December 6th, 2009

Important info or propaganda?

The teamsters have released a report entitled “Damaged when Delivered“. I have started through it and They seem to have found some poor transport practices that need to be improved but some of them don’t look like a problem to me.  Why would dropping a tire into drop pockets be an issue? I used to drive a stinger rig that had a head rack equipped like the one in the picture and I never had any problems using those pockets the whole time I drove it. Leave me your comments.

Another blogger’s view “Teamsters try a new angle”

teamster propoganda

Update 12-8-09: Mr Fred Zuckerman took the time to go over the report with me and address my questions. I miss understood the issue with truck in the picture above. It isn’t a safety/damage issue but rather the manufacturer that this truck is loading for has some specific requirements that prohibit bottomless drop pockets. I would agree with him that if the customer wants it done a certain way then that is the way it should be done. Since that seems to be a whole different set of  issues then I think that picture needs more explanation under it. especially since the rest of the report deals with Damage and safety issues.

Basically the point he is trying to make is that if the manufacturers use the lowest bid model then the rate will be lower than what  is possible to do a safe quality job at.  He states that the typical union driver has had several weeks of training and that often non-union drivers have inadequate training and sometimes they have had no training.

If you have an opposing view point you are welcome to leave a comment but lets keep them professional.

Update 12-8-09: Another update, I spoke with Tom from Accelerated services and he looked up The load that truck 107 did out of Ohio and it appears that the vehicle pictured above is a 2005 Equinox that was a smart auction car that was successfully delivered to it’s destination with no damage.

If you are featured in this report you are welcome to leave your response to the allegations in the comments section.

October 8th, 2009

Lawmakers question GM, Chrysler carhauler moves

From chron.com:

WASHINGTON — Months after the government bailed out General Motors and Chrysler, some lawmakers are questioning tough contract demands by the two auto companies that union officials argue could lead to the replacement of hundreds of union carhaulers with nonunion drivers.

Michigan lawmakers have raised the issue with GM CEO Fritz Henderson and Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne in letters during the past week, concerned that the automakers could reduce business with auto transport companies whose drivers are represented by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.

“We demand an explanation of your position,” wrote Rep. Dale Kildee, D-Mich., in letters to Henderson and Marchionne. “We do not support your plans to abandon your long-term carrier partners.”

Union officials said GM and Chrysler have sought cost savings of at least 25 percent from Allied Systems Holdings Inc. of Atlanta, and Cassens Transport Co. of Edwardsville, Ill., who deliver assembled vehicles to car dealers in the U.S. and Canada.

The Teamsters represent about 4,800 workers who deliver new cars and trucks to auto dealers. More than 2,000 employees work for Allied, Cassens and Jack Cooper Transport Co. in Kansas City, Mo.

Chrysler Group LLC’s contracts with Allied and Cassens expired Sept. 30 and the company has shifted some work to nonunion contractors, affecting 129 union drivers, including 50 in Detroit, said Fred Zuckerman, director of the Teamsters’ automobile transport division.

According to a one-page summary titled “Chrysler Vehicle Distribution Changes,” the company said some of the changes occurred because a new facility built in Toledo, Ohio, allowed the automaker to mix vehicles in one location for distribution.

Chrysler said in the document that Allied and Cassens failed to address uncompetitive cost structures and beginning Oct. 1 the auto company would re-source 28 percent of its haulaway carrier business “to improve transit time and reduce costs by $31 million over three years.” Chrysler said in the document that Allied and Cassens would reduce 77 Teamster jobs in Michigan.

Zuckerman called it an attempt by Chrysler to undermine union drivers. “We don’t believe for a minute that it had anything to do with cost,” he said.

In addition to the 50 jobs in Detroit, Zuckerman said the Chrysler moves led to union job losses in Winston-Salem, N.C., Warren, Mich., Richfield, N.J., Buffalo, N.Y., Miami, Jessup, Md., and Shelbyville, Ky.

Teamster officials are also watching upcoming talks between General Motors Co. and Allied, whose contract with the automaker expires Feb. 1, 2010. About 400 union drivers deliver GM vehicles for the transport company.

Allied filed for bankruptcy in 2005 and imposed a 17.5 percent wage cut on its workers in 2007 and 2008, Zuckerman said. He said GM has sought cost reductions of 26 percent, cuts he said would be unsustainable.

A GM spokeswoman declined comment. Messages left with Allied and Cassens officials weren’t immediately returned.

The union job losses have caught the attention of several Michigan lawmakers, who sought government loans for GM and Chrysler and pushed for a $3 billion Cash for Clunkers program to revitalize auto sales.

“I urge you to not discriminate against the unionized labor work force,” wrote Rep. Gary Peters, D-Mich. “Although cutting costs is a necessary measure, I expect that you will not base your decision exclusively on which operators pay their employees the lowest wage rate.”

Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-Mich., wrote the “intent of the government’s support for GM and Chrysler and the ‘cash for clunkers’ program was to keep the automobile industry viable and not to force companies in the supply chain like the car haul industry into bankruptcy.”

In a letter to Congressman Peters, Mike Keegan, Chrysler’s senior vice president of supply chain management, wrote that the company explained to Allied and Cassens its inability to continue subsidizing their uncompetitive business models, particularly in light of the automaker’s recent bankruptcy action and the concessions made by the UAW, CAW and dealers.

Keegan wrote that Chrysler’s business relationship with Allied and Cassens will continue in segments and regions where they are more competitive. Of the 77 Teamster jobs that will be lost in Michigan, he said 20 of these positions will be filled by Teamsters in Toledo, Ohio.

August 22nd, 2009

Whats next?

Guest post by, The anonymous carhauler

I have been on both sides working for United Road and Allied. I believe that there are very few differences. Both have very good medical insurance, and poor maintenance programs. Union drivers call non-union scabs and non-union drivers say we pay a pimp. The bottom line is we all have the same skilled trade. We are all car haulers, a elite breed of truck drivers. We all stay at the same hotels, load in the same yards, and deliver to the same dealerships.

United road is owned by a hedge fund just like allied, active-jack cooper. These investors want a return on their capital, that’s it. They don’t care if we are a union or non-union driver, they don’t know the difference. They only care about return on capital. They are not in it for a career like we are, they want to squeeze the companies of everything they can and move on.

Bottom line is it doesn’t matter what name is on the door, we need to stick together for the greater good of all car haulers. As you all know not all truck drivers can successfully operate a car hauler. We ARE a skilled trade, and can’t be replaced. The  executives in Atlanta and Romlus,Mi dont’ have a CDL and have no idea how to load a truck. Without us who are they going to hire? Think about all the new drivers that you worked with over the years that couldn’t cut it. I know the Teamsters are very flawed, but we need to stick together. Most people would agree that when the unions started they did great things for workers and set the standard for wages and benefits. Now the Teamsters have evolved into a big business. We are holding all the cards in this game, this is our industry. How do we get it back?

Transportfool  will allow guests to write opposing views, if you are interested leave a comment for us on this post.

disgruntled teamster Says:

I agree with many of your points….As far as what’s next? I only see more URS, Harbor, Sierra Mountain Express, Selland etc, etc. The shippers only concern is getting their vehicles shipped safely and don’t care who does it. The non union sector has been growing and the Teamsters just watch and talk about organizing??
The fact of the matter is that just the benefit package is $13 an hr or $27,000 a year. The economic downturn has created the perfect storm for more of this cost cutting and Teamsters are making too much money, Roadway/Yellow has taken 2 pay cuts already this year and suspended pension contributions for 18 months. PMT and Hadley on west coast lost everything to non union and now laid off Teamsters are working for nothing. Owner operators have not been spared because they’ve taken substantial pay cuts and work for URS, Sierra Mtn, Harbor just to keep their rigs. You’re right about being a skilled work force but as far as being a brotherhood…..It’s wishful thinking and the Teamsters only care about dues and contributions. The new owners of Cooper Active, Allied Yucaipa, URS, etc. are making a ton of money off these guys and want more!!! Hold on to your wallets and the guys who are still employed by Allied Cooper, PMT, Cassens, get your heads out of the sand because the WEST COAST AND EAST COAST has been conquered by NON UNION. I once heard my DI call it a “pincer move” you surround your enemy and then you keep squeezing from both sides until you crush them and they can’t retreat because your attacking from West and East. Brilliant strategy on their part and the Teamsters just watching from the sidelines like they did to freight in the 70’s from 450,000 to less the 30.000. The “gippos” are coming real soon

  • October 14th, 2009 at 12:13 pm Edit

    Non-union Carrier Says:

    The long and the short of it is everyone wants to ‘maximize there income or profits’ This includes the manufactures, the transport companies and the employees whether they are union or non-union.
    Union drivers have nothing invested other than a commitment and a lunch pail. To work for a traditional company, such as Allied, Cassens Jack Cooper, etc, you would have a minimum of 5 years if not longer before you are truely a full-time employee. And that is only if you can put of with the union rules of ’sweeping the floor’ for what the senior men don’t want to do and working most of the undesirable times and runs. Isn’t that a great way to live.
    It also explains why the biggest portion of the equipment is border line junk.
    But, the bigger problem is that the bigger companies have terrible management. You will see empty trucks on any given Interstate passing each other empty and heading for the same place the other truck had just come from. This is very poor planning and if it is because the the driver had too much or too little seniority for that particular load, who is running the company? The inmates could be running the asylum and that is no way to run a business.
    Now, on the other hand, there are some very unethical non-union carriers. URS is a great example, cut the rates to get the work, make a ton of promises that you can’t keep, and then farm it out. They get there percentage of the revenue regardless of how they do it. Everyone, I think, disagrees with this strategy, including the manufactures’.
    However, there are some very good, non-union, “Owner Operator” carriers that pride themselves in nice equipment, professional drivers and ‘not’ bargain basement prices. Companies like this have a valued interest in the industry and just choose not to let the Union’s dictate what they can do, where they can go, or who they give the loads to. If a driver or should I say owner/operator takes the iniatative to invest in his future by buying equipment, he or she deserves that. They don’t crash and smash, they show up for work on time and they put the customer, whether corporate or personal back in the 1st position. They are the ones who pay for reliable, on-time, damage free services.
    To sum it all up, the companies need to keep the rates up, give the employees the opportunity to invest in the company and their future if so desired, and learn to work together regardless of union or non-union affiliation. Union members need to remember, “it is not your work” You have just been fortunate to have it as long as you have. Talk your employers into making an investment in the company and take to the time and make the commitment to keep the “customers” satisfied.
    Remember one thing, non-union carriers are not wrecking the industry. Greedy unions, drivers, company owners and management teams are.

December 18th, 2008

Layoff at Unimark

Sounds like there was a large layoff at Unimark.

You can read about it on the auto truck blog

October 27th, 2008

Teamster contract approved by a landslide

teamsters local 630 truck

Was this contract that much better than the first one they turned down? Well, it was substantially better in some key areas but I think it has more to do with the auto transport industry feeling the impact of the economic trouble the big three auto makers are in. Another factor is the successful efforts by non-union auto transporters to land contracts. Another round of strikes would have really swung the door open for the non-union carriers who got their foot in the door during the PTS strike. Here is what one teamster had to say:

KarHauLer wrote:

NON-union is taking our jobs…
United Road has moved into Ontario and has hired driver for a mere $700.00 per week thru a driver service… Hauling Toyotas
What next?

  • November 18th, 2008 at 4:21 pm Edit

    The Chap Man Says:

    Sometimes it takes losing a great job like the PTS employees did to realize how good they had it. It is a true shame that PTS closed and opened the door for the Non-Union carriers.

    Now that the door is open expect it to be kicked down…

    Here is the kicker to the situation, the same Union drivers that held their ground with PTS are now working for those non union carriers and doing the job that they should have done in the first place before their company closed. The reality is that there are not a lot of Union Jobs out there because the companies that do business with the Union can not afford to stay open.

    The sad part of the situation is that the owner of the company is not affected on a personal level; unlike the union employees who ultimately lose there job and now have a history that most employers do not want to touch.

    It is a sad but true statement, but if the union employee did what is described in the contract as “fair days work for a fair day’s wage” then companies like PMT, Allied, and the fallen PTS would be strong and competitive in today’s market.

September 18th, 2008

Efforts to unionize Hansen & Adkins

According To a post on Thecarhauler.com there is an effort by drivers at Hansen & Adkins to unionize. If you read the comments it looks like the guys at United Road would like to join the teamsters too.

September 10th, 2008

Transportfool gets banned from teamstersonline!!!

I just got run out of dodge!

I didn’t get banned for a raging post, or even for a post at all for that matter. I got banned because I don’t have a union card in my wallet! Here is the notice I got:

vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Not a Teamster/Union Member

Date the ban will be lifted: Never

Now that I think about it I can’t ever remember the teamsters described as “friendly”

According to TDU (they haven’t banned me yet) the teamsters union is accusing Allied Systems Holdings INC. of breach of contract and asking that each teamsters get reimbursed all wage concessions retroactively with interest!

Update: I have reviewed the rules page at teamsters online. In their defense it is right there in rule #3 that us non-union guys are not allowed to sign up. What I found real funny was the very first sentence in the rules was:

TeamstersOnline.com is a friendly place.

The Transportfool isn’t buying that one though!

  • September 25th, 2008 at 6:41 am Edit

    Rocky Says:

    Hey Dave,
    I wouldn’t read too much into it. It’s nothing personal. We are just trying to keep it Union. Every forum we (Teamster members) go to we have to deal with people who don’t like us because of it, so it’s nice to just have a forum to go to where we are among brothers.

    I also realize that you weren’t debating and causing a ruckus out on the open forums. I Thank you for that. So the ban almost seemed unwarranted.

    I personally have no problems at all with you or your site here, and have checked in several times.

    Good day to you, and God Bless.

  • Dave Says:
  • What do you suppose created all of those negative feelings towards teamsters?
  • I don’t think there is as much anti-teamster sentiments as you think there is. Most guys are pretty ambivalent about whether they work for a union company or non-union. They just want decent pay. I really think that “don’t care attitude” is what is eroding the union strength. It used to be that a driver would be gone in a heartbeat if he had the chance to make a move from a non-union carrier to a union one. If you are a productive driver the commission that most companies offer will result in at least as large a paycheck as the union job. The benefits are typically not as good but the trucks that they drive are typically superior. I see that as the trade-off.
  • It is your (teamsters) forum so you can run it anyway you want. I still stand by my opinion that “TeamstersOnline.com is a friendly place.” is a FALSE statement
August 18th, 2008

Teamsters leadership feeling backlash after NO vote

It has to be a bit embarrassing to have a contract recommended unanimously and then be soundly defeated. TDU has a petition on their site asking for a new negotiating committee. Of course there are two sides to every story and truth be told it has been a long time since times have been this tough for the big three that are the carhaul teamsters main customers. This means the customers are holding the rate down and in turn the union carriers are finding it hard to turn a profit. Allied ,PTS, Active, and Unimark are examples that come to mind. The union carriers have in the past set the standard, but as I travel around it has become apparent that the scales are tipping. I see more good jobs with decent benefits in non-union trucks than ever before. I see more cutting-edge technology like vin scanners and GPS navigation in the non-union trucks! As a matter of fact some of the union drivers have been asked to use some pretty sorry equipment!

Union or non-union car hauler?

August 12th, 2008

The vote is in……Teamsters Union contract defeated!

teamsters send Fred Zuckerman back to the batgaining table

Teamsters for a Democratic Union is reporting that the contract and all of its supplements were rejected! some of the margins are close but I’m surprised there was a clean sweep. Here is a quote from their site:

The national contract was rejected by 2,939 to 2,076, and all three supplements were rejected as well. The Central-Southern supplement was rejected 2,555 to 1,500, the East by 316 to 304, and the West by 184 to 171.”

From the official union site the reaction is less than enthusiastic. Fred Zuckerman is quoted as saying:

We hope to resolve this contract without going on strike.”

here is the vote count

Here is a post From teamsteronline that I think accurately expresses the feelings of a majority of the drivers:

Quote:
“Now that the ballots have been counted and the contract has been rejected, we plan to speak to our members and our carhaul local union leaders to discuss the issues behind this defeat,” Zuckerman said. “We will get our members’ input on the issues that concern them. We understand that our members are worried and angry about the difficult economic conditions facing the auto and carhaul industries. We hope to resolve this contract without going on strike.”

Perhaps this should have been done before instead of after the fact.”

August 7th, 2008

Is the teamsters future at stake?

On TEAMSTERSONLINE.COM 2chained SAYS:

Could be the start of the end of Union Carhaul, lets just hope not

While we can debate whether or not this contract vote will determine the future of the teamsters union, I think most will agree that it is at least a very important vote. There is a post on The Carhauler titled:

“Ballot count may decide our Future or Failure!.

The truth is both those voting NO and those voting YES believe that they are doing what is best for their union and for their jobs!