What's new

ABF | April 22 THE BIG VOTE

L

leftyblack

TB Lurker
Credits
0
APRIL 22 ABF STOCK HOLDERS WILL VOTE TO INCREASE THE COMPENSATION ON IT'S TOP 3 BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM 1.5 MILLION DOLLARS TO 3.1 MILLION DOLLARS !!!!!

GENTLEMEN DO REALLY FEEL SORRY FOR THE GUYS? DO YOU REALLY FEEL THEY NEED OUR 15% OR 10% OR EVEN 5% OR ELSE WE ARE GOING OUT OF BUSINESS !! WE ARE IN SUCH BAD SHAPE YET WE CAN VOTE TO GIVE RAISES TO THEM ..OH WAIT IT'AS PROBABLY A PROMOTION !!!

I OVERWHELMINGLY VOTE NO !!
 
[quote author=joshracing11 link=topic=79430.msg823437#msg823437 date=1271853873]
Ok LB, that's not true, and I think that you know it. The compensation ceiling thing has been covered several times, both here on TB and elsewhere. When you throw stuff out there like this that everyone can see is wrong, it kind of hurts the rest of your argument. Just my 2 cents.

http://www.truckingboards.com/bb/index.php?page=page2083
[/quote



You might want to read this a couple of times:

3. Equal Sacrifice of Non-Bargaining Unit Employees and Their Participation.
(a) All non-bargaining unit employees (including management) will participate equally in the Plan, and the Employer will share the burden of sacrifices among all IBT bargaining unit and non-bargaining unit employees (including management), in each case, as described in this Section 3(a). The Employer must reduce the total compensation (defined as wages plus health and welfare and pension or retirement benefits) of all non-bargaining unit employees (including management) by the same percentage reduction (an “Equal Reduction”) in total compensation as is being applied to IBT bargaining unit employees. Non-bargaining unit employees (including management) shall not be provided any discretionary bonus payments during the life of this Plan (these are distinct from the pre-existing incentive and performance based pay plans that are expressly allowed to continue, as noted in the final paragraph of Section 10 below). In determining the Equal Reduction for non-bargaining unit employees under this Plan, the Employer may include the monetary value of the following concessions imposed on non-bargaining unit employees starting on January 1, 2008
 
[quote author=joshracing11 link=topic=79430.msg823497#msg823497 date=1271868340]
And that has absolutely nothing to do with what either he or I posted, but ok......
[/quote]



Non-bargaining unit employees (including management) shall not be provided any discretionary bonus payments during the life of this Plan (these are distinct from the pre-existing incentive and performance based pay plans that are expressly allowed to continue, as noted in the final paragraph of Section 10 below). In determining the Equal Reduction for non-bargaining unit employees under this Plan, the Employer may include the monetary value of the following concessions imposed on non-bargaining unit employees starting on January 1, 2008

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, I'm not the brightest bear in the woods but the way that I read this is they can still give bonuses at will.
 
Well, first of all, "shall not be provided any discretionary bonus payments during the life of this Plan" tells me that they cannot give bonuses "at will" and second of all, his post, and my response, was about the mis-information that when they voted on raising the maximum compensation limits for certain officers of the company, they were actually voting in a raise, which is not the case. They simply changed the theoretical maximum as to what one could recieve. There were apparently also some other changes that reduced the percentage of compensation that they could recieve other than salary, but none the less, it had nothing to do with what you had posted.
 
[quote author=joshracing11 link=topic=79430.msg823521#msg823521 date=1271875276]
Well, first of all, "shall not be provided any discretionary bonus payments during the life of this Plan" tells me that they cannot give bonuses "at will" and second of all, his post, and my response, was about the mis-information that when they voted on raising the maximum compensation limits for certain officers of the company, they were actually voting in a raise, which is not the case. They simply changed the theoretical maximum as to what one could recieve. There were apparently also some other changes that reduced the percentage of compensation that they could recieve other than salary, but none the less, it had nothing to do with what you had posted.
[/quote]



You're starting to talk like a politician now,it has everything to do with it. You better start to open your eyes a little bit or the world will pass you by. Why do you actually think that the pay increase will be voted on? Let me guess, just to be there and not be used! Read that again, they can give bonuses at will.This is the real world.
 
[quote author=joshracing11 link=topic=79430.msg823521#msg823521 date=1271875276]
Well, first of all, "shall not be provided any discretionary bonus payments during the life of this Plan" tells me that they cannot give bonuses "at will" and second of all, his post, and my response, was about the mis-information that when they voted on raising the maximum compensation limits for certain officers of the company, they were actually voting in a raise, which is not the case. They simply changed the theoretical maximum as to what one could recieve. There were apparently also some other changes that reduced the percentage of compensation that they could recieve other than salary, but none the less, it had nothing to do with what you had posted.
[/quote]Mr. JOSH...Why would they raise the ceiling for compensation if the weren't going to increase the compensation? don't say this is an IRS reg because that isn't true. Just like Mr. kemp didn't a raise he got a promotion...b/s he still doing the same job with a new title & what of the other raises the past 5 years he has been awarded...it's a beautiful thing when a company is traded public ...you can find all kinds of filings. if you like to debate any and all of my post email me i'll make myself available to do so.
 
There is a letter that is put out by Mr.Kemp that has a paragraph that says ,"The sacrifices already borne by our non-contrctual employees since the beginning of 2008 will be taken into account". This doesn't sound like the company is looking for equal sacrifices.It is looking to see how many are fooled into giving away wages.
 
Remember I'm YRC.

The statement...
The sacrifices already borne by our non-contractual employees since the beginning of 2008 will be taken into account", is loaded. It means that even if you vote for a wage decrease, the company may come back and say they are awarding bonuses to their officers for all the wage losses (bonuses) they have suffered over the past few years. IMO, bend over if you vote Yes.
 
josh 11 racing = mgmt duh, is there any dues paying teamsters that believe whats coming out of ft smith??? i hope not!!

VOTE NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WAKE UP AND BE A MAN
 
we're in a very interesting environment right now... not only do we have the "I'm a UNION TEAMSTER FOR LIFE" guys... we also have the "MGMT SUCKS NO MATTER WHAT" guys... and now we have the "VOTE NO IF YOU"RE A TEAMSTER!" guys... which is odd, because usually teamsters agree with teamster mgmt on things, but by and large, they don't seem to (or at least the most vocal ones don't seem to).

I'm not a teamster so my vote doesn't count... but I still think the vote will pass. For every teamster on here saying "VOTE NO!" there are probably 5 or 10 behind the scenes, die-hard teamsters that trust the IBT w/o question... they'll vote the way the teamster mgmt tells them to. And that's what teamster mgmt and ABF are banking on.

To address the original poster's concerns... no, no raises are being given... yes, IRS required the statements to be made (look for reasoning on ABF RoundTable) and yes, its' good to work for a publicly traded company, as if any raise IS awarded, you will know. What can they hide? Maybe some things but not raises for executive officers.
 
[quote author=joshracing11 link=topic=79430.msg823788#msg823788 date=1271948312]
Hey, Hoffa, thanks for the promotion! I never saw it coming.
geez.
[/quote]


How did Hoffa get in this ABF concession agreement? Now I know that you don't know what you are talking about. What color is the sky in your world? Or are you on here to try to get us to vote yes too? Go ahead, say I'm paronoid but you just watch this be turned down OVERWHELMINGLY! Even though we are in the middle of two adversaries trying to convince us that this is in our best interest. Poor us...we actually can't think for ourselves.
 
[quote author=ScifiFri link=topic=79430.msg823786#msg823786 date=1271947835]
we're in a very interesting environment right now... not only do we have the "I'm a UNION TEAMSTER FOR LIFE" guys... we also have the "MGMT SUCKS NO MATTER WHAT" guys... and now we have the "VOTE NO IF YOU"RE A TEAMSTER!" guys... which is odd, because usually teamsters agree with teamster mgmt on things, but by and large, they don't seem to (or at least the most vocal ones don't seem to).

I'm not a teamster so my vote doesn't count... but I still think the vote will pass. For every teamster on here saying "VOTE NO!" there are probably 5 or 10 behind the scenes, die-hard teamsters that trust the IBT w/o question... they'll vote the way the teamster mgmt tells them to. And that's what teamster mgmt and ABF are banking on.

To address the original poster's concerns... no, no raises are being given... yes, IRS required the statements to be made (look for reasoning on ABF RoundTable) and yes, its' good to work for a publicly traded company, as if any raise IS awarded, you will know. What can they hide? Maybe some things but not raises for executive officers.
[/quote]


If that's what they were banking on,they will lose! Now I'm seeing people that were on the line and thinking of voting for it are saying no because of all the negatives in the agreement. Too bad ABF and IBT, you got too greedy and just asked for too much. Watch the vote... my friend!
 
Working Man,

"hoffa" was the handle of the poster who said I was management. That's who I was referring to. Not to the IBT leader, unless they are one and the same, which seems unlikely, but yes, I will agree with you, you are paranoid. I'm not here to convince anyone to vote yes or no on anything. I have spoken a couple of times when people posted things that were untrue and I felt that they knew were untrue. I think that the things that will have to be decided are extremely important, and worthy of everyone involved dealing as truthfully as possible, and not throwing out a bunch of rhetoric. Everyone that gets a ballot will have to decide what's best for them, their family, and for the Teamsters and ABF. I can't tell anyone how to do that. I just think that everyone should get to do it based on fact, and not a load of BS.
 
So, let me get this straight josh. You know everything and everyone else just don't have a clue. I'm glad that you're setting everyone straight.What would we do without you. I just must be paranoid, there just can't be any corruption in any institution in America.Are you calling the news station and setting them straight too? I hope that you are since you know everything. I knew everything when I was 19 but I must of forgot a hell of alot.
 
Ok, I think Jeff needs to work on the site some more, because there seems to be a disconnect between what I'm saying and what you are reading. I never claimed to have it all figured out, nor did I indicate that no one else had a clue, although there are some people who seem to be trying hard to make that case on their own. What I am saying is this: I have no use for propaganda or baseless claims, from any one or "side." For example, on a different topic on this forum, someone posted:

"That is why we need to vote this thing down. Make them go back to the table and come up with something better. VOTE NO!"

Now, this could be a reasonable point of view, except for one thing. It was posted at 10:30AM on the 19th, half a day BEFORE it was announced what was being proposed! The individual posting this comment was certain that the proposal was no good, they just had no idea at the time what the proposal was. This is the kind of thing that serves absolutely no purpose.

Now as for who I am, or what I have "figured out," I will tell you the following. I checked into the matter after a previous post, and unfortunately, I have NOT been promoted, so I am not management. I am also not in charge of convincing anyone to vote for or against anything. I AM an employee that has not seen a raise of any kind, for merit or cost of living, in over 2 years, and if the proposal passes, won't see any for another 3 years. While I would love to tell you that I make so much money in my imaginary management job that this doesn't really affect me, the truth of the matter is I make less than most of you on this board. According to Leftyblack's figures on the "what could you do w/30K" topic, even if the proposal proposal passes, I'll still make less than many of you. Add to that the fact that my healthcare benefits have been reduced, my costs have gone up, and I no longer have any 401K match, and I think it's fair to say that I'm not looking forward to taking any more cuts. The fact of the matter is, though, that it's not all about me, or you, or anyone else. We all have to do what we have to do to feed our wives and kids. Is this proposal what I would have written? Probably not. But I think that everyone should decide what they have to do based on facts, not on garbage.... from anyone.



.
 
[quote author=joshracing11 link=topic=79430.msg823894#msg823894 date=1271977898]
Ok, I think Jeff needs to work on the site some more, because there seems to be a disconnect between what I'm saying and what you are reading. I never claimed to have it all figured out, nor did I indicate that no one else had a clue, although there are some people who seem to be trying hard to make that case on their own. What I am saying is this: I have no use for propaganda or baseless claims, from any one or "side." For example, on a different topic on this forum, someone posted:

"That is why we need to vote this thing down. Make them go back to the table and come up with something better. VOTE NO!"

Now, this could be a reasonable point of view, except for one thing. It was posted at 10:30AM on the 19th, half a day BEFORE it was announced what was being proposed! The individual posting this comment was certain that the proposal was no good, they just had no idea at the time what the proposal was. This is the kind of thing that serves absolutely no purpose.

Now as for who I am, or what I have "figured out," I will tell you the following. I checked into the matter after a previous post, and unfortunately, I have NOT been promoted, so I am not management. I am also not in charge of convincing anyone to vote for or against anything. I AM an employee that has not seen a raise of any kind, for merit or cost of living, in over 2 years, and if the proposal passes, won't see any for another 3 years. While I would love to tell you that I make so much money in my imaginary management job that this doesn't really affect me, the truth of the matter is I make less than most of you on this board. According to Leftyblack's figures on the "what could you do w/30K" topic, even if the proposal proposal passes, I'll still make less than many of you. Add to that the fact that my healthcare benefits have been reduced, my costs have gone up, and I no longer have any 401K match, and I think it's fair to say that I'm not looking forward to taking any more cuts. The fact of the matter is, though, that it's not all about me, or you, or anyone else. We all have to do what we have to do to feed our wives and kids. Is this proposal what I would have written? Probably not. But I think that everyone should decide what they have to do based on facts, not on garbage.... from anyone.



.
[/quote]I agree with your right Mr. Josh to disagree with me. however I stand by what I have posted and have the paper work & facts to collabrate what i have written. I do not believe in anything other than the facts. If you want to discuss the propaganda that is being put out by ABF with full support of the IBT leadership that is the stink you smell of garbage. As far as knowing what the terms were the word was out thru texting & such in less than 1/2 hour after that meeting was finished. There were many people in that meeting & many who overwhelmingly disagreed with what was proposed. As for me from now on you can call me joe friday"just the facts'
 
That's right Josh,I agree with lefty. You are so quick to point out the indescrepencies on these posts but when it comes to what ABF and the IBT post, you automatically take that as a fact.Well I have news for you,Just because it's in print,that don't make it a fact. I know for a fact that Tyson didn't hear from an overwhelmingly number of ABF teamsters to continue the talks.Can you prove that he did? Oh, I forgot,it was in print. So,it must be fact,right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
AdBlock Detected

Ads Suck but we have a server bill to pay every month. I am no Zuckerbuerg or Musk here just a Truck Driver like you. Can you help us out here and disable your Ad Blocker? We gotta pay the bills here. I have a 100% Ad Free option for you located here cool

I've Disabled AdBlock