What's new

Yellow | Anyone know about this?

Triplex said:
Not necessarily true. Lots of people do market research to determine if there is a market for the service or product they want to provide, then they secure capital to start up the business hoping to become successful. Some do and of course some fail.
Click to expand...

I get that, the market has excess capacity right now. Carriers are doing very well, OR's are good to excellent. Largely because good management finally understands LTL after seeing decades of poor decisions.
These folks ran an auto carrier into the ground, they do not even have a USDOT number yet for this entity.
It takes months to set up customers now days, with FAK Bands, Czar Tariff purchases, the length of the sales process, hence why we have not seen a brand new LTL carrier in many decades. If this happened they would need thousands of brand new customers.
You well understand this industry, can you name the newest LTL Carrier to start up? We've seen hundreds fail but no one start a new carrier. Why?
I believe it is far too difficult to start a brand new carrier even in a small region. The Cap Ex is too great and unless there are very high expectation on returns I doubt investors or banks are quick to jump in after the Yellow debt disaster.....
 
almost13ranch said:
Exactly. Why in the world would a bankruptcy court that’s charged with maximizing the amount that can be gotten from the sale of assets to pay back creditors? Jack Cooper has done nothing except make bids for “going concern” while asking for concessions from the court and creditors. Now it wants the potential employees to fund the operation. They’ve got nerve, that’s for sure.
Click to expand...

Because their priority should have been to restructure and not liquidate if possible. the judge already granted them way more lenience then they deserved IMHO by not questioning the CH11 strategy used to skirt around forensic audits, executive bonuses, insider stock manipulation, Apollo/Citadel hedge fund collusion, etc.
 
RumRunner1 said:
Because their priority should have been to restructure and not liquidate if possible. the judge already granted them way more lenience then they deserved IMHO by not questioning the CH11 strategy used to skirt around forensic audits, executive bonuses, insider stock manipulation, Apollo/Citadel hedge fund collusion, etc.
Click to expand...

I'm not certain the courts would have approved a Ch.7 bankruptcy. Ch.7 allows many/all unsecured debtors claims to be discharged. Ch.7 is usually utilized when the liabilities exceed the assets, and that wasn't the case here.
 
ROLLBACK said:
They probably don’t, but they don’t have that choice, I do. That’s how yellow wounded up where they are today. Destroyed their whole company trying to get rid of one individual. When do I get my Warn Act check?
Click to expand...

It's your choice to not go to work for them, given the opportunity. It would also be their choice to hire you or not.

I wouldn't hold my breath for a Warn Act check. I don't foresee the court ruling that the situation qualifies. If the court puts the kibash on the Warn Act, I'd bet Next Century amends their proposal.
 
EX396 said:
It's your choice to not go to work for them, given the opportunity. It would also be their choice to hire you or not.

I wouldn't hold my breath for a Warn Act check. I don't foresee the court ruling that the situation qualifies. If the court puts the kibash on the Warn Act, I'd bet Next Century amends their proposal.
Click to expand...
Warn act and vacation etc. should be paid, before any remaining debtors are paid. Employees provided a service for the company no different than a vendor. If a vendor or consultant company provided a service 60 days prior to closing they should fall behind employees who have accrued benefits going back almost a year. Period end of discussion.
 
Last edited:
dokman said:
Warn act and vacation etc. should be paid, before any remaining debtors are paid. Employees provided a service for the company no different than a vendor. If a vendor or consultant company provided a service 60 days prior to closing they should fall behind employees who have accrued benefits going back almost a year. Period end of discussion.
Click to expand...

That's not how it works. First, the court would have to rule that a violation of the WARN Act occurred. I don't believe it did. Time will tell what the court believes.

Secondly, there isn't a 60 day cut-off for vendors, only pre-petition and post-petition.

If you haven't already done so, familiarize yourself with the priority of claims in a Ch. 11 bankruptcy case. It will either confirm what you already believe or correct any errors in your understanding.
 
EX396 said:
That's not how it works. First, the court would have to rule that a violation of the WARN Act occurred. I don't believe it did. Time will tell what the court believes.

Secondly, there isn't a 60 day cut-off for vendors, only pre-petition and post-petition.

If you haven't already done so, familiarize yourself with the priority of claims in a Ch. 11 bankruptcy case. It will either confirm what you already believe or correct any errors in your understanding.
Click to expand...
Does the bankruptcy judge decide the class action lawsuit too?
 
TC1 said:
Does the bankruptcy judge decide the class action lawsuit too?
Click to expand...

I don't believe so, but I don't know for certain. WARN Act cases are heard in district court. I was under the impression that bankruptcy judges only handle bankruptcy cases but this could be a judge that works the circuit so to speak.
 
EX396 said:
It's your choice to not go to work for them, given the opportunity. It would also be their choice to hire you or not.

I wouldn't hold my breath for a Warn Act check. I don't foresee the court ruling that the situation qualifies. If the court puts the kibash on the Warn Act, I'd bet Next Century amends their proposal.
Click to expand...
Why is the gentle lady asking the violated employees to wage their warn act payment. Proof is in the pudding!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top