Obama's Unionizing Ways
 

I'm trying to figure out what effects on the Owner Operator market, Obama's plan for making it easier for workers to Unionize.

I'm sure you've heard--but in case you don't already know--what the Dems are getting ready to do is change the way companies are unionized. They are going to make it so all Schneider drivers for instance, may simply get a card mailed to their house, which they fill-out in private and return to the union organizers. No more having to do in the workplace, under the eye of management.

In my opinion, that is going to change the game. I think we may be looking at a situation where JB, Schneider, Swift, Werner, and so on, are all out of business real soon.

Now, if that were to happen, it may be good times again for the Owner Operators. I'm thinking the clock may get turned back to the 1970's -- we may actually see OOs back in the big numbers.

How do you see this playing out?

Filling out a card does not make a workplace unionized. All those cards say is that the person filling it out is interested in what the union has to say. The union still has to get so many cards on file and then there has to be an election to unionize or not.

Regardless of what any given union may say there is never any guarantee that things will get better. They can in fact end up the same or worse.

In the current economy and the job market being what it is I really can not see too many people risking their jobs by forcing a company's hand.

I know what you're saying about the economy, but I also know the drivers at those big companies because I started-out as one of them.

Now, the fact that they are in one of those trucks to begin with, may not say much for their smarts, but they are working or they are trying to work--and that counts for something.

I can't say for sure about specific percentages, but I can say for sure that the vast majority of drivers at those big companies realized they were getting screwed, and were taking steps to get out -- I never saw but a handful of people who were happy with those big companies.

I think they will force them to Unionize because they aren't making it as it is. It's not like they'd be risking financial security. Right?

I mean, they're starved-out as it is.

The days of "forcing" are over, the companies will simply change their names and keep right on trucking.

For example, Con-way is what was Consolidated Freightways.

I doubt you will ever see the unions organize like they did years ago.

Unions currently represent between 10-8% of the workforce,,,depends on the profession. The AFL-CIO has lost support in the last couple of years also...

To organize a union into a company there must be 50% plus 1 representation request cards submitted to the NLRB..as far as I know this did not have to be canvassed soley at a workplace...I have seen info seminars set up at hotels, parties held at organizer's homes..and other....the EYE of management never has played a big part in organizing.

I do not believe the unions have ever been the cause of workplaces folding. The unions did get a 5 day workweek established, held wages higher than unemployment, and maintained a retirement and medical benefits schedule....will they put Swift, Schneider, and others out of business....come on...be real.

Obama may be a Dem...that does not make him union friendly...the fact unions are notoriuos for realizing better outcomes from the Dems does not assure Obama will assist....remember a guy named Clinton...got union support....got elected...and his first week he signed NAFTA into effect...allowing jobs to migrate at a higher speed and ease than ever before....but wait....he was a Dem!

Forced to be unionized due to "not making it"...get real...if you're not making it now...do you think paying $60 a month is going to change the bottom dollar at your Company?....Our economy, or lack thereof, gives your company the chance to be fruitful, not a union...a union simply asks for a contract and then assures it stays intact, stays healthy, as they also wishes their respective companies stay healthy....I just voted for and realized a 10% decrease in pay to assure our company will last...

I am also getting furloughed at the end of this month...but do have the assets to get another job. Good luck to all the drivers in making the most they can with what they have.

All companies are affected by this recession....UNIONS MEMBERS ARE BEING FURLOUGHED ! If LTL is slow for a union company...it's also slow for non-union.

Originally Posted by :
Now, the fact that they are in one of those trucks to begin with, may not say much for their smarts, but they are working or they are trying to work--and that counts for something.

And just how do you figure that? Last time I checked there were not a whole lot of employment opportunities for people who just got their CDL, and most of them reside with Swift, USXpress, etc. Also you have to figure that the vast majority of people who have just gotten their CDL or who are looking to get one know very little if anything about the industry, and even if they do a lot of research their knowledge is still going to be far less than those who have spent a few years going around the block.

Sure they learn after a few months where the real lube is used at many of these big companies, but they also know that until they get some experience they are pretty much stuck. Then after switching companies a few times they figure out it is not so much the size of the company that determines how much of a screwing you are going to get but the company and the people running it that determines if you need the standard or industrial strength stuff.

Originally Posted by oneway:
I'm trying to figure out what effects on the Owner Operator market, Obama's plan for making it easier for workers to Unionize.

I'm sure you've heard--but in case you don't already know--what the Dems are getting ready to do is change the way companies are unionized. They are going to make it so all Schneider drivers for instance, may simply get a card mailed to their house, which they fill-out in private and return to the union organizers. No more having to do in the workplace, under the eye of management.

In my opinion, that is going to change the game. I think we may be looking at a situation where JB, Schneider, Swift, Werner, and so on, are all out of business real soon.

Now, if that were to happen, it may be good times again for the Owner Operators. I'm thinking the clock may get turned back to the 1970's -- we may actually see OOs back in the big numbers.

How do you see this playing out?

These big carriers are not likely to go out of business any time soon. If anything you could see more consolidation. It isn't necessarily the big carriers who are the problem with freight. The owner operators are their own worst enemies. There are some who will take a load no matter what the pay. The same can be said of the major carriers. I don't want things to be like they were in the 1970's. The only thing good about that time were the rates were regulated. It was a hassle to trip lease. Not everyone could get their authority. There were good things about trucking back then. The cops didn't hassle you as much and they didn't necessarily look at this industry as a cash cow that can be tapped whenever there is a short fall with local taxes.

There have always been those who will take cheap freight. It does seem that there are more these days.

If my employees try to unionize I will fight it !!!!!!!!!!!! Oh, wait. I am the only employee. Well I do sometimes lose fights with myself :( :( :(

Originally Posted by Walking Eagle:
Oh, wait. I am the only employee. Well I do sometimes lose fights with myself :( :( :(

Don't worry! Either way, you gonna win it. Cause you are also an employer.

Originally Posted by Uturn2001:
Filling out a card does not make a workplace unionized. All those cards say is that the person filling it out is interested in what the union has to say. The union still has to get so many cards on file and then there has to be an election to unionize or not.

Not exactly. Its called a card check and signing a card is the same as a yes vote. The pending legislation would allow a card check. Basically if 50% plus one sign a card it becomes a union workplace. No vote necesarry and no intimidation from the employer. And the employer has no choice but to negotiate or close up forever. If they cannot reach an agreement then either side can demand arbitration to settle it.

Originally Posted by Uturn2001:
In the current economy and the job market being what it is I really can not see too many people risking their jobs by forcing a company's hand.

I think just the opposite would happen. Alot of people would see union representation as a way to get ahead. The EFCA makes it easier for people to get union representation and makes it tougher for a company to block the organizing efforts. A company like Werner, Swift, Schneider or JB Hunt etc. could easily be organized under the new law. Just get enough cards signed.



The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) is legislation in the United States which aims to "amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish an easier system to enable employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to provide for mandatory injunctions for unfair labor practices during organizing efforts, and for other purposes."[1] Under current U.S. labor law, the National Labor Relations Board will certify a union as the exclusive representative of bargaining unit employees by card check process or secret ballot election, which is held if more than 30% of employees in a bargaining unit sign statements asking for representation by a union. If enacted, EFCA would require the NLRB to certify a bargaining representative without directing an election if a majority of the bargaining unit employees signed cards, the card check process.[1]
Pursuant to the bill, a union can demand that an employer begin bargaining within ten days of certification of the union as the exclusive bargaining representative for an appropriate unit of employees via the card check.[1] In addition, if the union and employer cannot agree upon the terms of a first collective bargaining contract within ninety days, either party can request federal mediation, which could lead to binding arbitration if an agreement still cannot be reached after thirty days of mediation.[1] Where government arbitration determines terms of the agreement, employees would lose their current right to ratify the terms of the agreement.[1] Finally, the Act would provide for liquidated damages of three times back pay if employers were found to have unlawfully terminated pro-union employees.[2] The EFCA also would impose a $20,000 penalty upon employers for each employer violation of the proposed legislation if the NLRB or a court deems the violation willful or repetitive.[1][3]
On March 1, 2007, the House of Representatives passed the act by a vote of 241 to 185. The Senate on June 26, 2007 voted 51 to 48 on a motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to consider the bill. The bill failed to pass during the 110th United States Congress because of the 60 votes required to enforce cloture, which may be possible to obtain in the 111th United States Congress.[4]

If you want to see inefficiency at work then by all means organize your company. Unions have been responsible for many companies relocating to other regions of the country and in many cases have resulted in some moving their operations abroad. Unions take away personal responsibility from the individual to produce. It also makes the union organizers rich. Unions are a major reason this country doesn't have much of a steel industry any more. They have also been instrumental in killing the U.S. auto industry. Unions promote inefficiency and protect the inefficient and unproductive. Just visit any of the union steel plants that are still around. Japanese and German automakers who have U.S. plants and are not unionized are making a profit and selling cars whereas their U.S. counterparts are broke and laying off workers. That should tell you something. I hear about companies intimidating workers to not join unions, but I can tell you some real horror stories about unions intimidating workers and management in an effort to organize these companies. I hope this bill doesn't pass but with these weak minded so called representatives we have in congress it is likely to pass. If people want to organize a company they should not mind things being above board and open. They should not want to be part of anything that would force them into servitude to the union. Frankly, I think if people are not happy with their wages they should either find another company to work for or start their own company rather than attempting to shake down their employer. Contrary to what is being promoted by the unions, this bill actually takes away workers rights to decide for themselves whether to organize or not.

I will say that I never liked unions, as it is protection for slackers and people who do not like to work.

I agree that it promotes inefficiency and slacking on the job.

Lots of money wasted.

If you are in a union and you work to fast, watch out as your buddies will come down on you.

You may be let go because your screwing with the program.

Some won't see it, but you will become insensitive to those you serve. Some don't care.

Some people enjoy the power to do nothing and get paid for it.

I've said enough.

I have to say, I am a little surprised at the anti-union sentiments voiced in these initial replies--but I don't know why I would be surprised, I've heard the same feelings expressed for years, especially coming from the South, where authority is mistrusted--but we also have to remember that our personalities, as truckers, leans toward the independent side. I know that and accept it.

But these times we're living in now are hard-times and I don't think they just a passing thing--I think we are going to have to do things differently in the future.

In the past, people started-out at those big companies knowing they were going to be slaved, but they endured the time in order to reap the rewards of being able to graduate to being an OO, or getting a better Union job, or non-Union job if that was their desire. The difference now, is that these big companies are no longer a stepping stone--they are a job. They are a real, long-term, one and only J-O-B. There is no more upward movement in trucking. The OOs out there now are barely surviving and there are no new OOs coming on board. So something has to change.

Agreed?

Originally Posted by GMAN:
If you want to see inefficiency at work then by all means organize your company. Unions have been responsible for many companies relocating to other regions of the country and in many cases have resulted in some moving their operations abroad. Unions take away personal responsibility from the individual to produce. It also makes the union organizers rich. Unions are a major reason this country doesn't have much of a steel industry any more. They have also been instrumental in killing the U.S. auto industry. Unions promote inefficiency and protect the inefficient and unproductive. Just visit any of the union steel plants that are still around. Japanese and German automakers who have U.S. plants and are not unionized are making a profit and selling cars whereas their U.S. counterparts are broke and laying off workers. That should tell you something. I hear about companies intimidating workers to not join unions, but I can tell you some real horror stories about unions intimidating workers and management in an effort to organize these companies. I hope this bill doesn't pass but with these weak minded so called representatives we have in congress it is likely to pass. If people want to organize a company they should not mind things being above board and open. They should not want to be part of anything that would force them into servitude to the union. Frankly, I think if people are not happy with their wages they should either find another company to work for or start their own company rather than attempting to shake down their employer. Contrary to what is being promoted by the unions, this bill actually takes away workers rights to decide for themselves whether to organize or not.

G-man the union did not kill the US auto company's. Just to let you know only 10% of a new cars price is labor. I saw on CNN even if the workers worked for free the US Auto company's would still be in trouble. Just my 2cents.

I also like how all you guys think union workers are lazy bums. Come on a job-site and look at union labors in the ditch laying pipe they work harder in one day then most drivers work in a week.:thumbsup:

I will also like to point out. If these OTR company's treat their drivers so good they shouldn't have to worry about going Union cuz the drivers will not vote it in.

The septic company i worked for we try to go union and couldn't get enough votes cuz allot of the guys thought they had a good deal and didn't want to mess it up. So not all company's that try to go union go union. But I'm sure most OTR driver will vote union if they can cuz they know the deal they have ain't that great.

Originally Posted by Mackman:
G-man the union did not kill the US auto company's. Just to let you know only 10% of a new cars price is labor. I saw on CNN even if the workers worked for free the US Auto company's would still be in trouble. Just my 2cents.

I also like how all you guys think union workers are lazy bums. Come on a job-site and look at union labors in the ditch laying pipe they work harder in one day then most drivers work in a week.:thumbsup:

Unions were not the only problem that has plagued the auto industry, but they have been a major source of the problem, at least with the U.S. automakers. Government regulations have also played a part. However, it was the unions who would order strikes and shut their companies down costing their employers millions of dollars per day in lost revenue. Labor is usually the largest single expense for most companies. I would want to take a closer look at the numbers quoted by CNN. They are too easily manipulated. Benefits should also be counted in labor costs as well as retirement contributions. The percentage they mentioned was probably the retail price which is not what the manufacturer receives but the dealer which includes his mark up and may include items installed at the dealer which may not be included in their calculations. I also know that there have been more problems with the U.S. made autos than many of the former imports as far as quality control. That requires additional costs to the manufacturer in having to correct poor workmanship.

I know what unions did to the steel industry in the 1970's in Ohio. Youngstown used to have a strong steel industry presence. I have also seen first hand how little many union workers do their jobs. I was talking to one of my drivers the other day. We were discussing the big U.S. Steel plant in Gary. The last time I was there the plant wasn't doing all that much for a facility that large. In fact, it was all but shut down. I had one guy loading me and 5 watching. If I go into a non-union plant there is usually no one supervising and one guy who either loads or unloads my truck. I have been to many construction sites. One in particular stands out in my mind. I delivered a load to a power plant that was under construction. There was 1 guy operating the crane, two guys unloading the truck and at least 3 managers watching. It is no wonder it costs so much to build a nuclear power plant.

I have been to many steel plants over the years. I have received better service and been treated better at the non-union plants. I have been to very few plants where there was a strong union presence that they worked as they should to get the job done. Most try to do as little as possible. I understand some of you like to work in a union environment. I won't put you down for belonging to one. I prefer to be paid on performance. I know this industry could not survive with a strong union presence. We are having enough of a difficult time without having to pay workers for sitting around. I know what it would be like if otr drivers were paid by the hour. We would see much less productivity but much higher labor costs.

There is an attitude of entitlement with many union workers. Just look at some of those who have posted who want to be paid for going to the toilet, taking a shower, eating and sleeping. I have never heard any of these unions or their members discuss how much more they will produce if they get the extra pay and goodies they want when it comes to negotiations or contracts. I have known of some who have been penalized by their fellow union workers for actually being productive. By their very nature unions are anti capitalism and pro socialism. That goes against the free enterprise system we enjoy in this country.

Mackman:

There are plenty of union guys that work hard.

I also have friends that work very hard on road construction crews.

But,

I have been in two different unions. I have been told to slow down, not work so hard and where to hide out to avoid working.

I like to work, I can not work like that. It actually makes the day last longer.

I have also waited time and time again for a union guy to finish his coffee before he would even speak to me. Let alone try to help me get my load off the truck.

The majority of the time it is the I'm better then you attitude. Go scatch I'll get you when I'm good and ready.

From here:

Silver Pen Letter: EFCA ensures companies do right thing | Postcrescent.com | Appleton Post-Crescent

Originally Posted by :
I'm writing in response to Pete Bach's Jan. 23 article about the Employee Free Choice Act. Our economy is in crisis and the middle class is in trouble in large part because corporate greed has gone unchecked.
CEOs have secured outrageous salaries for themselves by denying working people a square deal. It should come as no surprise that the highly paid corporate lawyers Mr. Bach quoted are against the reforms laid out in the EFCA.
The current company-controlled process does not give working people a fair chance to decide for themselves whether or not to form a union. Although harassing and firing workers for union activity is technically illegal, the current fines are so small that many corporations consider it just another cost of doing business.
The EFCA is about restoring to working people the freedom to improve their lives through unions. Nationwide, employees who have the opportunity to bargain are 52 percent more likely to have health insurance and three times more likely to have pensions.
Here in Wisconsin, workers who negotiate a union contract earn an average of 34.4 percent more than nonunion workers.
For years, some responsible employers, such as AT&T and Kaiser Permanente, have taken a position of allowing employees to choose by majority decision whether to have a union. Those companies have found that majority sign-up is an effective way to allow workers the freedom to make their own decision — and it results in less hostility and polarization in the workplace.
Now is the time to restore that right to all America's workers. We need an economy that works for everyone, and we cannot count on corporations to do the right thing on their own. We need the Employee Free Choice Act.
Michael Bolton,
USW District 2 director,
Menasha

Originally Posted by GMAN:
Unions were not the only problem that has plagued the auto industry, but they have been a major source of the problem, at least with the U.S. automakers. Government regulations have also played a part. However, it was the unions who would order strikes and shut their companies down costing their employers millions of dollars per day in lost revenue. Labor is usually the largest single expense for most companies. I would want to take a closer look at the numbers quoted by CNN. They are too easily manipulated. Benefits should also be counted in labor costs as well as retirement contributions. The percentage they mentioned was probably the retail price which is not what the manufacturer receives but the dealer which includes his mark up and may include items installed at the dealer which may not be included in their calculations. I also know that there have been more problems with the U.S. made autos than many of the former imports as far as quality control. That requires additional costs to the manufacturer in having to correct poor workmanship.

I know what unions did to the steel industry in the 1970's in Ohio. Youngstown used to have a strong steel industry presence. I have also seen first hand how little many union workers do their jobs. I was talking to one of my drivers the other day. We were discussing the big U.S. Steel plant in Gary. The last time I was there the plant wasn't doing all that much for a facility that large. In fact, it was all but shut down. I had one guy loading me and 5 watching. If I go into a non-union plant there is usually no one supervising and one guy who either loads or unloads my truck. I have been to many construction sites. One in particular stands out in my mind. I delivered a load to a power plant that was under construction. There was 1 guy operating the crane, two guys unloading the truck and at least 3 managers watching. It is no wonder it costs so much to build a nuclear power plant.

I have been to many steel plants over the years. I have received better service and been treated better at the non-union plants. I have been to very few plants where there was a strong union presence that they worked as they should to get the job done. Most try to do as little as possible. I understand some of you like to work in a union environment. I won't put you down for belonging to one. I prefer to be paid on performance. I know this industry could not survive with a strong union presence. We are having enough of a difficult time without having to pay workers for sitting around. I know what it would be like if otr drivers were paid by the hour. We would see much less productivity but much higher labor costs.

There is an attitude of entitlement with many union workers. Just look at some of those who have posted who want to be paid for going to the toilet, taking a shower, eating and sleeping. I have never heard any of these unions or their members discuss how much more they will produce if they get the extra pay and goodies they want when it comes to negotiations or contracts. I have known of some who have been penalized by their fellow union workers for actually being productive. By their very nature unions are anti capitalism and pro socialism. That goes against the free enterprise system we enjoy in this country.

I've said it here before and I'll say it again, I'm a member of the Teamsters union and I bust my f'in as$ every day, if I didn't, I wouldn't be working there, union or not.

I appreciate the superior wages and benefits that result from working union.

These comments about all union workers f'ing off or being lazy just pis$ me off no end.

WTF, should we all just go and work for f'in minimum wage while the corporate bigwigs continue to line their pockets with the fruits of our labor?

And don't give me that f'in sh*t about performance based pay. Union workers are generally more skilled than non union workers, and can command higher pay due to higher productivity.

That "performance based pay" sh*t assumes that every employee is going to f*ck off on the job unless you dangle the carrot on the stick in front of them to make them work.

I feel sorry for any employer that thinks such tactics are necessary to get his or her employees to give a good days work, and I feel even sorrier for the employees that work for that type of boss.

End of rant.

:hellno::hellno::hellno::hellno:

I never said that all union workers are lazy. I did convey my experiences with some of them. My experience is more like that of Sidman. I have seen first hand how little many of them want to work. You may be a good worker, but not all union workers like to work. With performance pay you don't need anyone to represent you if you are a good worker. You produce, you make money. Performance pay is fair for both the worker and company.

LOOK AT UPS!!!!!!! LOOK AT ABF!!!!! LOOK AT NEW PENN!!!!!! LOOK AT HOLLAND!!!! and yes LOOK AT ROADWAY!!!!!-before Yellow.. All of these LTL lines were and are as profitable as the "nons"!!! Yes, "some" employees goof off because they know nothing will happen to them, this also happens at large TL carriers because they will not pay these guys what this job is worth and the TURNOVER rate is ridiculous! LOOK AT THE RESPONSIBILITIES we have as CDL holders. Is being the operator of an 80,000lb cannon not worth a decent days wages? If you think not then we are in a heep of trouble! I have never understood why truck drivers thought they were making "good" money when you look at their lifestyle, hometime, wages, etc... AMAZING!! But then again, MAYBE thats why they make what most drivers do. Hmmmm!

Originally Posted by GMAN:
I never said that all union workers are lazy. I did convey my experiences with some of them. My experience is more like that of Sidman. I have seen first hand how little many of them want to work. You may be a good worker, but not all union workers like to work. With performance pay you don't need anyone to represent you if you are a good worker. You produce, you make money. Performance pay is fair for both the worker and company.

Sure GMAN, whatever you say.:roll3: And all the fat, smelly, non union OTR dirtbags hanging out at the truck stops aren't lazy? Whether or not a person is in a union has nothing to do with their work ethic. You are every bit as belittling as CFM was only you are more subtle about it. But your true colors still come out. You heard about a bad union so there all bad, riiiigggghhhht. OK. Meanwhile corporate America sold or moved everything we ever had of any value to some third world nation where people work for peanuts and now our whole economy is based on credit and retail buying. One big ponzi scheme and when the credit runs out and the buying stops we have nothing to offer the rest of the world. Well now white collar has ****ed themselves with their greed cause the layoffs and hard times have hit all classes.

Originally Posted by Snowman7:
Sure GMAN, whatever you say.:roll3: And all the fat, smelly, non union OTR dirtbags hanging out at the truck stops aren't lazy? Whether or not a person is in a union has nothing to do with their work ethic. You are every bit as belittling as CFM was only you are more subtle about it. But your true colors still come out. You heard about a bad union so there all bad, riiiigggghhhht. OK. Meanwhile corporate America sold or moved everything we ever had of any value to some third world nation where people work for peanuts and now our whole economy is based on credit and retail buying. One big ponzi scheme and when the credit runs out and the buying stops we have nothing to offer the rest of the world. Well now white collar has ****ed themselves with their greed cause the layoffs and hard times have hit all classes.

"Ditto" driver, "Ditto"! Good post.

There have been a lot of "Union" companies disappear from the road. PIE. Ranger. Matlack. Montgomery Tanklines. Consolidated Freight.

Pie / Ranger...what is left of them is known as "Landstar". Landstar Ranger, Landstar Inway, Landstar Gemini.

Matlack.....Big union tank company...know it is known as Quality Carriers, along with the numerous other, unionized tanker companies that have folded into them.

Montgomery Tanklines is now known as DisTech. No longer union and more Owner Operators than company drivers.

And the CornFlakes...already been pointed out...they are Con-Way. Con-Way Freight was started as the multi area "Regional" carriers that it was, as a "non-union" company...then management filed bankruptcy on Consolidated..to get rid of the union driver pension and health bennies, that Consolidated was on the hook for. Now...Con-Way is one company again...and has purchased truck load carrier CFI...Contract Freighters Inc.

All of those changes were about GREED. Any new changes will be for the same reason...GREED.

Originally Posted by Kranky:
I've said it here before and I'll say it again, I'm a member of the Teamsters union and I bust my f'in as$ every day, if I didn't, I wouldn't be working there, union or not.

I appreciate the superior wages and benefits that result from working union.

These comments about all union workers f'ing off or being lazy just pis$ me off no end.

WTF, should we all just go and work for f'in minimum wage while the corporate bigwigs continue to line their pockets with the fruits of our labor?

And don't give me that f'in sh*t about performance based pay. Union workers are generally more skilled than non union workers, and can command higher pay due to higher productivity.

That "performance based pay" sh*t assumes that every employee is going to f*ck off on the job unless you dangle the carrot on the stick in front of them to make them work.

I feel sorry for any employer that thinks such tactics are necessary to get his or her employees to give a good days work, and I feel even sorrier for the employees that work for that type of boss.

End of rant.

:hellno::hellno::hellno::hellno:

Very good post Kranky.:clap::clap::clap:

Originally Posted by Snowman7:
Sure GMAN, whatever you say.:roll3: And all the fat, smelly, non union OTR dirtbags hanging out at the truck stops aren't lazy? Whether or not a person is in a union has nothing to do with their work ethic. You are every bit as belittling as CFM was only you are more subtle about it. But your true colors still come out. You heard about a bad union so there all bad, riiiigggghhhht. OK. Meanwhile corporate America sold or moved everything we ever had of any value to some third world nation where people work for peanuts and now our whole economy is based on credit and retail buying. One big ponzi scheme and when the credit runs out and the buying stops we have nothing to offer the rest of the world. Well now white collar has ****ed themselves with their greed cause the layoffs and hard times have hit all classes.

I never said that all unions were bad. I only related my personal experience with unions in places such as Gary, Portage, New York, New Jersey and Florida, among others. There seems to be a common thread among most of them which discourages efficiency and hard work. That comes from my personal experience at companies in those areas, not something that someone has passed along. It inevitably takes longer for me to get loaded or unloaded at a union company than a non union company. The reason so many jobs have left the U.S. is not just greed from the corporations. There is just as much greed coming from the unions. That is one reason GM and some of the other big automakers are in trouble. They need to fund all those union retirement funds. Unions pit labor against management. It creates a wedge that fosters distrust on both sides. For many years unions have pushed for more money and benefits with less productivity required from workers. Well, it has now come home to the big 3 automakers. The unions may have won the battle but lost the war. If these companies are forced into bankruptcy the union workers could lose their retirement benefits. Only time will tell. The carrot approach works for executives and it works for labor. That is the primary reason paying workers on performance increases efficiency and productivity. You can't blame everything on the big corporations.

Matlack was just poor management,was heavy in debt when it folded, was privately owned by the Rollins family out of Delaware, remember Rollins truck leasing, same people, also was union, Superior took over most of it.


Chemical Leaman (union) and Montgomery tank lines, merged to form Quality Carriers, to get rid of the union, and have been in the red since they started, now owned by the Appolo group, an investment firm in Tampa, and still in the red.


Manfredi Motor Transit is now Dist Tech don't think there was any union involved.

What about all the non union trucking company's that go out of business who's to blame for that???

Originally Posted by Mackman:
What about all the non union trucking company's that go out of business who's to blame for that???

BUSH! lol

I suppose 4 years from now people will still be blaming Bush for whatever is wrong. Why accept responsibility yourself when you can blame Bush. :lol: