Yellow | 705 Shuttle Drivers
- Thread starter safetyjj
- Start date
What works best in reality is everyone working as a team.....not standing around saying, "not my job", but doing what needs to be done without regard for "whose" job it is...if it needs doing....do it.....The idea of "you do your job and I'll do mine" mentality sounds good on the surface, but that is as far as it goes....its just shallow thinking and is what gives the "Union" a bad rap to those who don't really understand the Union and its greater value and the positive impact it has made on the workers in this Country. The best way to combat the impact of the non union competition is to work in greater cooperation among work groups, in this time of difficulty, to provide a greater chance for the Union and Company to survive and prove that a Unionized workforce is a Superior workforce..... That's how things work best..
Even if your correct in your statement, that doesn't mean that Former Yellow drivers are better teamsters, as you seem to imply. IF a driver has a legitimate grievance he or she should seek the help of a Steward to help with the proper resolution to whatever the issue is.... Emphasis on the word legitimate... Please explain how they, the majority, "threw away their life savings" to the Company? Isn't that statement a little dramatic? And yes.....if you figure in the eroding effects of inflation and the shrinking value of the dollar over time, wages are stagnate. But that isn't what I meant by my statement about living in the past....and I'm sure your smart enough to know that.....
I'm impressed by your comment... really shows everyone your capacity of understanding. I do appreciate your taking time to read my post, even if you don't fully understand it......
Company screws up on making bad financial decisions, and the membership/employees are ending up paying the bill. 25% of the pension a year for the next 5 years? I would say that's sufficient enough for throwing away a life savings. That's not just a smack in the face, that's a smack in face and a
.
Last edited by a moderator:
yankee clipper
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 0
buffalo been going into the rails for 8 years or better,never could understand how we could pass our final destination and walk all over your work.I guess your local should have put a end to that when it started.
Company screws up on making bad financial decisions, and the membership/employees are ending up paying the bill. 25% of the pension a year for the next 5 years? I would say that's sufficient enough for throwing away a life savings. That's not just a smack in the face, that's a smack in face and a
Yes indeed the Company exercised poor judgment at a bad time.....This is something that is not happening to just YRC these days....whenever the People at the top make decisions and they go bad....the Employees always end up paying for these mistakes.....Enron a case in point.
I fully understand your point on the pension. We can essentially agree on that point.
While it seems that its a smack in the face or more, as indicated by your use of animations, YRC Teamsters have not had it as bad, concessionary speaking, as others have. Consider the Harley workers in Milwaukee and else where. The GM workers at Indianapolis. The workers at Motts...a company that even made a profit last year...still forced concessions on its workers and that was after a Strike none the less!!!! So yeah...we got smacked in the face to be sure...but it could have been worse...not saying that it couldn't get worse...no one holds the key to the future....Times are not good for Labor....
Pup Driver
TB Veteran
- Credits
- 25
Got to admit that was a good one .Here's some charted future. Only past facts creates a future reference for the present. I'm sure that those Yes voters/drivers at 309, that do the shuttle work, have the same enthusiasm with the dispatcher over the phone, as they did voting. The next concession contract vote will probably be answered more like this.......
YouTube - When Harry Met Sally - yes, yes, yes
Need I say more?
Pup Driver
TB Veteran
- Credits
- 25
Its no secret the company hates Chicago a little more than it does the rest of the country . There was an articular today from some news paper from Prue Illinois that said that YRC was closing that new terminal they built 4 years ago and that the employees will follow the work to Montgomery and Peoria Illinois . All the closings of the terminals threw out the country are following their work to the terminals that are picking up the new territories . Not Chicago, why wasn't CGB (300 )aloud to follow their work to Bolingbrook with out having to grieve it and still no answer , it would appear that this is a blatant case of discrimination against one area of workers with in a barging unit . The company is as wrong as can be on this one past practice must prevail on this one its a no brainier . . If the union can't win on this one they will have to go to the labor board . Just wonder if anyone out there on T/B thinks CGB should't have followed their work ?
Its no secret the company hates Chicago a little more than it does the rest of the country . There was an articular today from some news paper from Prue Illinois that said that YRC was closing that new terminal they built 4 years ago and that the employees will follow the work to Montgomery and Peoria Illinois . All the closings of the terminals threw out the country are following their work to the terminals that are picking up the new territories . Not Chicago, why wasn't CGB (300 )aloud to follow their work to Bolingbrook with out having to grieve it and still no answer , it would appear that this is a blatant case of discrimination against one area of workers with in a barging unit . The company is as wrong as can be on this one past practice must prevail on this one its a no brainier . . If the union can't win on this one they will have to go to the labor board . Just wonder if anyone out there on T/B thinks CGB should't have followed their work ?
They should love us now!!!! Thanks to Tyson J. And yes they should have been allowed to follow the work!
pilot87 I believe that tutone710 understands your articulate and reasonable opinion. But like a significant number of Teamsters he is unable to come to terms with the reality that IS the financial AND operational position of BOTH YRC and YRCW. If all stakeholders in our prospective future can recognize that sacrifices will be required to fulfill the promises of the concessions, then perhaps there will be a future for YRCW that includes YRC.
I want to add that I find it VERY distressing that there are some who find the situation 705 shuttle drivers are in to be humorous. I do not. Preserving jobs is a priority, but operational efficiencies are desperately needed. Our competition does not need to undercut our pricing if we continue to waste valuable operating capital on redundant work.
Its no secret the company hates Chicago a little more than it does the rest of the country . There was an articular today from some news paper from Prue Illinois that said that YRC was closing that new terminal they built 4 years ago and that the employees will follow the work to Montgomery and Peoria Illinois . All the closings of the terminals threw out the country are following their work to the terminals that are picking up the new territories . Not Chicago, why wasn't CGB (300 )aloud to follow their work to Bolingbrook with out having to grieve it and still no answer , it would appear that this is a blatant case of discrimination against one area of workers with in a barging unit . The company is as wrong as can be on this one past practice must prevail on this one its a no brainier . . If the union can't win on this one they will have to go to the labor board . Just wonder if anyone out there on T/B thinks CGB should't have followed their work ?
Bolingbrook has an endtail clause in thier contract which is the same as Montgomery's contract. 705 also did not have an agreement with 673 or 179 allowing them to follow thier work. Bolingbrook and Montgomery just followed suit in what 705 did to protect thier work, but it looks as if it has come to bite 705 guys for having thier own seperate contract.
I agree with you 100%. I would also like to add that it's very distressing that a significant number of the membership feel that this was just some sort of contract negotiations of a "normal" time......These are desperate times for organized labor,and labor in general, and for YRC/YRCW....
I notice that the same people that post on here about how YRC is wasteful and mis-managed are the ones that also complain about it when they try to cut out inefficiencies or as you state, redundant work,. (thats excactly what it is) I do not find any delight in the situation that the Shuttle drivers face either......any loss of jobs is a loss of teamster strength. On the other hand, as you seem to well understand, it is the entire point of the concessions and other sacrifices of other stakeholders as well, to preserve YRC. Which thus preserves the greatest numbers of Job, Teamsters and otherwise. The cost structure must be controlled if YRC/YRCW is to continue.
P.S I'll give tutone710 the benefit of the doubt....this time.....It would be of greater good if more would think beyond such a limited scope.
We did try to stop it but the buf drivers would never sign in or out to where they were going or comming from so we could'nt have a paper trail for it. Unless you got a work history of a certian driver , you had no way to file on it, and you know it and went along with the program.
Limited scope must mean letting one local steal work from another, because thats what happend to 705. if the IBT had any integreaty left this would not be an issue. The locals of 673 and 179 should have stood up and said this was not right. When the locals do not stand up to the co they are just as guilty as the co of trying to destroy a local. The members of 179 , 673 and 710 should now stand together and vote the bums out that our letting this happen to OUR UNION ! Yea that means pat f also. With the reprensation he has allowed us to not have, he needs to go also,nothing like a B A that is so cosy with management that your normal answer for a problem is "don't make waves".
Last edited by a moderator:
You said everything that sandy pope stands for!
A few years ago it did not seem to bother 705 to perform their own D/H in the 309 yard. They were violating 710 dockmen. Now the shoe is on the other foot and it's BOO HOO 710 is stealing our work. Stealing, stealing? The work is being assigned and ANY driver has NO contractual right to refuse. The movement of loads to and from railyards in the Chicago area is being performed by any YRC driver not just 710 road. Get real, conditions change. There was a time when a road driver would do a short turn (Rockford for example) for an 8 hour guarantee then do another run for additional miles. That does not occur now because it was wasteful.
Couldn't (shouldn't) the issue be not offering follow the work. I fully realize in the past the 705 and 710 endtail rule trampled somewhat on that, but this ignores completely who previously did the work and allows the company to punish or reward workers arbitrarily.
Big Mess
That is the crux of the problem, 309 is IMO exceding the limits of the MOU. Previous procedures for the movement of trailers to and from the railyards is not financially feasable any longer. 705 wants to continue the practice of prohibiting road drivers from moving loaded trailers between 309 and the Chicago area railyards. With the fierce independence that 705 exhibits I'm not sure how this issue will be resolved. 705 did not follow the guidence of the IBT during the cutover merger. Instead of dovetailing the Chicago area Yellow and Roadway 705 drivers they opted to merge the seniority lists one for one irrespective of seniority dates. This has resulted in members with higher DOH dates working ahead of members who were hired before them.