Yellow | Welch Does Have A "Plan B" !

Freightmaster1

TB Legend
Credits
594
Welch is confident Teamsters will ratify new deal, keep YRC rolling - Kansas City Business Journal

According to a quote from the above story, Welch does have a "Plan B" if the new MOU extension/modification is NOT approved...

If the union doesn’t consent, which Welch doesn’t think is likely, the company then will meet with lenders and try and work on “the best possible course for the company.” Welch said YRC is “not even thinking about” bankruptcy.

Welch is telling the media one thing, but telling YRCW Teamster employees something else? Who's zoomin' who?!

:wtflol:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Welch is confident Teamsters will ratify new deal, keep YRC rolling - Kansas City Business Journal

According to a quote from the above story, Welch does have a "Plan B" if the new MOU extension/modification is NOT approved...

If the union doesn’t consent, which Welch doesn’t think is likely, the company then will meet with lenders and try and work on “the best possible course for the company.” Welch said YRC is “not even thinking about” bankruptcy.

Welch is telling the media one thing, but telling YRCW Teamster employees something else? Who's zoomin' who?!

:wtflol:

He does tend to fib a wee bit... But then again he is Corporate and trained that way..
 
In the article he says they have had the plan since 2011. Do the yes people start to get the idea they have been had yet?
 
Welch is confident Teamsters will ratify new deal, keep YRC rolling - Kansas City Business Journal

According to a quote from the above story, Welch does have a "Plan B" if the new MOU extension/modification is NOT approved...

If the union doesn’t consent, which Welch doesn’t think is likely, the company then will meet with lenders and try and work on “the best possible course for the company.” Welch said YRC is “not even thinking about” bankruptcy.

Welch is telling the media one thing, but telling YRCW Teamster employees something else? Who's zoomin' who?!

:wtflol:

I would call it "crawfishen". After his stupid remark about voting no,he's caught a lot of flak (deserving so)!:732:
 
In the article he says they have had the plan since 2011. Do the yes people start to get the idea they have been had yet?

That's not exactly what he said. He said "he’s been planning a response to the debt load since he took over as CEO in July 2011". That's pretty much a generic comment about what he was facing as CEO when he took over.
 
Triplex, Paul Simon wrote a song "The Boxer". There are lyrics "a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest". Lots of opinions here not much news. I'm sincerely glad you're reporting NOT editorializing.
 
That's not exactly what he said. He said "he’s been planning a response to the debt load since he took over as CEO in July 2011". That's pretty much a generic comment about what he was facing as CEO when he took over.

Not considering bankruptcy? ??
Will work with lenders for best solution! !!

Welch just blinked!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Triplex, Paul Simon wrote a song "The Boxer". There are lyrics "a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest". Lots of opinions here not much news. I'm sincerely glad you're reporting NOT editorializing.

Well Al, I was at the meeting this morning in Southbend. They didn't start working on the refinace until last April.Welch does have a plan B its not Bankrupts.Most of the talk was the dock an
P&D questions.I
 
That's not exactly what he said. He said "he’s been planning a response to the debt load since he took over as CEO in July 2011". That's pretty much a generic comment about what he was facing as CEO when he took over.

And we've been hearing about it since at least last spring. Remember the talk that they wanted a 2 year extention this summer? Why the extra 3 year wait for the 3rd week? Why the purchased transportation to kill jobs at the small terminals? Why the utility drivers and 180 mile distance to get rid of the turn wheels at the breakbulk terminals? Why the pay freeze for non cdl positions? Why is it for 5 years, why not 4,3,2? They don't want to go up against all of us at the same time. How anyone can vote yes is really beyond my comprehension. Screw ourselves and all the people behind us? I never understood this I got mine, f em mentality. And the best part is the majority of the pro company people are not even part of this.:452:
 
Will you two be getting a room later?

Triplex, Paul Simon wrote a song "The Boxer". There are lyrics "a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest". Lots of opinions here not much news. I'm sincerely glad you're reporting NOT editorializing.
 
my thought on plan b
1............. I guess yrcw is or did sell 3 million shares A. was going to use it..... if mou passes to pay bonus

PLAN B. to use the money from sale to help pay 67 million due in February........... thou that sale of 3 million isn't enough................ so we have roughly 160 million in cash on hand so they take some from there, so they have the 67 million for payment

bad thing ..................that puts us very close to defaulting on our loans........................ because YRCW has to have I think like 119 million in cash at all times ................... this will get us thru till September......................... when 385 million is due, mean while the banks will have made additional roughly 100 million more in interest.........under our current mou

ladies and gentleman I ask you why is September important in history as a teamster

CF went out of business right on the holiday weekend,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, labor day ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,so I apologize................ when I said a no vote would close the doors the next day didn't realize they still have this as a possible plan b didn't now about sale of 3 million stock have been of most of November
 
Welch is confident Teamsters will ratify new deal, keep YRC rolling - Kansas City Business Journal

According to a quote from the above story, Welch does have a "Plan B" if the new MOU extension/modification is NOT approved...

If the union doesn’t consent, which Welch doesn’t think is likely, the company then will meet with lenders and try and work on “the best possible course for the company.” Welch said YRC is “not even thinking about” bankruptcy.

Welch is telling the media one thing, but telling YRCW Teamster employees something else? Who's zoomin' who?!

:wtflol:

Look at all of the moving pieces - our MOU isn't the only one. They're talking to the shareholders now. If they can keep the share price up then when they issue new equity it might be enough to swing that first interest payment in the event that we vote this down and buy the time needed to enter into further negotiations with the IBT. Talking about bankruptcy doesn't keep the share price up.
 
And we've been hearing about it since at least last spring. Remember the talk that they wanted a 2 year extention this summer? Why the extra 3 year wait for the 3rd week? Why the purchased transportation to kill jobs at the small terminals? Why the utility drivers and 180 mile distance to get rid of the turn wheels at the breakbulk terminals? Why the pay freeze for non cdl positions? Why is it for 5 years, why not 4,3,2? They don't want to go up against all of us at the same time. How anyone can vote yes is really beyond my comprehension. Screw ourselves and all the people behind us? I never understood this I got mine, f em mentality. And the best part is the majority of the pro company people are not even part of this.:452:

The guy who votes "No" and possibly risks the job shutting down might possibly take away the option of everyone else to stay on the job if that "No" vote wins and causes a shutdown.

The guy who votes"Yes" and possibly saves the job doesn't prevent anyone else from choosing to stay or to leave for something better

How then can anyone say about the "Yes" voter that he has a "I got mine, f em mentality"?

By the way, since it seems that bankruptcy is not an option according to recent comments made by Welsh, rejecting this deal and negotiating for something better sounds like a good idea AS LONG AS NEGOTIATIONS ARE POSSIBLE. Like I said earlier, the "shut them down" attitude is what I was against all along.
 
The guy who votes "No" and possibly risks the job shutting down might possibly take away the option of everyone else to stay on the job if that "No" vote wins and causes a shutdown.

The guy who votes"Yes" and possibly saves the job doesn't prevent anyone else from choosing to stay or to leave for something better

How then can anyone say about the "Yes" voter that he has a "I got mine, f em mentality"?

By the way, since it seems that bankruptcy is not an option according to recent comments made by Welsh, rejecting this deal and negotiating for something better sounds like a good idea AS LONG AS NEGOTIATIONS ARE POSSIBLE. Like I said earlier, the "shut them down" attitude is what I was against all along.

But at what point do you say "enough is enough"..Only good thing looking at it your way is that sooner or later the minimum wage will catch up..
 
Top