What's new

Holland | The time for action is now!

hooddock said:
We are told the 25%rule only pertains to people on letter of layoff. So now they just leave the 10% home.They have no guarantee.
Click to expand...
If they leave the 10% ers home, that just pushes the 25% overtime (maximum) even higher. Which should require MORE guys to be brought back off lay-off. If the union would enforce the contract language!
 
Northern Flash said:
If they leave the 10% ers home, that just pushes the 25% overtime (maximum) even higher. Which should require MORE guys to be brought back off lay-off. If the union would enforce the contract language!
Click to expand...

Let me explain what I was told .The company claims if there is nobody on "letter of layoff",there is no overtime (25%) formula.As for the 10%er`s they say there is no work,and they have no guarantee.Sad but I think the loophole is in the "letter of layoff",again just repeating how it was explained to us.
 
hooddock said:
Let me explain what I was told .The company claims if there is nobody on "letter of layoff",there is no overtime (25%) formula.As for the 10%er`s they say there is no work,and they have no guarantee.Sad but I think the loophole is in the "letter of layoff",again just repeating how it was explained to us.
Click to expand...
Yep, that makes sense. The union cannot force them to hire any new employees to reduce o/t. I'm sure it does only pertain to the lay-off getting brought back to work.:1036316054:
 
The problem we have in DS is the call back letter and the layoff letter are one day apart,and we been getting a few back with the 25% formula.
 
Deerslayer said:
The problem we have in DS is the call back letter and the layoff letter are one day apart,and we been getting a few back with the 25% formula.
Click to expand...
We've had that one day apart game played here also. As for the 25% call back rule, there is a grievance filed for the pay that is owed to the layed off guys. The terminal was over the 25% o/t, but wouldn't call them back. The grievance is to get them paid for the days that they should have been working. This language is in black and white in the contract, yet they continue to violate it.:argue:
 
The problem in Indy is that there continue to be layoffs and the number of $14 per hour casuals continue to grow. The guys on layoff have to get other jobs that are steady. Then when they turn down work they use the $14 an hour casual. Another lie about the contract, there were supposed to be no $14 per hour casuals used if there was anyone on layoff.
 
Jarhead13 said:
The problem in Indy is that there continue to be layoffs and the number of $14 per hour casuals continue to grow. The guys on layoff have to get other jobs that are steady. Then when they turn down work they use the $14 an hour casual. Another lie about the contract, there were supposed to be no $14 per hour casuals used if there was anyone on layoff.
Click to expand...

Why is your union letting this happen? Are there grievances filed,this is total BS!!
 
hooddock said:
Why is your union letting this happen? Are there grievances filed,this is total BS!!
Click to expand...

There is a grievance filed. "It is going to committee". We will see what happens. The company and the Local say they can work these casuals if the offer work to the Drivers on layoff first. Like I said more lies.
 
Jarhead13 said:
The company and the Local say they can work these casuals if the offer work to the Drivers on layoff first. Like I said more lies.
Click to expand...
Yeah and the offer of work is the letter they singed to not be called for work so they can work somewhere and pay bills.
 
pig in lipstick

Jarhead13 said:
The problem in Indy is that there continue to be layoffs and the number of $14 per hour casuals continue to grow. The guys on layoff have to get other jobs that are steady. Then when they turn down work they use the $14 an hour casual. Another lie about the contract, there were supposed to be no $14 per hour casuals used if there was anyone on layoff.
Click to expand...
The problem is everywhere and you aint seen nothing yet, integration
Hasn’t even kicked in yet, just wait. We who fought hard to warn people
About this contract and practically begged people to vote no were labeled
As “hardliners” “angry nuts” I remember a day when the word teamster
Meant strength, when brotherhood meant something. Today’s teamsters
Are a bunch of sheep (one of you passive we don’t want no trouble people
Call me a nut now) I’m not hoping to make a change saying that, because
Its way too late and hopeless anyway. If we even do make it to a next contract
The same 70 plus % percent or more will vote yes out of fear and will fall
For the very same lies and propaganda all over again. I’m just stating how
We got here. If it was a brotherhood of hardliner angry nuts that voted
We wouldn’t be in this fix right now would we? Ok sheep, have your say
On why I’m wrong while you still have a job.
 
stardock said:
The problem is everywhere and you aint seen nothing yet, integration
Hasn’t even kicked in yet, just wait. We who fought hard to warn people
About this contract and practically begged people to vote no were labeled
As “hardliners” “angry nuts” I remember a day when the word teamster
Meant strength, when brotherhood meant something. Today’s teamsters
Are a bunch of sheep (one of you passive we don’t want no trouble people
Call me a nut now) I’m not hoping to make a change saying that, because
Its way too late and hopeless anyway. If we even do make it to a next contract
The same 70 plus % percent or more will vote yes out of fear and will fall
For the very same lies and propaganda all over again. I’m just stating how
We got here. If it was a brotherhood of hardliner angry nuts that voted
We wouldn’t be in this fix right now would we? Ok sheep, have your say
On why I’m wrong while you still have a job.
Click to expand...
I couldn't have said it better myself. I just hope that we have learned a lesson here with this contract and the way that it was sold to us. Maybe when voting on the next contract (if there is one), more people will vote based on protecting everyone's rights for the future, instead of voting what "momma" told them to vote, based on their outbound household bills. Get your finances in order folks, we will have to try to correct this mess in 4.5 years.:hide:
 
nuff said

Thank you northern flash, I was waiting for a rebuttal from the
Play nice and sit on our hands crowd but I guess you can’t argue
Against the facts.
 
Northern Flash said:
I couldn't have said it better myself. I just hope that we have learned a lesson here with this contract and the way that it was sold to us. Maybe when voting on the next contract (if there is one), more people will vote based on protecting everyone's rights for the future, instead of voting what "momma" told them to vote, based on their outbound household bills. Get your finances in order folks, we will have to try to correct this mess in 4.5 years.:hide:
Click to expand...

Next contract? Please ,you don`t think there will be a next contract.The only way that happens is if YRC spins us off or sells us soon!!!
 
in the dark

hooddock said:
Next contract? Please ,you don`t think there will be a next contract.The only way that happens is if YRC spins us off or sells us soon!!!
Click to expand...

Several things to think about, bailout or not our economy is getting worse.
We have not hit bottom yet, (as yrc predicted) yrc now predicts a third quarter
Loss instead of a profit. Our stock was just downgraded to “underweight”
In layman’s terms it means don’t buy this crap, economists say yrc
Is on shaky ground right now along with swift trucking. At the time
Of this writing yrc stock was at $13.72 a share, junk. Overall shipping
Tonnage is heading strait for the ditch. Long story short this is no
Time to be optimistic about anything, but?? Will they sell us to make
A quick buck? We can only hope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top