What's new

Yellow | Yellow Bankruptcy & The Devastation of Corporate Greed

Razorblade said:
Yup, I accepted the reality of deregulation. As the industry changed with access to the markets and competitive pricing, I relocated 2 times, gladly accepted a couple of reductions in pay and lost a weeks vacation. Preston closed and I went to Yellow where I took an additional 15% reduction to start at 70% of the rate with no earned vacation time. I appreciated Yellow's giving me an opportunity at 50 years old.
I did not send out resumes stating 25 years experience including Ohio and Indiana triples licenses, hazmat and tanker endorsements and 2 million accident free miles. No resume stating that as a one seniority board Teamster, I had worked every job available including linehaul, P&D, dock and yard. I did not demand top pay and PTO because I knew that for the past 25 years, I had been grossly overpaid. How did I know that? I knew it because my skills would not command that level of compensation in the free market. Not a single displaced Yellow Teamster sat in front of a potential employer and said, "this is what you will pay me".
You would think that reasonable people seeing the decimation of unionized LTL would stop clinging to the 50 year old model of defined benefit pensions, no deductible, no premium healthcare and outdated work rules and classifications. Only unionized trucking believes that warehouse labor is worth the same rate of pay as a skilled CDL driver with multiple endorsements.
Click to expand...
Gosh Blade, I didn't exactly notice you reporting to us that you "ran away" due to a guilty conscience. Sounds to me like you put in your 30 years, activated your pension, and are now livng happily retired, but "belly-aching" about so-called extortion of the company. Wow!! If you feel that strongly about it, refuse your pension check every month, even if it means living in a tent on the riverbank. Fair enough?
 
Real Teamster said:
Gosh Blade, I didn't exactly notice you reporting to us that you "ran away" due to a guilty conscience. Sounds to me like you put in your 30 years, activated your pension, and are now livng happily retired, but "belly-aching" about so-called extortion of the company. Wow!! If you feel that strongly about it, refuse your pension check every month, even if it means living in a tent on the riverbank. Fair enough?
Click to expand...
It has already been suggested RT.....just like I have asked him if he thinks the 3 quarters of a million he has collected on his pension gave him a huge head start on his way to being wealthy and if his pension was the reason he was able to retire at 55 ...no real answer there....
 
ABF381 said:
I got another baseball analogy (tis the season)...Ralph Kiner led the league in home runs one year, he wanted a raise....his GM said "Nope, we would have still finished last without you." Always loved that line, but your point is correct....
Click to expand...
Kiner did go to GM Branch Rickey and asked for a raise, but the response was "Kid, we can come in last place without you"..as per Ralph Kiner.
 
ABF381 said:
It has already been suggested RT.....just like I have asked him if he thinks the 3 quarters of a million he has collected on his pension gave him a huge head start on his way to being wealthy and if his pension was the reason he was able to retire at 55 ...no real answer there....
Click to expand...
Actually, it's $826,000.00 to date. An amount I have always said is outrageous. Whoever thought that million dollar pensions for everyone would be sustainable. I have also written many times that Butch-Lewis is welfare for Teamsters, no different than corporate welfare that all of you hate. I wrote that I was overpaid because of the system of socialist regulation. Overpaid because my skillset was not worth what I should have been paid in an American free market system. There can be no debate that deregulation of the industry has shown that I was correct. Carriers that could not compete failed. Carriers tied to outdated defined benefit pensions, no premium, no deductible healthcare, work rules and classifications failed. Unions that refused to adapt, unions that demanded more than already stressed carriers could pay forced companies out of business. Carriers with more flexibility and lower costs prospered and thrived. Their growth was possible because those companies were able to hire quality employees at market based compensation. Market based meaning tens of thousands of employees agreed to accept the compensation packages offered by those employers.
I accepted the wage reductions proposed by Preston Trucking in 1994. I watched as Preston slowly and steadily declined from having the best operating ratio in the country into bankruptcy. I accepted the pay and benefits until the day Preston closed and the following day, I was back in an orange truck pulling doubles for Yellow. I did not tell the interviewer that I would not work at 70%. I did not say I am worth the top rate because I have 2 million safe miles and am triples qualified. 70% was the rate because the IBT had negotiated a contract saying 70% is what the job was worth.
I take every dime of my pension because it is a third party annuity. My employers paid the premiums and I am entitled to collect as long as there is money to pay. If I am wealthy, it is not because of the pension but because I never depended on a pension to fund my retirement. I exercised personal responsibility and funded a retirement independent of the Teamster negotiated pension.
 
Last edited:
Real Teamster said:
Gosh Blade, I didn't exactly notice you reporting to us that you "ran away" due to a guilty conscience. Sounds to me like you put in your 30 years, activated your pension, and are now livng happily retired, but "belly-aching" about so-called extortion of the company. Wow!! If you feel that strongly about it, refuse your pension check every month, even if it means living in a tent on the riverbank. Fair enough?
Click to expand...
I am complaining frequently and loudly about a union that continued to tell its members that the corporations could afford wages, benefits, work rules and classifications based on the regulated industry of 1980. The union had an obligation to educate its members about the evolving economics of deregulated trucking. The union stood by and watched as the number of Teamsters covered by the original National Master Freight Agreement plummeted from 450,000 to less than 25,000 under contract at ABF and T Force.
I retired at 55 because the rules were about to change. The 30 and out rule was being removed as an option. Early retirement meant taking significant reductions in benefits. It was obvious that the funds were in financial trouble. So, yeah, I took the money and ran.
My pension check does not come from the Teamsters. The pension funds are third party providers of annuities. My employers paid the premiums, and I am entitled to the benefits as long as there is money to pay them. The taxpayers owe me nothing and the funds should be allowed to go bankrupt.
 
Razorblade said:
Actually, it's $826,000.00 to date. An amount I have always said is outrageous. Whoever thought that million dollar pensions for everyone would be sustainable. I have also written many times that Butch-Lewis is welfare for Teamsters, no different than corporate welfare that all of you hate. I wrote that I was overpaid because of the system of socialist regulation. Overpaid because my skillset was not worth what I should have been paid in an American free market system. There can be no debate that deregulation of the industry has shown that I was correct. Carriers that could not compete failed. Carriers tied to outdated defined benefit pensions, no premium, no deductible healthcare, work rules and classifications failed. Unions that refused to adapt, unions that demanded more than already stressed carriers could pay forced companies out of business. Carriers with more flexibility and lower costs prospered and thrived. Their growth was possible because those companies were able to hire quality employees at market based compensation. Market based meaning tens of thousands of employees agreed to accept the compensation packages offered by those employers.
I accepted the wage reductions proposed by Preston Trucking in 1994. I watched as Preston slowly and steadily declined from having the best operating ratio in the country into bankruptcy. I accepted the pay and benefits until the day Preston closed and the following day, I was back in an orange truck pulling doubles for Yellow. I did not tell the interviewer that I would not work at 70%. I did not say I am worth the top rate because I have 2 million safe miles and am triples qualified. 70% was the rate because the IBT had negotiated a contract saying 70% is what the job was worth.
I take every dime of my pension because it is a third party annuity. My employers paid the premiums and I am entitled to collect as long as there is money to pay. If I am wealthy, it is not because of the pension but because I never depended on a pension to fund my retirement. I exercised personal responsibility and funded a retirement independent of the Teamster negotiated pension.
Click to expand...
Still haven't answered my question with that long winded answer.....would you have retired at 55 without that union negotiated annuity contribution?
 
ABF381 said:
Still haven't answered my question with that long winded answer.....would you have retired at 55 without that union negotiated annuity contribution?
Click to expand...
Sounds like he wouldn't have retired at 55 if the 30 and out rule was not about to change, union pension or not.

If you mean, would he have been able to without that pension, what relevance is that? I retired before age 55, no pension, inheritance, trust fund, settlement or lottery winnings. So to argue it would have not been possible without that union pension is moot.
 
EX396 said:
Sounds like he wouldn't have retired at 55 if the 30 and out rule was not about to change, union pension or not.

If you mean, would he have been able to without that pension, what relevance is that? I retired before age 55, no pension, inheritance, trust fund, settlement or lottery winnings. So to argue it would have not been possible without that union pension is moot.
Click to expand...
The relevance is if you reaped a big benefit from it, and still complain about it, that would make you a hypocrite....and on top of that to tell others that they shouldn't keep working under the same rules is ridiculous... Just another example of I got mine gfy...
 
ABF381 said:
Still haven't answered my question with that long winded answer.....would you have retired at 55 without that union negotiated annuity contribution?
Click to expand...
I thought I did answer.
Yes, I retired to maximize my pension. Retirees had already lost the retiree health insurance benefit. I retired at 55 to avoid the loss of the 30 and out benefit. The rules were certain to change, and did, to require benefit cuts for early retirement. I was certain that funds were unsustainable, and they were. I expected future benefit cuts and there were. I elected to retire early and collect for as long as possible before the funds went bankrupt, and they would have if not for the taxpayer bailout. I took Social Security at age 62 for the same reason.
I have always lived below my means, saved and invested. By age 55, I had no debt. Although much of my money was in retirement accounts, I still had enough liquid assets to survive until age 60 when I could access IRA money. I never depended on money that was not in an account with my name on it. No, I never needed the pension to pay my bills or maintain my lifestyle.
To your point, having $3,500.00 a month in pension benefits allowed me to coast until age 62, add Social Security to my income and not touch retirement monies. Now at 74, I still have not touched retirement savings, except the minimum distributions required by law.
 
ABF381 said:
The relevance is if you reaped a big benefit from it, and still complain about it, that would make you a hypocrite..
Click to expand...
I hear you. Not sure where I stand. I complain about our income tax system all the time, yet I benefit here more than I would in Finland.

ABF381 said:
..and on top of that to tell others that they shouldn't keep working under the same rules is ridiculous... Just another example of I got mine gfy...
Click to expand...
This part I agree with.
 
Razorblade said:
Actually, it's $826,000.00 to date. An amount I have always said is outrageous. Whoever thought that million dollar pensions for everyone would be sustainable. I have also written many times that Butch-Lewis is welfare for Teamsters, no different than corporate welfare that all of you hate. I wrote that I was overpaid because of the system of socialist regulation. Overpaid because my skillset was not worth what I should have been paid in an American free market system. There can be no debate that deregulation of the industry has shown that I was correct. Carriers that could not compete failed. Carriers tied to outdated defined benefit pensions, no premium, no deductible healthcare, work rules and classifications failed. Unions that refused to adapt, unions that demanded more than already stressed carriers could pay forced companies out of business. Carriers with more flexibility and lower costs prospered and thrived. Their growth was possible because those companies were able to hire quality employees at market based compensation. Market based meaning tens of thousands of employees agreed to accept the compensation packages offered by those employers.
I accepted the wage reductions proposed by Preston Trucking in 1994. I watched as Preston slowly and steadily declined from having the best operating ratio in the country into bankruptcy. I accepted the pay and benefits until the day Preston closed and the following day, I was back in an orange truck pulling doubles for Yellow. I did not tell the interviewer that I would not work at 70%. I did not say I am worth the top rate because I have 2 million safe miles and am triples qualified. 70% was the rate because the IBT had negotiated a contract saying 70% is what the job was worth.
I take every dime of my pension because it is a third party annuity. My employers paid the premiums and I am entitled to collect as long as there is money to pay. If I am wealthy, it is not because of the pension but because I never depended on a pension to fund my retirement. I exercised personal responsibility and funded a retirement independent of the Teamster negotiated pension.
Click to expand...
I think you're forgetting one important point Blade. That Teamster contract pretty much set the bar for the industry (and perhaps ancillary industries too) for decades.
 
Razorblade said:
I thought I did answer.
Yes, I retired to maximize my pension. Retirees had already lost the retiree health insurance benefit. I retired at 55 to avoid the loss of the 30 and out benefit. The rules were certain to change, and did, to require benefit cuts for early retirement. I was certain that funds were unsustainable, and they were. I expected future benefit cuts and there were. I elected to retire early and collect for as long as possible before the funds went bankrupt, and they would have if not for the taxpayer bailout. I took Social Security at age 62 for the same reason.
I have always lived below my means, saved and invested. By age 55, I had no debt. Although much of my money was in retirement accounts, I still had enough liquid assets to survive until age 60 when I could access IRA money. I never depended on money that was not in an account with my name on it. No, I never needed the pension to pay my bills or maintain my lifestyle.
To your point, having $3,500.00 a month in pension benefits allowed me to coast until age 62, add Social Security to my income and not touch retirement monies. Now at 74, I still have not touched retirement savings, except the minimum distributions required by law.
Click to expand...
I know you didn't ask, but your argument may reach more ears if it didn't sound like boasting.
 
ABF381 said:
The relevance is if you reaped a big benefit from it, and still complain about it, that would make you a hypocrite....and on top of that to tell others that they shouldn't keep working under the same rules is ridiculous... Just another example of I got mine gfy...
Click to expand...
You fail to accept that working under the same rules was not and is not an option. The 450,000 NMFA jobs are gone and with them those outdated work rules. Are you the hypocrite? Just one of the fewer than 5% of the 450,000 MNFA jobs left who can say "I still got mine".
 
EX396 said:
I know you didn't ask, but your argument may reach more ears if it didn't sound like boasting.
Click to expand...
I answered truthfully. It isn't boasting if its fact.
It's also not anything that anyone else could not do. All that is required to have a comfortable retirement is financial discipline during your working years.
If you are asking if I have sympathy for those who can't save and invest a minimum of 10% of their income, whatever that income is, the answer is no. 10% of a yearly income is 5.2 weeks pay and at 10% out of each paycheck, it's not even missed.
 
Razorblade said:
I thought I did answer.
Yes, I retired to maximize my pension. Retirees had already lost the retiree health insurance benefit. I retired at 55 to avoid the loss of the 30 and out benefit. The rules were certain to change, and did, to require benefit cuts for early retirement. I was certain that funds were unsustainable, and they were. I expected future benefit cuts and there were. I elected to retire early and collect for as long as possible before the funds went bankrupt, and they would have if not for the taxpayer bailout. I took Social Security at age 62 for the same reason.
I have always lived below my means, saved and invested. By age 55, I had no debt. Although much of my money was in retirement accounts, I still had enough liquid assets to survive until age 60 when I could access IRA money. I never depended on money that was not in an account with my name on it. No, I never needed the pension to pay my bills or maintain my lifestyle.
To your point, having $3,500.00 a month in pension benefits allowed me to coast until age 62, add Social Security to my income and not touch retirement monies. Now at 74, I still have not touched retirement savings, except the minimum distributions required by law.
Click to expand...
Can you add me as a beneficiary?
 
Razorblade said:
You fail to accept that working under the same rules was not and is not an option. The 450,000 NMFA jobs are gone and with them those outdated work rules. Are you the hypocrite? Just one of the fewer than 5% of the 450,000 MNFA jobs left who can say "I still got mine".
Click to expand...
Not a hypocrite at all.....I got hired under these rules and I will keep working under them till I retire, if my employer tanks before then I will get a union job in a different industry....
 
ABF381 said:
The relevance is if you reaped a big benefit from it, and still complain about it, that would make you a hypocrite....and on top of that to tell others that they shouldn't keep working under the same rules is ridiculous... Just another example of I got mine gfy...
Click to expand...
EX396 said:
It most certainly can be both.

Boasting
Click to expand...
How dare you mere mortals question the “Omniscient One”. You two keep it up and you may well get the wrath of Blade with unspeakable plagues, pain and suffering. Repent while you still can!!! :bowdown::bowdown::bowdown:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top