding all of this and the supposed lack of shared knowledge, I would "argue" the lack of facts.

You posted "I can't believe..." I posted "Believe it,"

You posted "... nobody mention the fact..." I agreed, "...NOBODY mentioned it"

You posted "...the fact..." I asked for proof.

The statement next to the black dot you refer to is:

"We later learned that ABF shared our proposal dated March 25 with Teamster leadership during their contract negotiations."

No where does it state when, during negotiations, it was shared.

You, therefore, are jumping to conclusions, (as are many) as to when this was shared.
 
"Discuss," what I want to do is discuss, not "argue." If, as some have proposed, there were to be legal proceedings regarding all of this and the supposed lack of shared knowledge, I would "argue" the lack of facts.

You posted "I can't believe..." I posted "Believe it,"

You posted "... nobody mention the fact..." I agreed, "...NOBODY mentioned it"

You posted "...the fact..." I asked for proof.

The statement next to the black dot you refer to is:

"We later learned that ABF shared our proposal dated March 25 with Teamster leadership during their contract negotiations."

No where does it state when, during negotiations, it was shared.

You, therefore, are jumping to conclusions, (as are many) as to when this was shared.

Elwood as a seasoned veteran of TB you KNOW that "Conclusion Jumping" has been given Olympic status.
 
Elwood as a seasoned veteran of TB you KNOW that "Conclusion Jumping" has been given Olympic status.

Competitive Conclusion Jumping

I'm gonna mull that over a bit!

How, pray tell, would the judging on that be scored??
 
Competitive Conclusion Jumping

I'm gonna mull that over a bit!

How, pray tell, would the judging on that be scored??
A panel of 6 judges using a 1 to 10 scoring system, however 9+ scores are extremely rare as it would need to include "space aliens, nuclear weapons or ANYTHING regarding a new roof"! The more outrageous or implausible the conclusion the higher the cumulative score.
 
Top