What's new

ABF | Teamsters: ABF Lawsuit Frivolous And Without Merit

Teamsterjoe said:
What a managers dream this Teamguy must be, I'm sitting here reading this post of his and just thinking of all the guys over at yrc who would be out raged to know they have a jack@ss like this out here still supporting all the give backs, its bad enough they got to live with this ::shit:: and to put up with a kiss @ss like this man wtf, where does it end? thank god this law suit is out, and what kind of man calls anybody creamcake? yeah I think this boy is under the desk way to much..
Click to expand...

ya right? like anyone can post any opinion they want on the YRC forum even the under the desk sicko jokes that you seem to have a fetish with. or fantasy! but let someone come here with a different opinion and you call for their ouster. What seems to be the reason for this childish behavior?

The union lets the union people decide if any changes in the NMFA are necessary. The union people at YRC, New Penn and Holland by an overwhelming majority felt a change in the NMFA was necessary to keep the checks coming in.

ABF does not need this change in NMFA and you people voted no against any change or concession.
So please explain to us where this lawsuit is coming from and why most of you people support it. I take it not only your company execshirts want to see YRC gone but maybe some of you too. Not that it will ever happen
 
Union multi-employer pension plan is a dinosuar and at that Unionized Freight has become a dinosuar. YRC has not put into the pension plan for some time and going back in at 25% will not pay for the liability of the teamster's that where working in the 70's and 80's that are retiring. These pension funds are underfunded and you are asking 8,000 freight members at ABF to pay for hundreds of thousand member's that worked freight. Look at what YRC is doing to survive they are lay-off and down sizing, this is not helping the funds.
 
abfgreasemonkey said:
Have I mentioned that I would not shed one tear if YRC was shut down tomorrow?
Click to expand...

What is Pension Liability?

Pension liability refers to the fact that either a private company or a national government will have to account for making future pension payments. The methods used to make this accounting can vary immensely. A larger than expected pension liability can either literally force a company out of business or cause it to be insolvent on paper
 
Yrc road driver

I agree with abf, yrc is out of control and with the right amount of money you can get the TEAMSTERS to sell out the work force.
 
tutone710 said:
I agree with abf, yrc is out of control and with the right amount of money you can get the TEAMSTERS to sell out the work force.
Click to expand...

YRCW does not have any money, property or up to date equipment to get the Teamsters to sell out the work force, the only thing left is the work rules, and Bingo !! They will work 4hr. shifts ,because at least you still have "a job"
 
I apologize for the comments of several YRC members here on your board, on behalf of all ex-yellow drivers now temporarily working for YRC.
 
Yrc road driver

toytrucker251 said:
found this on another post

article 6 section 2. The employer agrees not to enter into any agreement or contract with it's employees, individually or collectively, which in any way conflicts with the terms and provisions of this agreement. Any such agreement shall be null and void.

Simply put......yrc is in violation of this contract.
Click to expand...

that's right. :6788:
 
Sad Mustache that you would only direct me to another post. You guys are making a GREAT big deal what Bob said. This all about him pulling out of the TMI and pension. It never happened. We voted in "the best contract ever". YRC has managed to chop it to pieces. And the YRC people are starting to call foul. They voted it in and know they will see where it gets them.
 
toytrucker251 said:
FOUND THIS ON ANOTHER POST

Article 6 Section 2. The employer agrees not to enter into any agreement or contract with it's employees, individually or collectively, which in any way conflicts with the terms and provisions of this agreement. Any such agreement shall be null and void.

Simply put......YRC is in violation of this contract.
Click to expand...

This specifically refers to making deals directly with employees, either one on one, or collectively, to circumvent the contract.
 
I know in times past different union companies voted for pay cuts to try to stay afloat. No lawsuits filed from other carriers claiming unfair and being unable to compete. But with not paying into the pension fund and 25% does this make it a whole new ball game? If ABF was to win I wonder if it would mainly be for the pension. I just hope we all aren't the losers when this is all said and done. Again I say maybe we are all going to learn what it means to ALL stick together...
 
ABFer said:
This specifically refers to making deals directly with employees, either one on one, or collectively, to circumvent the contract.
Click to expand...

Not when they had a majority vote. I'm sure somewhere in the contract it allows for that.
 
Look again!! There isn't anything in the contract allowing for individual company's to renegotiate the MASTER FREIGHT AGREEMENT.
 
As far as Bob pulling out of contract negotiations. I thought one of the biggest reasons was ABF had no say so in the contract, it was based on Yellow's needs with no consideration for ABF's needs. In the end, a kind of me too agreement, take it or leave it.
 
Exactly ABF wanted out of the pension because they had a lot of spare money and they were willing to pay for it. They were ingtelligent thinking about the future and saved instead of putting their money in a bunch of crap and taking on freight that lost money. As I understand ABF is thankful that they didn't get out of it as they would have to take on debt instead of survive this recession. It is amazing that they are basically being punished because they were responsible. I hate it for the YRC guys, but they are basically trying to bring everyone else down with them. Their management was so worried about being the biggest they forgot about the whole profit issue.
 
ABF will kick YRCW's ass in court!!

R-14Driver said:
November 1, 2010

On Monday, November 1 the Teamsters Union received copies of a grievance and a lawsuit filed by ABF Freight Systems, Inc. (ABF) in federal court in Arkansas against the Teamsters and other parties, alleging that the agreements the union entered into and that its members ratified with YRC Worldwide, Inc. violate the National Master Freight Agreement (NMFA).

“After initial review of the ABF lawsuit and grievance, the Teamsters Union finds each of them to be frivolous and without merit,” said Brad Raymond, Teamsters Union General Counsel. “The Teamsters will vigorously defend against the lawsuit and grievance and will withhold further comment until we have thoroughly reviewed the documents.”

Teamsters: ABF Lawsuit Frivolous And Without Merit | International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT)
Click to expand...
ABF pulled out of the Bargaining committee and said they would go with whatever came out of the negotiations back in 2008. ABF NEVER said they would go with second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and umpteenth millionth contracts and renegotiations after that first contract in order for YRCW to do what ever the hell they and the Teamsters wanted to do to position themselves against their competition (IE ABF and others).

ABF will win this lawsuit ... dumb asses (I mean drivers at YRCW) need to get a clue.

wild deuce
Teamster Stud and
Laid off YELLOW driver

You go ABF ... kick some ass!!!
 
partialperson said:
As far as Bob pulling out of contract negotiations. I thought one of the biggest reasons was ABF had no say so in the contract, it was based on Yellow's needs with no consideration for ABF's needs. In the end, a kind of me too agreement, take it or leave it.
Click to expand...
From what I was told it was take it or leave it. Seems like the union only cared about yrc back then & as you can see nothing has changed.
 
A lot of people have referred to older instances of the IBT and Companies agreeing on concessions or ESOP plans. Well it was legal then because there was contract language in the agreements up to the 2003-2008 contract. Article 6, Section 2 had another section that was dropped in the 2003 contract that
allowed for ESOP's and other concession deals. But the current contracts don't have that language.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top