Merry Xmas from the EPA

retmil46 · **Posted:** Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:43 pm

Well, I now have an idea of how the new '07 EPA regs are going to affect the trucking industry next year.

Yesterday at work, we got an e-mail from the Freightliner CEO saying that the workers at the St Thomas plant in Canada had just been notified that a good many of them would be laid off after the first of the year, and that company wide they were looking at laying off upwards of 4000 people.

A couple of hours later, we got a similar e-mail from the plant manager, dealing specificallly with our plant. Say bye-bye to 3rd shift and the people on it, during the second and third quarters next year we can look forward to pulling unemployment for upwards of 18 WEEKS of planned shutdown time. And they don't see things starting to turn around until the fourth quarter at the earliest.

Reason? All the trucking companies over-ordered '06 trucks, so they could put off ordering '07 trucks for as long as possible. It'll take close to a year until their present trucks start wearing out and they're forced to place large orders for replacements.

Looks like I'll just have to pay off what I owe on the CRD and sit tight for a year, even if I'd decided to trade it off I don't need a car payment right now.

Merry frigging Christmas. :evil:

Jeger · **Posted:** Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:50 pm

Sorry to hear that Mitch, I had wondered what the repercussions of that ordering rush would be. Hopefully things will pick back up sooner than they predict. Better get that overtime while you can.

Joe Romas · **Posted:** Wed Dec 06, 2006 1:19 pm

Same thing happened to the computer business after the rush in 1999 over the Y2K scare

I made it through that but was recently laid off and am old enough to retire so for me it was a no brainer.

DarbyWalters · **Posted:** Wed Dec 06, 2006 1:26 pm

Seems like the company could have seen this one coming and planned a little better juggling production...maybe not. The worst part is the CEO is reswponsible for the health of the company as a whole and that means to save it he has to fire some employees ( or layoff )....Catch 22. At least they did give you some decent notice unlike some other companies. You hear about people showing up for work with a Pink Slip at their desk. I hope that something good comes from this for you.

retmil46 · **Posted:** Wed Dec 06, 2006 1:36 pm

Well, at least I'm in a lot better shape than most. With over 9 years, I won't have to worry about being shown the door. And I'm now one of the senior QC inspectors, so I'll probably get to stay as an inspector and not get put back on the engine line as was the case last time this happened in 2000.

I've also planned financially for this occurrence, figured something like this might happen with both the EPA regs kicking in and the UAW contract coming up for renewal at the same time.

Got over a year's takehome in the bank. The CRD and one other monthly bill are down to the point I can easily write a check to pay off both, freeing up close to $600/month. If they do as planned, two weeks shutdown per month, that $600 would make up the difference between unemployment and the two regular checks. Also have 6 weeks of banked sick time on the books that I can cash in if something unforseen comes up.

Also, being single and having that monthly retirement check coming in from Uncle Sam for all those years spent underwater helps.

But it's still a pisser, basically having to put any future plans on hold for a year until things recover. There's a lot of people at that plant that are going to be hurt by this big time. They'll be lucky to find another job in this area that pays even half of what they were making at Freightliner.

retmil46 · **Posted:** Wed Dec 06, 2006 1:46 pm

DarbyWalters wrote:

Seems like the company could have seen this one coming and planned a little better juggling production...maybe not. The worst part is the CEO is reswponsible for the health of the company as a whole and that means to save it he has to fire some employees ( or layoff )....Catch 22. At least they did give you some decent notice unlike some other companies. You hear about people showing up for work with a Pink Slip at their desk. I hope that something good comes from this for you.

They can only juggle production so much. This isn't like building POV's, where the vehicle is going to end up sitting on a dealer lot until someone decides to buy it. Better than 80% of these trucks are going straight from the plant to the customer and immediately into service. Usually when the big companies order trucks, they specify when they want the trucks delivered so they can plan their rotation schedule for taking vehicles in and out of service. They have to build the trucks according to what the customer specs for a delivery date.

Ranger1 · **Joined:** Mon Oct 17, 2005 7:40 pm **Posts:** 1137

Sorry to hear this Mitch. The irony of this impact, not only to employment and the needless outflow for imported oil that diesels would help alleviate, is that our tax money is paying for this inflicted incompetence from our EPA leadership. This while CO2 from gassers is still unregulated by the same EPA.

Pablo · **Joined:** Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:06 pm **Posts:** 1201

Ranger1 wrote:

Sorry to hear this Mitch. The irony of this impact, not only to employment and the needless outflow for imported oil that diesels would help alleviate, is that our tax money is paying for this inflicted incompetence from our EPA leadership. This while CO2 from gassers is still unregulated by the same EPA.

You know the ULSD and the new filters are a good thing. It is the fact that the EPA has to be nazi's about the arbitary dates set for compliance that is putting people out of work and causing alot of reliability headaches. I also think someone needs to get the EPA to look at more than just emission's per mile. They should be taking into account fuel efficiency per mile (reducing dependence on foriegn oil) and engine longevity. It does not benefit the environment for you to make a 0 emmisions vehicle if the engine lasts only 20,000 miles and requires far more environmentally damaging waste to be generated to make it and junk it than if you operated a higher emissions vehicle for 500,000 miles and then recycled (rebuilt) most of it.

So the end result is we are still creating pollution, probably even more... we are just shifting the type of pollution and moving the time of its creation from engine operation to engine maintenance and engine manufacture. The environmental impact of the throw away society is something that the EPA needs to spend more time looking into, while going a little easier on things like emissions phase in deadlines.

no-blue-screen · **Posted:** Thu Dec 07, 2006 6:10 am

Sorry to hear about this. I feel that when one door closes...another opens....and it sounds like you have things planned out well financially. I kind of suspected there would be some kind of fall-out over the 2006 model rush as well....but many times we forget about the "real people" that are affected. From reading your other posts....it sounds like things will work out okay...I am sure things will eventually turn around.

As for the EPA...I agree with the previous poster....I think some of these emissions regs are no more than red tape and political garbage to make the tree huggers happy....I agree that it probably creates more pollution....and what about when these devices fail....the vehicle will actually pollute more than if it didn't have the device at all.

naturist · **Posted:** Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:14 am

Might be, seein's how you are single, footloose and fancy-free, a message from God: "Take thee abroad where the living is cheap and the chance to learn about the rest of the world abounds." Being's how winter is upon us, perhaps this is God's way of suggesting you spend the next three months in, say Brazil. It is almost summer there, and the exchange rate is excellent. I know folks who have retired to the south of Brazil where $15,000 built a new home and their pension allows 'em to live like kings.

Sorry to hear about your being afflicted by the advent of ULSD. But it was evidently good planning on your part to be set for it.

BiodieselJeep.com · **Posted:** Thu Dec 07, 2006 4:51 pm

Mitch:

Sorry bout this. I want to scond the Brazil idea. Any single man with blood in his viens should spend some serious time in Brazil. You'll learn why marraiges last longer in other parts of the world :wink:

Also, concerning emmissions per mile: this has been studied, and diesels are actually worse per mile...but not much. And quite frankly, compromizes have to be made when we are so dependent on foriegn companies that we are basically funding their armies and militiaswith our petrol dollars. So I personally think that mileage matters more than emissions.

But, hey, I'm just a crazy scientist in a limited production Jeep, so what do I know?

GregScuba · **Posted:** Thu Dec 07, 2006 8:13 pm

BiodieselJeep.com wrote:

Mitch:

Sorry bout this. I want to scond the Brazil idea. Any single man with blood in his viens should spend some serious time in Brazil. You'll learn why marraiges last longer in other parts of the world :wink:

So, why do marriages last longer in Brazil?

onthehunt · **Posted:** Thu Dec 07, 2006 8:57 pm

Why do marriages last longer in Brazil? You can still beat your wife there!! :lol:

retmil46 · **Posted:** Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:44 am

Got some info on the other truck manufacturers. Peterbilt, Mack, International, etc are going to be laying off nearly 50% of their workforce for most of next year. Peterbilt had told their people back in August to expect a layoff.

In a way, guess we're getting off light at Cleveland if we're only talking one shift out the door. Looks like working at the highest capacity plant for the highest volume manufacturer does have it's advantages.

Flying J · **Posted:** Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:21 pm

retmil46 - sorry to hear about your situation. Makes it double bad knowing it came from bad public policy by our elected public 'servants'.

On the good side it sounds like you are well prepared. A good lesson for all of us to put a little bit aside for a rainy day.

retmil46 · **Posted:** Wed Mar 21, 2007 12:14 pm

Here's an update on what's happening, at least at our plant -

Come April 2nd, 3rd shift goes bye-bye, 1100 people laid off.

In my case, I'm not only senior enough to keep my job, but also senior enough to remain as a QC inspector when they move everyone around to fill in the blanks.

Also starting April 2nd, it'll be work a week, off a week, all the way thru August - 12 weeks total shutdown time. From what I gather, part of that was planned anyway as they're completely rebuilding parts of the plant to manufacture the new P3 model truck.

Another fly in the ointment is that the UAW contract at our plant is due for renewal at the end of the month. As far as what DC has offered for proposals, let's just say that last Saturday we voted 98.4% in favor of calling a strike if necessary. Some of their proposals were so ridiculous that I almost have to believe that most of them were red herrings just to provoke a strike vote and see how many people were serious about this. Some have floated the idea that DC wanted to provoke a strike just so they wouldn't have to pay unemployment for at least some of the shutdown weeks.

I don't think it'll come to that. I have the feeling this is just the way the game is played, and now that the preliminaries are over, both parties will get serious and get a contract hammered out.

Past 3 years were the best ever for Freightliner, made something like 2.6 billion in profit, so the poverty/it'll break the company line doesn't fly. Even though we'll be shut down every other week, that still means every OTHER week they need to be operating and delivering trucks to customers or lose money. The contractors that are rebuilding the plant are union, and have expressed the sentiment that they won't cross a picket line - if we walk, they walk - and that would put a serious kink in the schedule for their new model truck. And from recent history, when one of their other large truck plants and Detroit Diesel actually walked out the door, it was literally only a matter of hours before the company agreed to a new contract.

In short, once they see we're serious about calling their BS and willing to back it up, I believe we'll have a new contract in short order.

Of the proposals I've heard the company offered, I won't discuss them because i don't know the legality of mentioning them here. Let's just say it would be similar to what happened to Delphi.

Jeger · **Posted:** Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:18 pm

retmil46 wrote:

Of the proposals I've heard the company offered, I won't discuss them because i don't know the legality of mentioning them here. Let's just say it would be similar to what happened to Delphi.

Oh, so they are sending your job to Mexico? :roll:

KJMedic · **Posted:** Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:23 pm

Hate to hear it but good luck.

retmil46 · **Posted:** Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:49 pm

Jeger wrote:

retmil46 wrote:

Of the proposals I've heard the company offered, I won't discuss them because i don't know the legality of mentioning them here. Let's just say it would be similar to what happened to Delphi.

Oh, so they are sending your job to Mexico? :roll:

No, but the way one of the bargaining committee members put it, without revealing any details, was that if the company had the contract written their way, we might as well be working in Mexico - "sweatshop conditions" was the way she put it. And I've known this particular person and worked with her for nearly 10 years, long before the UAW was brought into the plant, and I've no reason to doubt her word.

As far as moving jobs to Mexico - I've no doubts the gents over in Germany would love to be able to do that to save on labor, environmental, and safety costs. But more than one trucking company has told them flat out in the past they WILL NOT accept a truck built in Mexico, or they'll find another company to buy trucks from, some even specifying that they want their trucks built at our plant in particular. And even if they were seriously considering that, I doubt they would be doing the extensive reconstruction (we're literally talking millions of dollars) on certain parts of the plant to build their new model truck.

Once again, my gut feeling is that everything up until now has been smoke and mirrors, jockeying for position, and that now both sides will finally be getting down to brass tacks.

Napheus · **Joined:** Fri Aug 25, 2006 5:39 pm **Posts:** 57

[/quote] No, but the way one of the bargaining committee members put it, without revealing any details, was that if the company had the contract written their way, we might as well be working in Mexico - "sweatshop conditions" was the way she put it. And I've known this particular person and worked with her for nearly 10 years, long before the UAW was brought into the plant, and I've no reason to doubt her word.

As far as moving jobs to Mexico - I've no doubts the gents over in Germany would love to be able to do that to save on labor, environmental, and safety costs. But more than one trucking company has told them flat out in the past they WILL NOT accept a truck built in Mexico, or they'll find another company to buy trucks from, some even specifying that they want their trucks built at our plant in particular. And even if they were seriously considering that, I doubt they would be doing the extensive reconstruction (we're literally talking millions of dollars) on certain parts of the plant to build their new model truck.

Once again, my gut feeling is that everything up until now has been smoke and mirrors, jockeying for position, and that now both sides will finally be getting down to brass tacks.[/quote]

As president of my local, I just got done negotiating with my company for 20 months. Nothing of substance occurred until about the last month, which was Mid December until ratification in Mid January. EVERYTHING they need, according to them, is to be competitive with their competition. These companies all react to what the others do. They claim they need a modern labor agreement. You want to know what a modern labor agreement consists of? 1 page that gives management the right to do whatever they deem necessary whenever they deem it necessary.

I could elaborate on my experiences in dealing with my company (I am a steelworker who works in the paper sector, go figure) but it is depressing and I don't want to make this into a giant political debate. Let's just say America has some issues and the politicians, both Republican and Democrat, better pull their heads out of their collectives rears and do what is best for the American people instead of what is best for their respective parties and their lobbyists.

Merry Xmas from the EPA

Who is online