XPO | Xpo Union Thread.

[icuicp]

Talk about ignorant....wow

Hold on GO40...I've seen people do some back-of-the-napkin math on the ABF boards and basically what the $2 over 5 years amounts to is getting back to where you should have been if you add in the paycuts that ABF imposed a few years ago.

An honest questions GO40: Where is the aggressiveness that union haters accuse unions of having - the fight , the toughness?

Wouldn't you rather go down swinging ( if you go down at all ) than quietly taking a vote on the FIRST thing offered?

What's the old saying - I would rather die on my feet , than live on my knees.

This is how I always viewed unions of the past. Now , I don't know...






P.S.
From - IBT VP Sean O'Brien

But the proposal’s ( new ABF contract ) deficiencies go beyond harming the pension fund. The ABF contract fell short on a myriad of issues:

• WAGES: At a time when trucking demand is at an all time high and the industry is suffering from a shortage of qualified drivers, the International only came up with a 1.2 percent raise. That’s nothing compared to the $1.70 we lost the last time Hoffa went to the table. That means after this contract, ABF Teamsters will be back to where they were in 2008.

• SUBCONTRACTING: Nothing was done to stem the tide of Teamster work migrating to subcontractors across the country.

• WEAKENING CONTRACT ENFORCEMENT: By creating an ABF-only grievance panel, this contract allows the company to deadlock every grievance, every time.

• HEALTH CARE LOOPHOLES: Health care is always in the details and this deal allows ABF to make lesser payments to certain funds, which will force benefit cuts.

Working hand-in-hand, ABF, Wall Street and Team Hoffa lobbied hard for a YES vote. They pulled out all the stops by using mail, robocalls and social media and could only manage a partial victory.

 

[Hollywoodz]

And with all the money they have they can probably buy more time from those judges.

Although there are some judges so conservative, they will rule for the company whenever possible, I think that train has left the station. The law is the law and there is only so much leeway in activist judges interpreting it for the cronies who put them on the bench. XPO's reputation in the courts has been forever diminished evidenced by the fact that they have lost nearly every ULP charge so far. They are taking full advantage of the appeal process, but even the effectiveness of that strategy is waning.

 

[Hollywoodz]

The Teamsters had FedEx on the brain and all money and effort was directed towards FedEx. That drive didn't work out. And it's still an upsetting topic for some of the guys that wanted to go union here. Even if you get their attention, you might not be worth their effort. And remember CF and what use the Teamsters were to those guys ? Whose to say you don't go union and then they have you and move on to other things ?

Allow me to correct one huge misconception. Costs for conducting contract talks amount to nickels for the union when compared to what the company spends. Our lawyer makes nothing near the 400 to 500 dollars per hour paid to the company lawyer. They fly to these meetings. We drive. They rent hotel rooms. We go home. Every terminal that certifies represents another huge expenditure for the company. To be fair, the union has collected zero in dues from the XPO bargaining units and, although I have never heard it said, I'm sure the union has a breaking point also. No one can say how this will all pan out, but the certified terminals have committed to stay the course. When more terminals certify, the road will be much smoother.

 

[Hollywoodz]

That entity hasn't given me anything, and I owe them nothing. I didn't invite them here. The guilt trip won't work.



Yeah, they will. I'll make sure they do.



That's a U.S. problem, not an XPO problem. The increases have been kept manageable.



First, it's only 1 strike, and two, that's because it's federal law. You can't have it in your hands unless you're parked- stationary doesn't count. That policy is long overdue- should have been there from the beginning. How does the company profit at our expense with that policy change?



How does the company know you're on social media? How does the company profit at our expense with that policy change?



Stealing? Did they not announce that change before that date? How does the company profit at our expense with that policy change? I didn't lose two hours.

If they change policy for new employees, that's their problem. If they can't get people to sign up to work here then they'll have to do something else.



Heh, you act like all they have to do is go put a flag on some freight and collect the money. Where would you suggest they find freight in south Florida? That's the biggest freight hole in the country. XPO would lose less money hauling air.

The union hasn't given you anything because you are too stubborn to even consider the possibilities. You may already be ambivalent pertaining to the policy changes. You must be aware that there are more changes to come. Why wouldn't you be willing to address it?

What will you make sure that they do? Is this considered another "tough guy" internet statement?

The increases have not been kept manageable. My premium nearly tripled and my deductible and out of pocket costs have doubled. Fortunately, I'm not subject to these increases thanks to my union.

It's 2 strikes, my friend. Check your bulletin board for the posting. If it's not there, ask them to post it.

The company is well aware of what is going on on social media. They monitor every social media site. They want to know who is saying what about whom. They are eager to know who the "enemy" is. Not every policy change benefits the company economically. Some are designed just to bust chops.

They took away 16 hours per year PTO from anyone hired after January 1, 2017. I don't know why I typed 2 hours. Once again, that doesn't apply to me either. And that's the difference between you and me. I am concerned for my coworkers who will be there long after I'm gone. You are concerned with yourself.

Yes, policy change is their problem.In my mind, that becomes my problem too! This is the attitude the company loves. Screw everybody else...I got mine. Need I say that it's the problem with the rest of the country as well.

There are millions of pounds of outbound freight leaving Florida daily. Yes, MILLIONS. Good management finds a way to get that freight, Flexible tariffs, pricing and lanes would go a long way in filling those outbound trailers to capacity. This would also eliminate the need for outside carriers handling our freight.

 

[GO40]

Hold on GO40...I've seen people do some back-of-the-napkin math on the ABF boards and basically what the $2 over 5 years amounts to is getting back to where you should have been if you add in the paycuts that ABF imposed a few years ago.

An honest questions GO40: Where is the aggressiveness that union haters accuse unions of having - the fight , the toughness?

Wouldn't you rather go down swinging ( if you go down at all ) than quietly taking a vote on the FIRST thing offered?

What's the old saying - I would rather die on my feet , than live on my knees.

This is how I always viewed unions of the past. Now , I don't know...






P.S.
From - IBT VP Sean O'Brien

But the proposal’s ( new ABF contract ) deficiencies go beyond harming the pension fund. The ABF contract fell short on a myriad of issues:

• WAGES: At a time when trucking demand is at an all time high and the industry is suffering from a shortage of qualified drivers, the International only came up with a 1.2 percent raise. That’s nothing compared to the $1.70 we lost the last time Hoffa went to the table. That means after this contract, ABF Teamsters will be back to where they were in 2008.

• SUBCONTRACTING: Nothing was done to stem the tide of Teamster work migrating to subcontractors across the country.

• WEAKENING CONTRACT ENFORCEMENT: By creating an ABF-only grievance panel, this contract allows the company to deadlock every grievance, every time.

• HEALTH CARE LOOPHOLES: Health care is always in the details and this deal allows ABF to make lesser payments to certain funds, which will force benefit cuts.

Working hand-in-hand, ABF, Wall Street and Team Hoffa lobbied hard for a YES vote. They pulled out all the stops by using mail, robocalls and social media and could only manage a partial victory.

I voted no, and i cant do any more then that. People are entitled to make their own decisions, i just wish everyone would have voted....

 

[GO40]

Hold on GO40...I've seen people do some back-of-the-napkin math on the ABF boards and basically what the $2 over 5 years amounts to is getting back to where you should have been if you add in the paycuts that ABF imposed a few years ago.

An honest questions GO40: Where is the aggressiveness that union haters accuse unions of having - the fight , the toughness?

Wouldn't you rather go down swinging ( if you go down at all ) than quietly taking a vote on the FIRST thing offered?

What's the old saying - I would rather die on my feet , than live on my knees.

This is how I always viewed unions of the past. Now , I don't know...






P.S.
From - IBT VP Sean O'Brien

But the proposal’s ( new ABF contract ) deficiencies go beyond harming the pension fund. The ABF contract fell short on a myriad of issues:

• WAGES: At a time when trucking demand is at an all time high and the industry is suffering from a shortage of qualified drivers, the International only came up with a 1.2 percent raise. That’s nothing compared to the $1.70 we lost the last time Hoffa went to the table. That means after this contract, ABF Teamsters will be back to where they were in 2008.

• SUBCONTRACTING: Nothing was done to stem the tide of Teamster work migrating to subcontractors across the country.

• WEAKENING CONTRACT ENFORCEMENT: By creating an ABF-only grievance panel, this contract allows the company to deadlock every grievance, every time.

• HEALTH CARE LOOPHOLES: Health care is always in the details and this deal allows ABF to make lesser payments to certain funds, which will force benefit cuts.

Working hand-in-hand, ABF, Wall Street and Team Hoffa lobbied hard for a YES vote. They pulled out all the stops by using mail, robocalls and social media and could only manage a partial victory.

The supplement was voted down in this region & according to the thread on the abf board the company agreed to increase the pension by 5% in exchange for the $1,000 sign on bonus....

 

[upnorth]

IMO, the abf argument is nil. This from the Yrc ceo is the one we should be watching. The outcome of these negotiations is the one those of us who are not in favour of teamster representation should be watching. Read the part of the interview below. She admits teamsters gave back during the “ tough times” and clearly states wage increases to give that back and more will not be on the table. Add the interesting statement about the teamster negotiating team and the company spooning each other, this is the big one to watch. I hope the dsr’s Dig in their heels on this.


“Getting ready for next year's labor talks
Being a unionized carrier, YRC is not in position of needing to raise wages at this point to attract new drivers. The Teamsters did make concessions during YRC's most difficult days, and Mehrotra said there was has been "bluster" from the Teamsters getting prepared for negotiations on a contract that ends in March 2019.

Fisher would not discuss wage numbers, but said YRC is going to need "flexibility in the work force to actually run the business the way it needs to be run." She discussed a scenario in which a worker would be more of a utility worker, allowed to perform more functions than at present. Mehrotra asked whether it was "realistic" to think the Teamsters would move toward that model. "The good news is we have outstanding (union)leadership," she said. "They have been very helpful in the last 18 months. I think in the next nine months we can spend time talking to them, and letting them know the issues so that this is not a surprise."

 

[troubleman84]

Well I'm not going to leave, and I'm certainly not going to support it. I'd have to find something to do with my time.

I’d be the first one to tell you is this a contractual violation and not gripe. If violation file a grievance and we will see you in a local level hearing so if your filing to be an ass you get tired of being made of one in hearing by the company.

 

[icuicp]

IMO, the abf argument is nil. This from the Yrc ceo is the one we should be watching. The outcome of these negotiations is the one those of us who are not in favour of teamster representation should be watching. Read the part of the interview below. She admits teamsters gave back during the “ tough times” and clearly states wage increases to give that back and more will not be on the table. Add the interesting statement about the teamster negotiating team and the company spooning each other, this is the big one to watch. I hope the dsr’s Dig in their heels on this.


“Getting ready for next year's labor talks
Being a unionized carrier, YRC is not in position of needing to raise wages at this point to attract new drivers. The Teamsters did make concessions during YRC's most difficult days, and Mehrotra said there was has been "bluster" from the Teamsters getting prepared for negotiations on a contract that ends in March 2019.

Fisher would not discuss wage numbers, but said YRC is going to need "flexibility in the work force to actually run the business the way it needs to be run." She discussed a scenario in which a worker would be more of a utility worker, allowed to perform more functions than at present. Mehrotra asked whether it was "realistic" to think the Teamsters would move toward that model. "The good news is we have outstanding (union)leadership," she said. "They have been very helpful in the last 18 months. I think in the next nine months we can spend time talking to them, and letting them know the issues so that this is not a surprise."

This is exactly what I've asked about with those who seek to gain a contract at XPO :
Won't success at XPO undermine the traditional Teamster ( NMFA companies - ABF , YRCW units ) by having drivers that do multiple jobs ( fueling , hooking sets , working the dock , etc... ) ...?

Even with a contract , XPO unionized drivers would most likely still follow the model that is in place now - one driver , multiple duties to accomplish your job every night.

Isn't this something that goes against established Teamsters thinking? Aren't they against this? Not stirring up sh!t , I've asked this before yet here's proof that it may be more important than previously acknowledged.

 

[GO40]

This is exactly what I've asked about with those who seek to gain a contract at XPO :
Won't success at XPO undermine the traditional Teamster ( NMFA companies - ABF , YRCW units ) by having drivers that do multiple jobs ( fueling , hooking sets , working the dock , etc... ) ...?

Even with a contract , XPO unionized drivers would most likely still follow the model that is in place now - one driver , multiple duties to accomplish your job every night.

Isn't this something that goes against established Teamsters thinking? Aren't they against this? Not stirring up sh!t , I've asked this before yet here's proof that it may be more important than previously acknowledged.

Most of our drivers do everything you mentioned, hooking sets, fueling ect. are done mainly at break bulks. We also have some foreign drivers come in & we have to break & hook their sets if not they get paid triple time, it’s all how their supplement agreement reads....

 

[whip1]

This is exactly what I've asked about with those who seek to gain a contract at XPO :
Won't success at XPO undermine the traditional Teamster ( NMFA companies - ABF , YRCW units ) by having drivers that do multiple jobs ( fueling , hooking sets , working the dock , etc... ) ...?

Even with a contract , XPO unionized drivers would most likely still follow the model that is in place now - one driver , multiple duties to accomplish your job every night.

Isn't this something that goes against established Teamsters thinking? Aren't they against this? Not stirring up sh!t , I've asked this before yet here's proof that it may be more important than previously acknowledged.

If Sucker and Hollywoodz get the contract they want, it’s definitely not raising the union bar. If the Teamsters support this, it makes me wonder who they’re looking out for.

 

[Hollywoodz]

If Sucker and Hollywoodz get the contract they want, it’s definitely not raising the union bar. If the Teamsters support this, it makes me wonder who they’re looking out for.

We expect to raise the bar for those who are currently non-union. A grievance and arbitration process alone raises the bar. When you add affordable decent health care, the bar gets raised even further. Then, you add a guaranteed defined wage increase every year for the length of the contract, and the bar gets raised further. How about a contract that prevents them from imposing ALL the policy changes they are imposing at the current time. Up goes the bar again! We do not expect a UPS contract nor do we expect job classifications that match what exists today. As I stated many times before, our intention is not to destroy the company or impair their ability to compete in this market. This is not our fathers union. Times have changed and we acknowledge that. We are changing with the times.

 

[Hollywoodz]

This is exactly what I've asked about with those who seek to gain a contract at XPO :
Won't success at XPO undermine the traditional Teamster ( NMFA companies - ABF , YRCW units ) by having drivers that do multiple jobs ( fueling , hooking sets , working the dock , etc... ) ...?

Even with a contract , XPO unionized drivers would most likely still follow the model that is in place now - one driver , multiple duties to accomplish your job every night.

Isn't this something that goes against established Teamsters thinking? Aren't they against this? Not stirring up sh!t , I've asked this before yet here's proof that it may be more important than previously acknowledged.

If all I was worried about was forcing the company to hire someone to hook my set, I'd be wasting my time. There are so many more important things on the table. Grievance and arbitration, affordable, decent health care, defined wage increases eliminating the company's ability to make policy changes for the length of the contract and the ability to bargain everything. As I have stated many times before, it is not our intention to destroy this company or impair their ability to compete in this market. This is not our fathers union. Times have changed and we acknowledge that we must change with the times as well.

 

[Hollywoodz]

If Sucker and Hollywoodz get the contract they want, it’s definitely not raising the union bar. If the Teamsters support this, it makes me wonder who they’re looking out for.

It's not the union bar we intend to raise. We have NOTHING and the company continues to take from us, leaving us less than nothing. Read the next few posts and you'll understand where we are coming from and where we are headed.

 

[Hollywoodz]

I’d be the first one to tell you is this a contractual violation and not gripe. If violation file a grievance and we will see you in a local level hearing so if your filing to be an ass you get tired of being made of one in hearing by the company.

You can file all the grievances that you want. If they are not a violation of the contract, they will be thrown in the trash.

 

[Fly-by-night]

Does anyone know this guy:
Mike Esposito
It says he's the VP of Labor and employee relations. He was at one of the local FAC and they had a posted report for them. Also there has been a lot of union talk at that FAC.

 

[upnorth]

Does anyone know this guy:
Mike Esposito
It says he's the VP of Labor and employee relations. He was at one of the local FAC and they had a posted report for them. Also there has been a lot of union talk at that FAC.

He’s the company’s fire extinguisher.

 

[Hollywoodz]

Does anyone know this guy:
Mike Esposito
It says he's the VP of Labor and employee relations. He was at one of the local FAC and they had a posted report for them. Also there has been a lot of union talk at that FAC.

He's the VP of bullshit, the "in house" union buster. Instead of spending millions on Lupe Cruz & friends, they spend hundreds of thousands on him. He's very good at what he does and if you're not careful, you fall for his lines too!

 

[whip1]

We expect to raise the bar for those who are currently non-union. A grievance and arbitration process alone raises the bar. When you add affordable decent health care, the bar gets raised even further. Then, you add a guaranteed defined wage increase every year for the length of the contract, and the bar gets raised further. How about a contract that prevents them from imposing ALL the policy changes they are imposing at the current time. Up goes the bar again! We do not expect a UPS contract nor do we expect job classifications that match what exists today. As I stated many times before, our intention is not to destroy the company or impair their ability to compete in this market. This is not our fathers union. Times have changed and we acknowledge that. We are changing with the times.

I get all that. It may raise the bar for us, but it does lower the bar for other companies.

 

[trucknfool]

It is the case, that's why I said when you AND your spouse dies your pension evaporates. That's not the case with a 401(k).

If things take a down turn , your 401 K can evaporate quicker than a Pension. It's a gamble for this Generation.