What's new

XPO | Xpo Union Thread.

Status
Not open for further replies.
joes bar and grill said:
It may be in your name but in reality you have very little control over it, a market correction can be very costly.
Click to expand...
That would be true, if my money was parked in situations, that are market correction sensitive. I do have control over where I park my nest egg. I welcome market corrections, as a buying opportunity, because the bulk of my nest egg is in cash and earning interest.
Those rich wall street guys aren't going to let the MKT stay down. You just have to get on the ride with them.
 
Dracula said:
Saia's 401k plan limits the number of funds available for purchase. Most are junk but the key ones, for me, are the FRGXX, FBGKX, and FXAIX. The FRGXX is where I park cash. The fund is stable, pays a little interest, and it doesn't trade in stocks. I've never lost a penny in that fund. The FBGKX and the FXAIX funds are reliable, plus there is a loophole, that allows you to withdraw funds, without setting off the round trip alarm. The market takes an 800 point plunge and I add cash to FBGKX and FXAIX plus open new positions, in a few more. The MKT rebounds, it always rebounds to some extent, and I start utilizing that loophole and withdrawing funds, with whatever profit, that Fidelity calculated I had earned on the bounce. However, the bulk of my account has always been , in cash, in the fund that pays interest. It may not be the educated way to manage my account but I know that MKT downturns will not kill me either. It takes a while to build up a nice nest egg but I've been doing it over a period of a couple of decades.
To answer your question,It's only a loss, if you sell, and I never sell. The biggest gain is how fast you can remove the cash plus profit to a non risk FRGXX account.
Click to expand...
Ok thanks
 
Fly-by-night said:
WOW in a way you explained trickle down.
You all seem to hate the rich so someone show a poor man that gave you a job. I all your eyes any business owner is evil they are rich and evil and ship all there money over seas.
Click to expand...
Where did the rich man get his money?

He had to start somewhere. And everyone isn't rich. Most small business owners have to work three times as hard than someone like Bradley Jacobs.
 
Dracula said:
That would be true, if my money was parked in situations, that are market correction sensitive. I do have control over where I park my nest egg. I welcome market corrections, as a buying opportunity, because the bulk of my nest egg is in cash and earning interest.
Those rich wall street guys aren't going to let the MKT stay down. You just have to get on the ride with them.
Click to expand...
Clark Howard. Dave Ramsey.
 
Dracula said:
Yep, I am an old geezer just a few months shy of retirement and heaven on earth. Thank you but I'm out of the market. I'm into buying the fixed rate market plus some mutual funds , that I trust. I will use the fixed rate to supplement my Social Security, which no politician will ever touch. They may talk about cutting it but they'll never do it.
Here's to us old geezers. Let the youngsters have it, we've put in our time. Have a nice day and good luck to you, sir.
Click to expand...

Glad to hear that and the same to you, my friend.
 
Songremainsthesame said:
So again you admit that new recruits will be guided toward CSPF.
Click to expand...

Under CURRENT circumstances, no one is being guided towards the CSPF. I can speak for Miami, but I am dead certain that no XPO terminal in negotiations now has the CSPF been even mentioned in negotiations. I am telling you that if Congress fails to intercede, the fund will die, in my opinion.
 
Hollywoodz said:
Under CURRENT circumstances, no one is being guided towards the CSPF. I can speak for Miami, but I am dead certain that no XPO terminal in negotiations now has the CSPF been even mentioned in negotiations. I am telling you that if Congress fails to intercede, the fund will die, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
So what does Miami want in a contract about retirement
 
Dracula said:
Those are the big if's. When was the last time Central States added to its membership by unionizing a new company vs when was the last time Jr let a big time company contributor buy its way out? If it was as easy as moving in a great fund manager wouldn't Nylan have been gone a long time ago? A dwindling pool of participants, aka, retirees dying off, except, with no new membership, see question one, then the actives become the retirees replacing the dead people. Where is the new money coming from?
Click to expand...

Admittedly big if's, and to my knowledge no new members have been added. However, if the Butch Lewis act passes and the fund were made whole again, possibly new members would be added as contracts were ratified. And if a respected fund manager were in place, it would restore faith in the fund and in the process.
 
Dracula said:
But they did pay off their loans, with the sale,as you put it, of :::shit:::ty products. Central States can't fall back on :::shit:::ty products because they don't make one.
Click to expand...

I muddled the post. What I was trying to say was if they continued making :shit:ty products, they would have been unable to repay the loan, because no one would have bought those products. Management decided to dump Oldsmobile and Pontiac because they weren't profitable lines. Management made all the decisions on quality control that finally began producing quality vehicles. Management makes all the difference, with or without a product.
 
Last edited:
Songremainsthesame said:
So you admit those new contracts are being ratified and would be used to bail out CSPF in the form of loan repayment? So how do you explain using money that is not being deposited into CSPF funds by members not covered by CSPF to fund CSPF??
Click to expand...

Please don't put words in my mouth. Under current conditions, nobody is being steered towards CSPF. Should Butch Lewis become law, it would or could be a different story. If the fund were made whole, why wouldn't new members be asked to or have the choice to participate. Pensions done right are the backbone of a secure retirement. When did pensions become a bad thing?
 
peachykeen said:
So what does Miami want in a contract about retirement
Click to expand...

Can't be specific here, however, I can say that CSPF is not a part of our discussion. If you are asking for my personal preference, or what I would like to see, I would say that any increase in employer contributions to the 401K would be acceptable in a first contract. To be accurate, that's my PERSONAL OPINION.
 
Hollywoodz said:
Under CURRENT circumstances, no one is being guided towards the CSPF. I can speak for Miami, but I am dead certain that no XPO terminal in negotiations now has the CSPF been even mentioned in negotiations. I am telling you that if Congress fails to intercede, the fund will die, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree, it will fail without intervention. I believe that all the funds should be united (like a union, see?) into one fund. That would go a long way to fix the problem. Then maybe there would have to be a congressional intervention as well, but the average taxpayer wouldn’t be on the hook nearly as much. The government can’t even fund itself the way it is now with the rampant spending problem congress has. But hell, since we’re borrowing trillions from the Chi-coms why not borrow more?

I don’t even know for sure if my suggestions would even work. If the carhaulers at Cooper agree to this proposal to discontinue pension payments, it further puts CSPF in jeopardy. If it passes I expect YRC and ABF to follow suit. Union leadership is allowing this to happen. As I’ve said before, I don’t think the Teamsters is the answer. A new union that specifically represents LTL companies needs to be established. One whose leaders are tough in negotiations but reasonable as well.
 
Songremainsthesame said:
I agree, it will fail without intervention. I believe that all the funds should be united (like a union, see?) into one fund. That would go a long way to fix the problem. Then maybe there would have to be a congressional intervention as well, but the average taxpayer wouldn’t be on the hook nearly as much. The government can’t even fund itself the way it is now with the rampant spending problem congress has. But hell, since we’re borrowing trillions from the Chi-coms why not borrow more?

I don’t even know for sure if my suggestions would even work. If the carhaulers at Cooper agree to this proposal to discontinue pension payments, it further puts CSPF in jeopardy. If it passes I expect YRC and ABF to follow suit. Union leadership is allowing this to happen. As I’ve said before, I don’t think the Teamsters is the answer. A new union that specifically represents LTL companies needs to be established. One whose leaders are tough in negotiations but reasonable as well.
Click to expand...

I am far too recent on the scene to pretend that I have concrete solutions that will definitely solve these problems either. It seems both the company and the union face issues that need to be resolved. What I do know is that this company's core philosophy worships profit above all else. When profit is the ultimate and overwhelming motive, someone suffers along the way. That's usually the employees. Unionization may not resolve the problems this company faces, but neither will it impede the actions of this company to resolve it's own problems. Along the way, the Teamsters, or any other union, will improve compensation and working conditions for the employees of the company. This is a fact. The freight will always be there and need to be moved. It will fluctuate, but it will always be there. Companies will make billions of dollars moving it. Why shouldn't the people who actually do the work be fairly compensated?
 
Songremainsthesame said:
I’d be curious to know what issues they want to be addressed besides retirement.
Click to expand...

Everything is on the table from wages, overtime, healthcare, subcontracting to trivial items addressing bulletin boards and break room amenities. This was my first experience with contract negotiations and I was frankly surprised at the accepted protocol for these discussions. Unfortunately, one of those protocols is to limit the release of any information concerning the negotiations. If you have any specific questions, I'll do my best to answer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top