What's new

XPO | Xpo Union Thread.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hollywoodz said:
No law, however, if a company reports huge profits as XPO does, and they refuse to bargain, it sets them up for another ULP board charge.
Click to expand...

No one is saying anything about refusing to bargain- you don't seem to know what bargaining is. The company could ask for you to give something up, and that would not be illegal or bad faith bargaining.
 
Hollywoodz said:
If a company is making huge profits and asks you to to concede anything, that's bargaining in bad faith.
Click to expand...
No it’s not. If the company feels like they have fairly compensated their drivers why would it be bad faith? As a non teamster driver, if my compensation package equals X, are you entitled to more than me just because you organized? No. So if you want better insurance we’ll that means less hourly, if you want better retirement, then less PTO. That way your package and my package still equal X. Those are just theoretical possibilities but I think that would be common sense negotiating not bad faith.
 
troubleman84 said:
Refer to previous post on your first part.

I agree give backs where hard to swallow especially when you gave a House note back a month yet Im content till this next vote due acceptance of the majority vote.

That’s plain dumb to say city drivers down south do same job as me yet you agree they should be paid less. Don’t you think the company might see that as a mental tactic since they know northern drivers with raise more hell (organize) and south will just be grateful for job?
Click to expand...

Not just the south. sucker666 makes more than me.
 
troubleman84 said:
Unions look at companies books during negotiations? They look at market for drivers economy etc. IBEW UAW they all go thru books they just say we want this amount blindly. Look at buster brown they rates thru the roof ( package drivers earn it ) yet look at how much they profit. You can’t compare unions to unions in different industries and different companies.
Click to expand...


You can sure contrast success and failure, can't you ?
 
troubleman84 said:
Neat trick how you trying to twist. You sound like a new guys who just don’t understand how unions are or structured. You two must be related.
Click to expand...

No twist at all. It's the same line of logic you are using on northern drivers making more than southern drivers. Don't you even recognize your own ignorance ? I am trying to walk you through this as slowly as possible.
 
troubleman84 said:
Man you don’t pay attention at all. Last time we agreed on two concessions filled contracts since recession. Recession over contract up next year that’s when we dig in and see where company stands. You throw out there what have we stood up for and I gave you two examples. Now you let’s say together high speed will be more specific next time in regards to questions ok!!!!! Your jabs are weak but that’s my opinion I hope you can do better.
Click to expand...


And when you go to dig in and realize the amount of debt. No just public. But also in money owed to the pension. On top of no more union being exempt from the ACA. What will you do when they tell you that they want you to work for another 10% less ?
 
troubleman84 said:
Like Hollywood has said before you start a pattern of running you will eventually get tired how bout stand up for yourself with legal rights.
Click to expand...


He's turning this into the LTL version of Swift. At some point you need to see that other LTLs ain't run like this. And eventually. That might be worth looking into. You didn't come work here. You took less to work over there. And after the last few years, it's not even that good here any more. How you can you rightly encourage people to stay at a job you wouldn't take yourself ?
 
upnorth said:
But what’s posted over and over, is how Xpo is making :shit:piles of money, and not passing some of that on to the drivers. But isn’t it the same as Yrc? You guys gave back 15% to help the company in a tough time, yet now the company is doing great, and you still have not received the same and more back? As for digging in your heels at contract time, looking at the abf vote, not much diggin in was done at all. And now they are stuck with that contract. True?
Click to expand...


Exactly this. I dunno why they don't see it.
 
highspeeds said:
Exactly this. I dunno why they don't see it.
Click to expand...
In all honesty , IT'S EVERYWHERE!!!

Stagnation in wages gets talked about EVERY jobs report. Stocks go up , in part , based on the fact that leadership of major corporations have resisted raising pay to the working class as profits have soared.

The new model seems to be based on job hopping and not loyalty to one company:

If you want more you have to leave where you are and go elsewhere since companies don't reward experience internally anymore.

XPO terminal nearby hired TM from outside ( even though there were plenty of good internal candidates ) - lasted 3 months...maybe. Same terminal hired outside Account Executive...quit in 3 weeks. When you via through you see two Ford Escapes abandoned at the front.

Why hire from outside when you have plenty of people from inside that would be excellent for the job? Maybe so you can lowball the outside candidates...? EBITDA
 
icuicp said:
The new model seems to be based on job hopping and not loyalty to one company:

If you want more you have to leave where you are and go elsewhere since companies don't reward experience internally anymore.
Click to expand...

And we work in LTL, an industry systematically built to make job hopping within it regressively painful. Pay scales and seniority make switching employers far more painful than most industries, imo. Our bosses tell guys with 20 years "you don't like it, go to FedEx..." and of course they dont. Not because they don't want better top pay, they just don't want to work nights and work back through the pay scale as they're paying mortgages and sending kids off to college.

LTL was such a bad choice, lol.
 
Maltman said:
No it’s not. If the company feels like they have fairly compensated their drivers why would it be bad faith? As a non teamster driver, if my compensation package equals X, are you entitled to more than me just because you organized? No. So if you want better insurance we’ll that means less hourly, if you want better retirement, then less PTO. That way your package and my package still equal X. Those are just theoretical possibilities but I think that would be common sense negotiating not bad faith.
Click to expand...

Your compensation package is based on your employers ability to pay and whether or not it might lead to the employer having a competitive disadvantage in the market. It has nothing to do with union vs. non union. However, without representation, you have no venue to demand a wage increase. You simply get what they choose to give. Remember the 2.06 raise in 2014, granted immediately after Laredo certified. You don't find that coincidental? Bottom line is they can certainly afford to pay and we are still paid less than some. My contention remains that, in our case at least, wages will be bargained up and not down.

"The refusal to comply with an information request may constitute bad faith. For example, in NLRB v. Truitt Manufacturing Co., 351 U.S. 149, 76 S. Ct. 753, 100 L. Ed. 1027 (1956), the employer committed an unfair labor practice when it refused to supply the union with information supporting its claim that it could not afford to pay a wage increase the union demanded. Over the years, courts have clarified that employers' claims of an inability to pay requested wage increases are conceptually distinct from claims that wage increases will result in a competitive disadvantage (United Steelworkers of America v. NLRB, 983 F.2d 240 [D.C. Cir. 1993]). Accordingly, in Graphic Communications International Union Local 508 v. NLRB, 977 F.2d 1168 (7th Cir. 1992), the court held that an employer was not required to disclose financial information unless it had asserted specifically that it was unable to pay a requested wage increase; an employer's claim that a wage increase would lead to competitive disadvantage did not require it to disclose wage information.

collective bargaining facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com articles about collective bargaining
 
Hollywoodz said:
Your compensation package is based on your employers ability to pay and whether or not it might lead to the employer having a competitive disadvantage in the market. It has nothing to do with union vs. non union. However, without representation, you have no venue to demand a wage increase. You simply get what they choose to give. Remember the 2.06 raise in 2014, granted immediately after Laredo certified. You don't find that coincidental? Bottom line is they can certainly afford to pay and we are still paid less than some. My contention remains that, in our case at least, wages will be bargained up and not down.

"The refusal to comply with an information request may constitute bad faith. For example, in NLRB v. Truitt Manufacturing Co., 351 U.S. 149, 76 S. Ct. 753, 100 L. Ed. 1027 (1956), the employer committed an unfair labor practice when it refused to supply the union with information supporting its claim that it could not afford to pay a wage increase the union demanded. Over the years, courts have clarified that employers' claims of an inability to pay requested wage increases are conceptually distinct from claims that wage increases will result in a competitive disadvantage (United Steelworkers of America v. NLRB, 983 F.2d 240 [D.C. Cir. 1993]). Accordingly, in Graphic Communications International Union Local 508 v. NLRB, 977 F.2d 1168 (7th Cir. 1992), the court held that an employer was not required to disclose financial information unless it had asserted specifically that it was unable to pay a requested wage increase; an employer's claim that a wage increase would lead to competitive disadvantage did not require it to disclose wage information.

collective bargaining facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com articles about collective bargaining
Click to expand...
I believe you will try to bargain wages up. Maybe in 3 to 4 years when you get around to that part of the negotiations. I still don’t quite understand how you think you’ll get more than your non-union counterparts. If the company were to agree to anything other than an equal compensation package then you union guys would get your wish because the flood gates would open. Good luck. the nlrb can’t make them pay you more than the rest of us, if they could it would not be a negotiation
 
Maltman said:
I believe you will try to bargain wages up. Maybe in 3 to 4 years when you get around to that part of the negotiations. I still don’t quite understand how you think you’ll get more than your non-union counterparts. If the company were to agree to anything other than an equal compensation package then you union guys would get your wish because the flood gates would open. Good luck. the nlrb can’t make them pay you more than the rest of us, if they could it would not be a negotiation
Click to expand...
We don't have equal compensation now.
 
highspeeds said:
He's turning this into the LTL version of Swift. At some point you need to see that other LTLs ain't run like this. And eventually. That might be worth looking into. You didn't come work here. You took less to work over there. And after the last few years, it's not even that good here any more. How you can you rightly encourage people to stay at a job you wouldn't take yourself ?
Click to expand...
Well I'll say one thing if brad j could figure out how to fix stupid he would make more money then Bezos does because some of the drivers we got are even to stupid to work at swift
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top