What's new

Yellow | Woah not so fast investors, docket #1833

ABF381

ABF381

TB Veteran
Super Moderator
Credits
61
Docket #1833 says pretty much exactly what I said about how the law reads regarding pension withdrawal liability in the Butch Lewis Act...the Central States Pension Fund in a filing on the 19th they believe that Yellow is responsible for billions in withdrawal penalties....this is getting interesting...
:couch:

Epiq 11

Epiq11.com builds on a library of cases spanning two decades - the largest repository of such data in the industry outside of the federal court system.
dm.epiq11.com dm.epiq11.com
 
Last edited:
ABF381 said:
Docket #1833 says pretty much exactly what I said about how the law reads regarding pension withdrawal liability in the Butch Lewis Act...the Central States Pension Fund in a filing on the 19th they believe that Yellow is responsible for billions in withdrawal penalties....this is getting interesting...
:couch:

Epiq 11

Epiq11.com builds on a library of cases spanning two decades - the largest repository of such data in the industry outside of the federal court system.
dm.epiq11.com dm.epiq11.com
Click to expand...
My understanding is that in exchange for paying CSPF, all active employees of record at the time of closing, will receive a 2001, - 2009, Yellow tractor. Whether you get a tandem or single axle will go by company seniority, first choice.
 
ABF381 said:
Docket #1833 says pretty much exactly what I said about how the law reads regarding pension withdrawal liability in the Butch Lewis Act...the Central States Pension Fund in a filing on the 19th they believe that Yellow is responsible for billions in withdrawal penalties....this is getting interesting...
:couch:

Epiq 11

Epiq11.com builds on a library of cases spanning two decades - the largest repository of such data in the industry outside of the federal court system.
dm.epiq11.com dm.epiq11.com
Click to expand...
Sounds like corporate management might of got ahead of its self. They would like it to go away quickly , but lets slow down and have a look at some of this stuff.
 
steercrazee said:
Sounds like corporate management might of got ahead of its self. They would like it to go away quickly , but lets slow down and have a look at some of this stuff.
Click to expand...
Here's the thing.......Butch Lewis was passed and explicitly says it is not to make it easier for companies to buy their way out of funds, that withdrawal liabilities are to be figured without the government money figured in....what Yellow and the investors on investment websites want is for the government to allow them to not pay the funds and stick that money (which is essentially taxpayer money) in their pockets....I don't know what should happen with the money, whether the fund should return it to the government, or perhaps to give a small boost to Yellow employee pensions...but what shouldn't happen is to have it reward Yellow executives (who got stocks for bonuses) for mismanaging the company or investors who bought stock in a failing company and obviously didn't do their homework on Yellows history (think reverse split which wiped out the original shareholders)
 
ABF381 said:
Here's the thing.......Butch Lewis was passed and explicitly says it is not to make it easier for companies to buy their way out of funds, that withdrawal liabilities are to be figured without the government money figured in....what Yellow and the investors on investment websites want is for the government to allow them to not pay the funds and stick that money (which is essentially taxpayer money) in their pockets....I don't know what should happen with the money, whether the fund should return it to the government, or perhaps to give a small boost to Yellow employee pensions...but what shouldn't happen is to have it reward Yellow executives (who got stocks for bonuses) for mismanaging the company or investors who bought stock in a failing company and obviously didn't do their homework on Yellows history (think reverse split which wiped out the original shareholders)
Click to expand...
Wow, so all the owners/investors (shareholders) who actually invested real money to purchase shares of Yellow should get screwed? I really can't believe you're saying that. If they didn't do their homework by investing in a "failing company" shouldn't employees who didn't do their home by working at a "failing company" be treated the same way? And by the way, stock splits do absolutely nothing to change a persons total investment in a company. Stock splits are like exchanging 5 one dollar bills for one five dollar bill, you still have the same value.
 
Triplex said:
Wow, so all the owners/investors (shareholders) who actually invested real money to purchase shares of Yellow should get screwed? I really can't believe you're saying that. If they didn't do their homework by investing in a "failing company" shouldn't employees who didn't do their home by working at a "failing company" be treated the same way? And by the way, stock splits do absolutely nothing to change a persons total investment in a company. Stock splits are like exchanging 5 one dollar bills for one five dollar bill, you still have the same value.
Click to expand...
The owners/shareholders are basing their gains on government bailout money.... they aren't getting "screwed" if the judge follows the law...
 
This is what I was speaking of, sorry for the confusion...Union stakeholders got "screwed" and no one cared...
finance.yahoo.com

Yellow’s demise: 2 decades in the making

Less-than-truckload carrier Yellow Corp. closed the gates Sunday and ceased all operations. The post Yellow’s demise: 2 decades in the making appeared first on FreightWaves.
finance.yahoo.com finance.yahoo.com

After months of credit agreement amendments and extensions from its lender group, YRC was finally able to craft a $470 million debt-for-equity deal in the closing hours of 2009. The deal deferred interest and fee payments to lenders through 2010 and provided the company with access to $160 million in liquidity under its revolving credit facility. The transaction wiped out existing shareholders, including union stakeholders, leaving former bondholders owning 94% of the company’s outstanding shares.
 
ABF381 said:
The owners/shareholders are basing their gains on government bailout money.... they aren't getting "screwed" if the judge follows the law...
Click to expand...
Stop deflecting. Owners aren't getting bailed out by the government, the pension funds are. And you haven't responded to my main premise - if shareholders should have known better, what about worker who stayed and should have known better? Not much hypocrisy here is there? :duh:
 
Triplex said:
Wow, so all the owners/investors (shareholders) who actually invested real money to purchase shares of Yellow should get screwed? I really can't believe you're saying that. If they didn't do their homework by investing in a "failing company" shouldn't employees who didn't do their home by working at a "failing company" be treated the same way? And by the way, stock splits do absolutely nothing to change a persons total investment in a company. Stock splits are like exchanging 5 one dollar bills for one five dollar bill, you still have the same value.
Click to expand...


IMG_4651.md.jpeg
Employees were protected by a contract, which explicitly spells out what they will receive in return for working for the company. Investors, especially the ones trying to pump and dump at the end can go jump in a lake for all I care.
 
ABF381 said:
This is what I was speaking of, sorry for the confusion...Union stakeholders got "screwed" and no one cared...
finance.yahoo.com

Yellow’s demise: 2 decades in the making

Less-than-truckload carrier Yellow Corp. closed the gates Sunday and ceased all operations. The post Yellow’s demise: 2 decades in the making appeared first on FreightWaves.
finance.yahoo.com finance.yahoo.com

After months of credit agreement amendments and extensions from its lender group, YRC was finally able to craft a $470 million debt-for-equity deal in the closing hours of 2009. The deal deferred interest and fee payments to lenders through 2010 and provided the company with access to $160 million in liquidity under its revolving credit facility. The transaction wiped out existing shareholders, including union stakeholders, leaving former bondholders owning 94% of the company’s outstanding shares.
Click to expand...
Re-read this part... "The transaction wiped out existing shareholders, including union stakeholders." Seems like anyone who held shares took the hit equally.
 
Triplex said:
Stop deflecting. Owners aren't getting bailed out by the government, the pension funds are. And you haven't responded to my main premise - if shareholders should have known better, what about worker who stayed and should have known better? Not much hypocrisy here is there? :duh:
Click to expand...
Do you understand that they are saying since the funds got bailed out they don't deserve the withdrawal liability money? That directly contradicts the law...the workers who did stay got screwed out of the health insurance that their labor should have secured...they also lost out on the two months of pension payments.....so since the workers did get screwed there would be no hypocrisy on my part....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top