Holland | Utility Drivers

[grimreaper]

It said if the UE position was abolished then people would go back to where they came from. I don't think they have a choice here, but I may be wrong. The major issue here to me is that this is exactly what the company wanted in the first place, its been stated to many of us by several different local leaders in different states. Did we just get mislead during the contract, by our own leaders, to get this put through now? They knew we wouldn't vote this current proposal in with any contract. I bet the same guys that were so upset about the road loosing work because of the UE position, that was voted in by the membership, will think now that the so called leaders are changing the contract around to take work away from the city, its all fair now. I for one will NEVER vote for any of the current leaders we have, they can't be trusted, thats a fact. It wasn't fair before and its not fair now, if this goes through. The big difference between each one is that one was voted in by the full membership and the other one will be put in the full memberships back. I'm a city guy that won't be effected either way but this whole thing hasn't been handled correctly from the start and we all know it. Thats the way I see it, please convince me I'm wrong.

it says would allow retreat rights back to the road ... not forced but we dont have to worry about it now ..... ????

 

[Benny Hill]

I have said this before, the contract that was "voted in by the majority" was not the contract that was explained by the IBT and each Local. I believe that the IBT is trying to fix the mess that they created. Regardless we need new Leadership. The other issue that needs addressed is the fact that the Company is using $14 casuals when there are men on layoff. I say if this is the end, we should all go together. Brotherhood until the end.

I agree with you 100% Brother!

it says would allow retreat rights back to the road ... not forced but we dont have to worry about it now ..... ????

Like I said, I could be wrong. The way you said it, is what it said, but then again, it was also explained to us the way I said it. Who knows what would/will happen, it says one thing but it means something else, where have I heard that before?

What do you mean "we don't have to worry about it now"?

 

[Benny Hill]

You are exactly right Benny. The first part that the linehaul were complaining about.........WAS AT LEAST VOTED ON BY THE MEMBERSHIP. Now this "change" was not voted on by the membership. And the city will lose work. Our leadership need a for this whole mess.

The whole thing comes down to this, the IBT showed us a contract and told us not to believe what we read, but what they said. And more people listened to what was said, than what they read. We pay the IBT to take care of us and to guide us, the bottom line is that they didn't. I just hope everybody remembers come election time, the main problem is that we're just part of the over all IBT now and the IBT doesn't think we matter very much any more, the way it seems to me. Not all of the local leaders knew what was going on back then but they all know whats going on now. Its up to all of us to make sure, they all do the right things, from now on.

 

[Tlc2cann]

BP, another thing that gets my attention is the wording "It is not the intent to use Utility Employees to perform local peddle runs or P&D work outside their Local Union's jurisdiction." My concern there for example is GR and GY are both local 406, But, 180 or so miles away from each other. This language leaves the door open for them to use a GY peddle driver (UE) in GR, or a GR (UE)driver to peddle in GY. Because we are WITHIN the local union's jurisdiction. Do any of you guys have this type of situation?

sikeston is in the same local(600) as st louis,165 miles apart.

 

[Northern Flash]

I have said this before, the contract that was "voted in by the majority" was not the contract that was explained by the IBT and each Local. I believe that the IBT is trying to fix the mess that they created. Regardless we need new Leadership. The other issue that needs addressed is the fact that the Company is using $14 casuals when there are men on layoff. I say if this is the end, we should all go together. Brotherhood until the end.

Jarhead, I totally understand your statements that say " this isn't the contract that we voted in". You are right. That is based on how each person interpreted the language. But, my take on it, is that everyone wanted to interpret the language to their advantage. But, nobody wanted to analyze the gray areas and the.... what if they try this or that. Many of us tried to warn guys of this potentially happening. So I disagree that "this is not the contract that we voted in". Technically, it IS the contract that we voted in. A p.o.s. contract with too many gray areas. Now the gray areas are coming back to haunt us. The IBT knew about all of these gray areas, we helped throw up the red flag. But, they wouldn't fix them. I hope that we all have learned a lesson about contractual language. The IBT needs a face lift. I will do my part of the surgery at our next election.

For the record again...I am a city driver. I voted no on this p.o.s. contract because of all of these gray areas, and I felt that the linehaul were getting screwed. Now it is me with my hands around my ankles.

 

[jarhead13]

Jarhead, I totally understand your statements that say " this isn't the contract that we voted in". You are right. That is based on how each person interpreted the language. But, my take on it, is that everyone wanted to interpret the language to their advantage. But, nobody wanted to analyze the gray areas and the.... what if they try this or that. Many of us tried to warn guys of this potentially happening. So I disagree that "this is not the contract that we voted in". Technically, it IS the contract that we voted in. A p.o.s. contract with too many gray areas. Now the gray areas are coming back to haunt us. The IBT knew about all of these gray areas, we helped throw up the red flag. But, they wouldn't fix them. I hope that we all have learned a lesson about contractual language. The IBT needs a face lift. I will do my part of the surgery at our next election.

For the record again...I am a city driver. I voted no on this p.o.s. contract because of all of these gray areas, and I felt that the linehaul were getting screwed. Now it is me with my hands around my ankles.

I am also on layoff. I am a Road Driver. I also tried to warn people of this contract. I voted no. What I am saying about the contract is that the IBT sent out mailers and most Locals interpreted the contract in a very different light than the contract read. I actually read the contract proposal. Most people trusted their elected Representatives. That's why 67% voted yes. I agree that we need new Leadership. However, it may be too late for everyone.

 

[wolf]

Seems that the company and IBT thought flexibility was a good idea but ends up Management can't function without structure. They run from one thing to another instead of working on doing it right. Given a blank check with this contract as far as grey areas and still your Labor Man Sam is blaming the Union for the demise of the company. I have a different oppinion on who to blame. Old boy once told me it was damn near impossible to push a rope down the road, so much for "flexibility". Hope to see you guys on the other side of YRC. Good Luck to :smilie_132:all.

 

[Hooddock]

Seems that the company and IBT thought flexibility was a good idea but ends up Management can't function without structure. They run from one thing to another instead of working on doing it right. Given a blank check with this contract as far as grey areas and still your Labor Man Sam is blaming the Union for the demise of the company. I have a different oppinion on who to blame. Old boy once told me it was damn near impossible to push a rope down the road, so much for "flexibility". Hope to see you guys on the other side of YRC. Good Luck to :smilie_132:all.

Maybe labor man Sam should look in the mirror?

 

[Northern Flash]

Maybe labor man Sam should look in the mirror?

I agree. Anytime our TM talks about how bad things are, his excuses usually fall back on it being labor problems. Or the contract makes it too hard for the company to run efficiently. They are the problem.