What's new

Yellow | 2nd customer service rep says no

309 YRC Chicago

Triplex said:
I hope you're not relying on your IQ to get you your next job. The word is "bored". "Board" is what you probably lie on when you sleep on the job.
Click to expand...


Thats a fact, I come home well rested. You get what you pay for YRC. :1036316054:
 
Triplex said:
What makes you think they don't have to live with it?

You have no idea of my status with YRC so why pretend you do?
Click to expand...

O K. What, where and how long? I've only gone by your other posts. Why the attacks? All easy questions to be answerd. And how does not being in the workplace affect them?
 
309 YRC Chicago

Triplex said:
I hope you're not relying on your IQ to get you your next job. The word is "bored". "Board" is what you probably lie on when you sleep on the job.
Click to expand...


Also proving my point board enough to be on truckboards a site for truck drivers to correct their spelling.
 
pilot108 said:
O K. What, where and how long? I've only gone by your other posts. Why the attacks? All easy questions to be answerd. And how does not being in the workplace affect them?
Click to expand...

All freight Teamsters will ultimately be affected by what happens at YRC, either directly as employees or indirectly as freight Teamsters. I would think that's fairly obvious. In a time of dwindling support for and popularity of labor unions, the "shut them down" attitude does nothing to reverse that trend.

Attacks? Are you referring to my responses to the low life comments I've received from certain individuals? I could very well be wrong but I do believe I respond negatively only after I've been the target. I know it's better to turn the other cheek but sometimes it's more satisfying to return in kind.

If you need further clarification of my position, let me state it this way. If I didn't like the working conditions on my job I would vote with my feet and find a better job - something I've done in the past. I would not want to ruin a job for many others who need the job and for some reason can't find something else. To me that's really how a Teamster brother should behave. My disagreement is with those why know they are risking the job closing and still insist on voting to very likely bring that about. This situation is not about gaining better wages and/or benefits from a profit making, successful organization. This is about attempting to help the company (and 20,00 Teamster jobs) survive a bad situation. You certainly don't have to see it my way - that's your choice. Good luck.
 
tutone710 said:
Also proving my point board enough to be on truckboards a site for truck drivers to correct their spelling.
Click to expand...

Geez, it's a common 5 letter word. I wouldn't expect you to know how to spell some 10 letter medical term or something. And is there something wrong with truck drivers being somewhat intelligent or do you expect them all to be down at your level?
 
Triplex said:
All freight Teamsters will ultimately be affected by what happens at YRC, either directly as employees or indirectly as freight Teamsters. I would think that's fairly obvious. In a time of dwindling support for and popularity of labor unions, the "shut them down" attitude does nothing to reverse that trend

Attacks? Are you referring to my responses to the low life comments I've received from certain individuals? I could very well be wrong but I do believe I respond negatively only after I've been the target. I know it's better to turn the other cheek but sometimes it's more satisfying to return in kind.********************
I only asked 4 questions and you answerd none. I take it by your non answers that the post I made about non-employees being the cheerleaders is correct and applies to you. What, where and how long are the questions I asked. Will you not answer? You said it wasn't my business, I think you should be up front with your reply. I'm not trying to hit you a low shot but to make the statement you did and then not answer the question does not sit well.
I've cut down the full quote accidently. You can read the full comment on triplex post
Click to expand...
 
Triplex said:
All freight Teamsters will ultimately be affected by what happens at YRC, either directly as employees or indirectly as freight Teamsters. I would think that's fairly obvious. In a time of dwindling support for and popularity of labor unions, the "shut them down" attitude does nothing to reverse that trend.
Click to expand...

Well stated.

Triplex said:
If you need further clarification of my position, let me state it this way. If I didn't like the working conditions on my job I would vote with my feet and find a better job - something I've done in the past.
Click to expand...

Triplex said:
Geez, it's a common 5 letter word. I wouldn't expect you to know how to spell some 10 letter medical term or something. And is there something wrong with truck drivers being somewhat intelligent or do you expect them all to be down at your level?
Click to expand...

I notice a pretty strong correlation between the folks who appear to be "no" voters and their apparent intelligence quotient. There are always exceptions, but I don't think it's much coincidence that those with enough insight to vote "yes" also seem to be of above average intelligence.
 
pilot108 said:
Triplex said:
All freight Teamsters will ultimately be affected by what happens at YRC, either directly as employees or indirectly as freight Teamsters. I would think that's fairly obvious. In a time of dwindling support for and popularity of labor unions, the "shut them down" attitude does nothing to reverse that trend

Attacks? Are you referring to my responses to the low life comments I've received from certain individuals? I could very well be wrong but I do believe I respond negatively only after I've been the target. I know it's better to turn the other cheek but sometimes it's more satisfying to return in kind.
Click to expand...
I only asked 4 questions and you answerd none. I take it by your non answers that the post I made about non-employees being the cheerleaders is correct and applies to you. What, where and how long are the questions I asked. Will you not answer? You said it wasn't my business, I think you should be up front with your reply. I'm not trying to hit you a low shot but to make the statement you did and then not answer the question does not sit well. I've cut down the full quote accidently. You can read the full comment on triplex post
Click to expand...

What part of my answer didn't you understand? I answered that all Teamsters will be affected. If the vote causes the company to shut down, all the currently employed Teamsters will lose their jobs and benefits. Some will be able to find another Teamster job, but most will either hope to get hired at a non-union job or will take lower paying jobs outside the industry and many won't be able to find any decent work in this weak economy. As far as retired Teamsters, they face the possibility of greatly reduced pension payments due to the situations in many of the Teamster pension funds compounded by the absence of any future payments from YRC and the expected rush of new retirees who were at YRC. Potential Teamsters (those employees at the current non-union companies) will see how some Teamsters shoot themselves in the foot and they will be even harder to convince to go union in the future. And the public in general will be even more anti-union when they perceive how selfish Teamsters cause a decent job (in spite of the givebacks) to shut down (a la Hostess). In a sluggish economy where the news has stories about companies cutting back almost every week it seems foolish to cause a shutdown.

In any event, what difference does it make what position a person is in when they make statements about the YRC situation. It seems to me that when someone's position is indefensible or weak they resort to ancillary issues instead of discussing/debating the specifics or worse yet, attack the poster.

Now let me hear you refute the specific comments/reasons I've given you here.
 
309 YRC Chicago

Triplex said:
What part of my answer didn't you understand? I answered that all Teamsters will be affected. If the vote causes the company to shut down, all the currently employed Teamsters will lose their jobs and benefits. Some will be able to find another Teamster job, but most will either hope to get hired at a non-union job or will take lower paying jobs outside the industry and many won't be able to find any decent work in this weak economy. As far as retired Teamsters, they face the possibility of greatly reduced pension payments due to the situations in many of the Teamster pension funds compounded by the absence of any future payments from YRC and the expected rush of new retirees who were at YRC. Potential Teamsters (those employees at the current non-union companies) will see how some Teamsters shoot themselves in the foot and they will be even harder to convince to go union in the future. And the public in general will be even more anti-union when they perceive how selfish Teamsters cause a decent job (in spite of the giv


ebacks) to shut down (a la Hostess). In a sluggish economy where the news has stories about companies cutting back almost every week it seems foolish to cause a shutdown.

In any event, what difference does it make what position a person is in when they make statements about the YRC situation. It seems to me that when someone's position is indefensible or weak they resort to ancillary issues instead of discussing/debating the specifics or worse yet, attack the poster.

Now let me hear you refute the specific comments/reasons I've given you here.
Click to expand...




Union jobs are already going away, pensions are already being reduced , where you been? .
 
Triplex said:
Geez, it's a common 5 letter word. I wouldn't expect you to know how to spell some 10 letter medical term or something. And is there something wrong with truck drivers being somewhat intelligent or do you expect them all to be down at your level?
Click to expand...

Thank God for spell check....you might think me an idiot. :biglaugh: ....... HEY!!!!
 
wolf said:
Thank God for spell check....you might think me an idiot. :biglaugh: ....... HEY!!!!
Click to expand...

My favorite is still the write up that the Breaks need adjusting................I tell them to go talk to the BA if they want a shorter break......................
 
Wrench97 said:
My favorite is still the write up that the Breaks need adjusting................I tell them to go talk to the BA if they want a shorter break......................
Click to expand...

I hope my neighbors can't hear (or is it "here") me laughing at that one! :1036316054:
 
Wrench97 said:
My favorite is still the write up that the Breaks need adjusting................I tell them to go talk to the BA if they want a shorter break......................
Click to expand...
Oh No!! Spell check won't catch that one. Sure glad nobody actually reads those things :shift: :wavey:
 
Triplex said:
What part of my answer didn't you understand? I answered that all Teamsters will be affected. If the vote causes the company to shut down, all the currently employed Teamsters will lose their jobs and benefits. Some will be able to find another Teamster job, but most will either hope to get hired at a non-union job or will take lower paying jobs outside the industry and many won't be able to find any decent work in this weak economy. As far as retired Teamsters, they face the possibility of greatly reduced pension payments due to the situations in many of the Teamster pension funds compounded by the absence of any future payments from YRC and the expected rush of new retirees who were at YRC. Potential Teamsters (those employees at the current non-union companies) will see how some Teamsters shoot themselves in the foot and they will be even harder to convince to go union in the future. And the public in general will be even more anti-union when they perceive how selfish Teamsters cause a decent job (in spite of the givebacks) to shut down (a la Hostess). In a sluggish economy where the news has stories about companies cutting back almost every week it seems foolish to cause a shutdown.

In any event, what difference does it make what position a person is in when they make statements about the YRC situation. It seems to me that when someone's position is indefensible or weak they resort to ancillary issues instead of discussing/debating the specifics or worse yet, attack the poster.

Now let me hear you refute the specific comments/reasons I've given you here.
Click to expand...

I would love to see you be more specific about how the hostess bankruptcy is comparable to the situation at yrc. Myself I don't see much to compare.
 
Triplex said:
What you don't see is not my problem, sorry.
Click to expand...

Since you don't care to elaborate on a comparison you raised,that was asked in a non confrontational manner, I guess I will respond in the sophomoric tone that you seem most comfortable communicating in.me not seeing you is a good problem to have.
 
COLKID said:
Triplex said:
What you don't see is not my problem, sorry.
Click to expand...
Since you don't care to elaborate on a comparison you raised,that was asked in a non confrontational manner, I guess I will respond in the sophomoric tone that you seem most comfortable communicating in.me not seeing you is a good problem to have.
Click to expand...

You're right, shame on me.

1) Hostess in rough financial shape/YRC in rough financial shape
2) Hostess asks for concessions to stave off possible bankruptcy/YRC asks for concessions to stave off possible bankruptcy
3) Hostess files Ch 11 when concessions refused/YRC (to be determined)

I don't have a crystal ball to know with certainty what will happen. Does anyone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top