What's new

XPO | Xpo Union Thread.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Found it.

In the last UPS contract debacle,.....even though UPS rank-and-file voted down the Supplements multiple times,........Mr. Hoffa and Mr. Hall invoked Article XII, Sec. 6 of the IBT constitution,........giving the Executive Board the right to accept any contract....if the GEB feels "it's in the member's best interests"......even though the members had voted against that tentative agreement.

I guess it remains to be seen if Mr. Hoffa will use the amended Constitution to jam this steaming heap down the throats of the rank-and-file......if they vote it down more than once.....
 
upnorth said:
Found it.

In the last UPS contract debacle,.....even though UPS rank-and-file voted down the Supplements multiple times,........Mr. Hoffa and Mr. Hall invoked Article XII, Sec. 6 of the IBT constitution,........giving the Executive Board the right to accept any contract....if the GEB feels "it's in the member's best interests"......even though the members had voted against that tentative agreement.

I guess it remains to be seen if Mr. Hoffa will use the amended Constitution to jam this steaming heap down the throats of the rank-and-file......if they vote it down more than once.....
Click to expand...
In defense of the union people upnorth , I think in that same thread it was mentioned that the car haulers voted down bad deals multiple times and the Teamster upper management didn't invoke the clause to force a crappy contract on them.

Hopefully , the Teamster upper management won't override the vote of the membership - seems to be a conflict to the whole concept of a union of people when a small group makes a decision different than what was voted for.
 
icuicp said:
In defense of the union people upnorth , I think in that same thread it was mentioned that the car haulers voted down bad deals multiple times and the Teamster upper management didn't invoke the clause to force a crappy contract on them.

Hopefully , the Teamster upper management won't override the vote of the membership - seems to be a conflict to the whole concept of a union of people when a small group makes a decision different than what was voted for.
Click to expand...
That’s what I’m trying to get my head around. The executive works for the members, right? Not the company they are negotiating with. Seems counter-intuitive to me.
 
upnorth said:
So by reading the abf board, your vote doesn’t mean a flying :censored:. The union leadership can use some clause and over ride a no vote, and ratify an agreement against the wishes of the majority. Is that accurate?
Click to expand...
Yes if majority is by slim margin of 2% if I’m correct. Then they can go forward with ratification. Meaning your not gonna make everyone happy in negotiations it could be something real minor they the 2% want that be absurd. If majority is by a wide margin then back to drawing board.
 
upnorth said:
That’s what I’m trying to get my head around. The executive works for the members, right? Not the company they are negotiating with. Seems counter-intuitive to me.
Click to expand...
Yes they do , but at times decisions will be made for in the long term that we may not agree with now but understand down the road.
 
whip1 said:
You sound like those people screaming “not my president”. I understand it doesn’t fit your agenda, but the facts are the facts. If the Teamsters wouldn’t have stole the funds, the government never would have had the chance to ruin it. I expect the Teamsters to do the right thing for its members. I don’t expect the government to do the right thing.

Why aren’t people more pissed off about this? It barely affects me and I’m pissed.
Click to expand...
The Teamsters didn't steal from the fund, they loaned the money to the mob and were getting paid back. What's my agenda? Please tell me. I'm just trying to correct some of the false statements. I've been retired for 10 years now and my pension is not in any danger of defaulting.
 
30yearman said:
The Teamsters didn't steal from the fund, they loaned the money to the mob and were getting paid back. What's my agenda? Please tell me. I'm just trying to correct some of the false statements. I've been retired for 10 years now and my pension is not in any danger of defaulting.
Click to expand...
They didn’t steal, yet people went to prison and others were murdered.
You’re agenda is pro Teamsters. The fact that your pension isn’t affected explains why you’re not bothered by it. All for one!
 
whip1 said:
They didn’t steal, yet people went to prison and others were murdered.
You’re agenda is pro Teamsters. The fact that your pension isn’t affected explains why you’re not bothered by it. All for one!
Click to expand...
a good read start at 1.4 Influence of organized crime and 1.5 Rise, fall, and disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa
 
30yearman said:
The Teamsters didn't steal from the fund, they loaned the money to the mob and were getting paid back. What's my agenda? Please tell me. I'm just trying to correct some of the false statements. I've been retired for 10 years now and my pension is not in any danger of defaulting.
Click to expand...
They did more than that how about loans to union officials that were never paid back " Teamster Pres David Beck admitted to receiving an interest-free $300,000 loan from the Teamsters which he had never repaid, and Senate investigators claimed that loans to Beck and other union officials (and their businesses) had cost the union more than $700,000"

Also the creations of paper locals or better fake union locals and a few other thing to boot like bribes, embezzling money, and engaging in extensive extortion and labor rackets as well as beatings, vandalism and even bombings.
 
Maltman said:
I can hook my own sets and work the dock without someone filing a grievance.
Click to expand...
troubleman84 said:
I understand the need for flexibility, but how do you stop them from overreaching or using you more do to your younger and faster than senior men. That’s where your work protection kicks in.
Click to expand...
Maltman's post is what I'm talking about. Troubleman, can you please elaborate on what you mean by "overreaching." And also please clarify the part about using "using you more do to your younger and faster than senior men."
 
ScotchNeat said:
Maltman's post is what I'm talking about. Troubleman, can you please elaborate on what you mean by "overreaching." And also please clarify the part about using "using you more do to your younger and faster than senior men."
Click to expand...
Certain terminals depending on operation size have full time yard guys. They do all moves for road drivers foreign or domicile at start coming thru and end of shift. Fueling and placards as well. That’s where you file for a man taking your work, yeah some will say I don’t trust another mans work. You supposed to do a pretrip all equipment so you know the work was done right. For flexibility at smaller terminals Road does switch only when coming thru unless supplements states it’s still local cartage work, but never at beginning and end of shift. According to a family member and on here you guys bid start times not vicinity in city. Why should and senior man be forced to take a run that he doesn’t prefer deliver in and risks late or missed pickups. Your more efficient in areas you know. Let’s say a road driver gets in and they let him work inbound and he is taking on extra hours that a city guy could be doing but now he is scraping for hours due to a man in another classification did it for him. That’s where you need work protection.
 
troubleman84 said:
Certain terminals depending on operation size have full time yard guys. They do all moves for road drivers foreign or domicile at start coming thru and end of shift. Fueling and placards as well. That’s where you file for a man taking your work, yeah some will say I don’t trust another mans work. You supposed to do a pretrip all equipment so you know the work was done right. For flexibility at smaller terminals Road does switch only when coming thru unless supplements states it’s still local cartage work, but never at beginning and end of shift. According to a family member and on here you guys bid start times not vicinity in city. Why should and senior man be forced to take a run that he doesn’t prefer deliver in and risks late or missed pickups. Your more efficient in areas you know. Let’s say a road driver gets in and they let him work inbound and he is taking on extra hours that a city guy could be doing but now he is scraping for hours due to a man in another classification did it for him. That’s where you need work protection.
Click to expand...
We have always bid start times, not locations. That has never changed. Nothing to protect. And most terminals keep city kitties in the same areas wherever possible. And if a driver is overworked and loaded up where others have light days, that’s easy to fix. Every driver knows how to fix that. As for union companies trusting a mule to properly hook my set, no ****ing way I’m trusting anybody. It’s my set. I’m doing a pre trip whether you like it or not.
 
upnorth said:
We have always bid start times, not locations. That has never changed. Nothing to protect. And most terminals keep city kitties in the same areas wherever possible. And if a driver is overworked and loaded up where others have light days, that’s easy to fix. Every driver knows how to fix that. As for union companies trusting a mule to properly hook my set, no :censored: way I’m trusting anybody. It’s my set. I’m doing a pre trip whether you like it or not.
Click to expand...
Your pretrip would make sure everything is done correctly right?
 
whip1 said:
This is what I mean when I say some people have an agenda. They claim they’re here to correct false statements, yet ignore true statements about the Teamsters being corrupt because a union that steals from its memebers is hard to sell.
Click to expand...
We never said that corruption wasn’t involved?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top