American Steel needs help.
Moderators: Public Relations Department, Players Department
-
Camino
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 1:13 pm
- Location: Anti-Climactic Post Apocalyptic Studios
The US is the only country currently maintaing an embargo against Cuba, with two years of the embargo being declared Latin American countries had already begun trading with Cuba. Plus except for the last seven years, new legislation being brought in, American companies with foreign based departments have been able to trade with Cuba, end result nothing of much happened.
-
west
- Posts: 4649
- Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 5:23 pm
I personally think the Cuban embargo is stupid. I mean, we're depriving ourselves of Cuban cigars and top-notch car mechanics for what, exactly?
/anyone who can turn a '57 Chevy into a boat that'll get to Miami after keeping it in pristine running condition for almost 50 years is obviously a damn good mechanic.
/anyone who can turn a '57 Chevy into a boat that'll get to Miami after keeping it in pristine running condition for almost 50 years is obviously a damn good mechanic.
I'm not dead; I'm dormant.
-
quidit
- Posts: 129
- Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 9:43 pm
- Location: Peoria, Illinois
Well for anyone who was still interested here is the latest news with my company....another contract offered and turned down..it was worse than the first..notice what the retired had to pay if passed...and the highest figures are for the same coverage we have now 80-20 and the basic, the lowest figure, is for catostrophic only. Oh and notice how the paper implies it's our fault that the co. may go under.
Steelworkers ax deal
Union's rejection pushes Bartonville steel company one step closer to bankruptcy
February 19, 2004
By PAUL GORDON
of the Journal Star
BARTONVILLE - Bankruptcy is now more likely for Keystone Consolidated Industries Inc. after hourly workers at its Bartonville plant rejected a proposed contract amendment Wednesday by more than a 2-1 margin.
Members of the Independent Steelworkers Alliance, which represents hourly workers at Keystone Steel & Wire Co., voted down the proposal that would have left wages alone but would have sharply increased health-care premiums for the employees and their families.
Alliance members voted 527-257 to reject the amendment, which the company said it had to have for its $11.7 million annual savings to have any chance of staving off bankruptcy.
That's now unlikely, as the company has warned for weeks that the chance of restructuring the company without an amended contract was remote.
The company was emphatic about that when it met with employees Monday to discuss Keystone's financial situation, said Vic Stirnaman, director of human resources at the steel plant.
While he declined to say bankruptcy was the last option for Keystone, Stirnaman said, "The ISWA has decided our next course of action for us."
Even though it might have become necessary even had the union approved the agreement, Stirnaman said: "It would have helped us and the union to restructure through the bankruptcy courts with an amendment contract that enabled us to get financing to continue operating. Without it, we've been unable to get financing."
Stirnaman said while the vote wasn't surprising, "We are disappointed. We understand the membership has a different view, but this company needs relief. Our view is that the people didn't take a close enough look at the situation to realize that."
Don Miller, vice president of the union, also said the vote was not surprising "because of how people felt about the premiums and what this was doing to the retirees. I think that influenced most people."
That included him.
"I was against this proposal from the start because it would be an extreme, unbearable hardship for the retirees," he said.
Miller said the union now can only wait and see what the company does next. "We bounced the ball last, they can bounce it next."
This proposal would have at least doubled health insurance premiums for active employees - even with a monthly company contribution of $145 - but it would have been much worse for retirees. Those younger than 65 still protected by contract would have faced monthly premiums ranging from $244 for an individual under the most basic plan to $1,972 for family coverage under the premium plan. { WHAT A JOKE }
Those older than 65 would have had prescription drug coverage, but the monthly premium for that coverage would have ranged from $160 for an individual to $712 for a family.
Keystone asked the union for concessions because of the financial crisis, which includes millions of dollars in losses and the loss of credit. The company said the concessions would demonstrate to its lenders it has taken action to save money so its lines of credit can resume.
This is the second proposed contract amendment union members rejected within a matter of weeks. In January, the union, in a much closer vote, rejected a package that called for higher premiums - though not as high - as well as hourly wage cuts, the elimination of scheduled hourly raises and the loss of a holiday.
This latest proposal left wages and benefits alone, but employees and retirees would have been paying the bulk of health care premiums.
The proposal included three coverage options - a base plan that would provide catastrophic coverage only; a standard plan that is somewhat less than what employees now have; and a premium plan, which is the same as is now provided.
The cost to the employee would have depended on which option was chosen and what type of coverage was selected under that option, whether it be individual $0 to $145 a month; employee-children, $55 to $426 a month; employee-spouse, $80 to $497 a month; or family coverage, $175 to $770 a month.
Annual deductibles and maximum annual out-of-pocket expenses also would have been much higher.
Currently, employees pay $55 a month for individual coverage and $115 for family coverage.
Stirnaman said he understood union members were upset about the plight of retirees, but he added, "This was the only way we could see that the retirees could have anything."
[/b]
Steelworkers ax deal
Union's rejection pushes Bartonville steel company one step closer to bankruptcy
February 19, 2004
By PAUL GORDON
of the Journal Star
BARTONVILLE - Bankruptcy is now more likely for Keystone Consolidated Industries Inc. after hourly workers at its Bartonville plant rejected a proposed contract amendment Wednesday by more than a 2-1 margin.
Members of the Independent Steelworkers Alliance, which represents hourly workers at Keystone Steel & Wire Co., voted down the proposal that would have left wages alone but would have sharply increased health-care premiums for the employees and their families.
Alliance members voted 527-257 to reject the amendment, which the company said it had to have for its $11.7 million annual savings to have any chance of staving off bankruptcy.
That's now unlikely, as the company has warned for weeks that the chance of restructuring the company without an amended contract was remote.
The company was emphatic about that when it met with employees Monday to discuss Keystone's financial situation, said Vic Stirnaman, director of human resources at the steel plant.
While he declined to say bankruptcy was the last option for Keystone, Stirnaman said, "The ISWA has decided our next course of action for us."
Even though it might have become necessary even had the union approved the agreement, Stirnaman said: "It would have helped us and the union to restructure through the bankruptcy courts with an amendment contract that enabled us to get financing to continue operating. Without it, we've been unable to get financing."
Stirnaman said while the vote wasn't surprising, "We are disappointed. We understand the membership has a different view, but this company needs relief. Our view is that the people didn't take a close enough look at the situation to realize that."
Don Miller, vice president of the union, also said the vote was not surprising "because of how people felt about the premiums and what this was doing to the retirees. I think that influenced most people."
That included him.
"I was against this proposal from the start because it would be an extreme, unbearable hardship for the retirees," he said.
Miller said the union now can only wait and see what the company does next. "We bounced the ball last, they can bounce it next."
This proposal would have at least doubled health insurance premiums for active employees - even with a monthly company contribution of $145 - but it would have been much worse for retirees. Those younger than 65 still protected by contract would have faced monthly premiums ranging from $244 for an individual under the most basic plan to $1,972 for family coverage under the premium plan. { WHAT A JOKE }
Those older than 65 would have had prescription drug coverage, but the monthly premium for that coverage would have ranged from $160 for an individual to $712 for a family.
Keystone asked the union for concessions because of the financial crisis, which includes millions of dollars in losses and the loss of credit. The company said the concessions would demonstrate to its lenders it has taken action to save money so its lines of credit can resume.
This is the second proposed contract amendment union members rejected within a matter of weeks. In January, the union, in a much closer vote, rejected a package that called for higher premiums - though not as high - as well as hourly wage cuts, the elimination of scheduled hourly raises and the loss of a holiday.
This latest proposal left wages and benefits alone, but employees and retirees would have been paying the bulk of health care premiums.
The proposal included three coverage options - a base plan that would provide catastrophic coverage only; a standard plan that is somewhat less than what employees now have; and a premium plan, which is the same as is now provided.
The cost to the employee would have depended on which option was chosen and what type of coverage was selected under that option, whether it be individual $0 to $145 a month; employee-children, $55 to $426 a month; employee-spouse, $80 to $497 a month; or family coverage, $175 to $770 a month.
Annual deductibles and maximum annual out-of-pocket expenses also would have been much higher.
Currently, employees pay $55 a month for individual coverage and $115 for family coverage.
Stirnaman said he understood union members were upset about the plight of retirees, but he added, "This was the only way we could see that the retirees could have anything."
[/b]
Never hold your farts in. They travel up
your spine, into your brain, and that's where you get shitty ideas from.
your spine, into your brain, and that's where you get shitty ideas from.
-
quidit
- Posts: 129
- Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 9:43 pm
- Location: Peoria, Illinois
HERE IS ANOTHER ARTICLE...AGAIN NOTICE HOW THE HEADLINE IMPLIES THAT IT IS OUR FAULT...oh and the stuff about the strike in there is our brilliant union's idea..I think that would be unwise at this point.
Expert: Liquidation is a real possibility for Keystone plant
Bankruptcy is more probable since union rejected proposal
February 20, 2004
By PAUL GORDON
of the Journal Star
BARTONVILLE - Keystone Consolidated Industries Inc. has hurdles to clear before it can even try to reorganize through bankruptcy court, a bankruptcy law expert said Thursday.
In fact, closing and liquidating the Keystone Steel & Wire Co. plant in Bartonville is a very real possibility if the parent company is unable to get financing to keep it running during the reorganization process, said Barry Barash, a Galesburg attorney who specializes in bankruptcy.
If a company already is strapped for cash - as Keystone has repeatedly said it is - it must be able to demonstrate it has financing available to meet expenses
during the months-long process, Barash said.
"The real guts to this thing will be finding somebody to make available to Keystone what is known as a DIP - or debtor-in-possession - financing facility. Keystone needs cash to keep operating, but the DIP lender also needs to believe it can work. Under Chapter 11 bankruptcy, all the old debt is parked during the process, so the company would need to just be able to cover everyday operating expenses.
"It's really pretty straightforward. It's not a matter of law as much as it is a matter of economics. The numbers have to fit," Barash said.
Bankruptcy became more probable Wednesday when the union representing Keystone's 950 hourly workers rejected a proposed contract amendment by more than a 2-1 margin.
The proposal would have sharply increased health-care premiums for employees and retirees while cutting the amount the company would pay. It would have saved the company $11.7 million annually, which Keystone said is necessary to secure additional credit to allow it to keep operating.
Without that amendment, if Keystone is able to file for reorganization bankruptcy, its next hurdle would be to convince the bankruptcy judge that its contract with the Independent Steelworkers Alliance must be altered - or rejected, in bankruptcy law parlance - in order for the company to cut its expenses sufficiently to be able to operate once it emerges from reorganization.
That, by law, would mean more bargaining between Keystone and the union before a judge would consider it, said Michael Lied, a Peoria attorney who specializes in labor law.
And the company then must show not only that it bargained with the union in good faith, but that the union rejected the company's settlement offer without good cause, he said.
"The court would then have to make a judgement on the fairness of the company's request to everybody involved, that it is in the best interest of all," Lied said.
He agreed the issue of fairness in such a case can be ambiguous, "but is it in anybody's best interest to close this company? I'm pretty sure nobody wants that."
The union has authorized its bargaining team to call a strike if the contract is altered in bankruptcy court to something the union won't accept.
Dan O'Day, a Peoria attorney who represents the Steelworkers Alliance, said the no-strike clause in the contract becomes void if terms are put in place that the union didn't agree to.
"We have in this country the 13th Amendment, which outlaws slavery. Nobody has to work under conditions they don't accept. So if the contract is changed, the union will have to decide if it is something it can live with," he said.
The threat of a strike could hamper Keystone's efforts to find financing to see it through reorganization, Barash said.
If the union strikes and the company is thus unable to operate, he said, "Keystone could well lose the customers it has and it would be very difficult to woo those customers back."
But O'Day said that while he doesn't know if the possibility of a strike will keep lenders away, those lenders "are smart enough to know if the contract is changed, the threat is out there anyway."
That would also be true if the company is sold, he said.
"Any new company would probably need to make peace with the people who know how to operate the equipment," he said.
O'Day believes the key to the contract issue is the clause in the bankruptcy law that the two sides must bargain in good faith before the company can ask a judge to change the contract.
"I would hope there is still some opportunity for more negotiations, more good-faith bargaining before this is done. Reorganization under Keystone would definitely be better for the workers and for the community," he said.
Barash said a DIP lender would be somebody experienced enough to know the pitfalls and would not take them lightly. That would include Congress Financial Corp., Keystone's current chief creditor.
"They know if this plant closes, it will probably never reopen unless it is sold. And even then they might recover 20 cents on the dollar. So an existing lender might step forward to do the DIP financing because they know if the plant closes, they will be hurt. They know the only way they are going to come out of this with anything is to keep that plant going.
"It's a business decision they will have to make," he said.
Expert: Liquidation is a real possibility for Keystone plant
Bankruptcy is more probable since union rejected proposal
February 20, 2004
By PAUL GORDON
of the Journal Star
BARTONVILLE - Keystone Consolidated Industries Inc. has hurdles to clear before it can even try to reorganize through bankruptcy court, a bankruptcy law expert said Thursday.
In fact, closing and liquidating the Keystone Steel & Wire Co. plant in Bartonville is a very real possibility if the parent company is unable to get financing to keep it running during the reorganization process, said Barry Barash, a Galesburg attorney who specializes in bankruptcy.
If a company already is strapped for cash - as Keystone has repeatedly said it is - it must be able to demonstrate it has financing available to meet expenses
during the months-long process, Barash said.
"The real guts to this thing will be finding somebody to make available to Keystone what is known as a DIP - or debtor-in-possession - financing facility. Keystone needs cash to keep operating, but the DIP lender also needs to believe it can work. Under Chapter 11 bankruptcy, all the old debt is parked during the process, so the company would need to just be able to cover everyday operating expenses.
"It's really pretty straightforward. It's not a matter of law as much as it is a matter of economics. The numbers have to fit," Barash said.
Bankruptcy became more probable Wednesday when the union representing Keystone's 950 hourly workers rejected a proposed contract amendment by more than a 2-1 margin.
The proposal would have sharply increased health-care premiums for employees and retirees while cutting the amount the company would pay. It would have saved the company $11.7 million annually, which Keystone said is necessary to secure additional credit to allow it to keep operating.
Without that amendment, if Keystone is able to file for reorganization bankruptcy, its next hurdle would be to convince the bankruptcy judge that its contract with the Independent Steelworkers Alliance must be altered - or rejected, in bankruptcy law parlance - in order for the company to cut its expenses sufficiently to be able to operate once it emerges from reorganization.
That, by law, would mean more bargaining between Keystone and the union before a judge would consider it, said Michael Lied, a Peoria attorney who specializes in labor law.
And the company then must show not only that it bargained with the union in good faith, but that the union rejected the company's settlement offer without good cause, he said.
"The court would then have to make a judgement on the fairness of the company's request to everybody involved, that it is in the best interest of all," Lied said.
He agreed the issue of fairness in such a case can be ambiguous, "but is it in anybody's best interest to close this company? I'm pretty sure nobody wants that."
The union has authorized its bargaining team to call a strike if the contract is altered in bankruptcy court to something the union won't accept.
Dan O'Day, a Peoria attorney who represents the Steelworkers Alliance, said the no-strike clause in the contract becomes void if terms are put in place that the union didn't agree to.
"We have in this country the 13th Amendment, which outlaws slavery. Nobody has to work under conditions they don't accept. So if the contract is changed, the union will have to decide if it is something it can live with," he said.
The threat of a strike could hamper Keystone's efforts to find financing to see it through reorganization, Barash said.
If the union strikes and the company is thus unable to operate, he said, "Keystone could well lose the customers it has and it would be very difficult to woo those customers back."
But O'Day said that while he doesn't know if the possibility of a strike will keep lenders away, those lenders "are smart enough to know if the contract is changed, the threat is out there anyway."
That would also be true if the company is sold, he said.
"Any new company would probably need to make peace with the people who know how to operate the equipment," he said.
O'Day believes the key to the contract issue is the clause in the bankruptcy law that the two sides must bargain in good faith before the company can ask a judge to change the contract.
"I would hope there is still some opportunity for more negotiations, more good-faith bargaining before this is done. Reorganization under Keystone would definitely be better for the workers and for the community," he said.
Barash said a DIP lender would be somebody experienced enough to know the pitfalls and would not take them lightly. That would include Congress Financial Corp., Keystone's current chief creditor.
"They know if this plant closes, it will probably never reopen unless it is sold. And even then they might recover 20 cents on the dollar. So an existing lender might step forward to do the DIP financing because they know if the plant closes, they will be hurt. They know the only way they are going to come out of this with anything is to keep that plant going.
"It's a business decision they will have to make," he said.
Never hold your farts in. They travel up
your spine, into your brain, and that's where you get shitty ideas from.
your spine, into your brain, and that's where you get shitty ideas from.
-
David
- Posts: 696
- Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 5:50 am
- Location: Maryland/America
Unfortunately, whenever there is the slight bit of Grey area, the corporate media always choses the corporate side. Except during the progressive era, and other isolated times, it is a battle against the constant erosion of what the American worker has fought for over the last century.
The current government is trying to fudge the figures to say that manufacturing jobs are increasing. One way they are doing this is to try and get the statisticians to classify fast food workers as being under manufacturing instead of service. Which in reality it is somewhat true, but the motives for the change are obvious.
The current government is trying to fudge the figures to say that manufacturing jobs are increasing. One way they are doing this is to try and get the statisticians to classify fast food workers as being under manufacturing instead of service. Which in reality it is somewhat true, but the motives for the change are obvious.
-
Meh
- Posts: 2661
- Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 10:13 pm
- Location: Way away from TRUE staff abuse
-
quidit
- Posts: 129
- Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 9:43 pm
- Location: Peoria, Illinois
-
quidit
- Posts: 129
- Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 9:43 pm
- Location: Peoria, Illinois
Well they filed for Bankruptcy protection last week of feb. For now its good cause now we have a dip lender and I am working more hours, But we still have to reach a agreement with the company on a contract. I'll keep this posted on future events.
Never hold your farts in. They travel up
your spine, into your brain, and that's where you get shitty ideas from.
your spine, into your brain, and that's where you get shitty ideas from.
-
quidit
- Posts: 129
- Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 9:43 pm
- Location: Peoria, Illinois
Heres the recent events..A judge forces a temporary contract on us.
Keystone can slash benefits
Judge grants emergency cost-cutting plan, which shifts health-care burden to workers and retirees
March 10, 2004
By MIKE RAMSEY
of Copley News Service
MILWAUKEE - Keystone Steel & Wire Co. can temporarily drop health insurance coverage for about 550 retirees and foist more medical costs on its nearly 900 active union employees, a bankruptcy judge ruled Tuesday in Milwaukee.
U.S. Judge Susan Kelley granted Keystone's parent company a request for emergency release from a labor contract with the Independent Steelworkers Alliance. Keystone Consolidated Industries Inc. sought the cost-saving measure as it reorganizes under Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
Keystone and the union are obligated to negotiate a permanent arrangement within six months for Kelley's approval.
The emergency relief purportedly would help Keystone save $17.4 million and give its lenders confidence to advance the company an initial $3 million to keep operating. Without the court's assistance, company representatives argued, the nail-and-wire-making plant in Bartonville was days away from closing for good.
"We don't have a viable business plan without this interim relief," Joseph D'Amico, a Keystone bankruptcy consultant, testified. "The company will run out of cash and won't be able to operate, so we'll have to liquidate."
Union members recently rejected two company requests for concessions. The temporary plan the court OK'd Tuesday cuts off union workers who retire on or after May 3, 1993, from their health insurance. It generally will require active union workers to pay more in premiums after Keystone kicks in $145 per month for each.
Active workers, like the retirees, had paid $55 per month for single coverage and $115 per month for
family coverage. New monthly employee premiums will rise to as much $777 for extensive family coverage.
Keystone can slash benefits
Judge grants emergency cost-cutting plan, which shifts health-care burden to workers and retirees
March 10, 2004
By MIKE RAMSEY
of Copley News Service
MILWAUKEE - Keystone Steel & Wire Co. can temporarily drop health insurance coverage for about 550 retirees and foist more medical costs on its nearly 900 active union employees, a bankruptcy judge ruled Tuesday in Milwaukee.
U.S. Judge Susan Kelley granted Keystone's parent company a request for emergency release from a labor contract with the Independent Steelworkers Alliance. Keystone Consolidated Industries Inc. sought the cost-saving measure as it reorganizes under Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
Keystone and the union are obligated to negotiate a permanent arrangement within six months for Kelley's approval.
The emergency relief purportedly would help Keystone save $17.4 million and give its lenders confidence to advance the company an initial $3 million to keep operating. Without the court's assistance, company representatives argued, the nail-and-wire-making plant in Bartonville was days away from closing for good.
"We don't have a viable business plan without this interim relief," Joseph D'Amico, a Keystone bankruptcy consultant, testified. "The company will run out of cash and won't be able to operate, so we'll have to liquidate."
Union members recently rejected two company requests for concessions. The temporary plan the court OK'd Tuesday cuts off union workers who retire on or after May 3, 1993, from their health insurance. It generally will require active union workers to pay more in premiums after Keystone kicks in $145 per month for each.
Active workers, like the retirees, had paid $55 per month for single coverage and $115 per month for
family coverage. New monthly employee premiums will rise to as much $777 for extensive family coverage.
Never hold your farts in. They travel up
your spine, into your brain, and that's where you get shitty ideas from.
your spine, into your brain, and that's where you get shitty ideas from.
-
Meh
- Posts: 2661
- Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 10:13 pm
- Location: Way away from TRUE staff abuse
$7,944 pay cut. No tax break.
There is something on the tax forms to cover part of health insurance premums if they are a certain percentage over your total income. Not much.
And if the plan was like most corporate sponsered plans it sucked to begin with.
Better to not pay the company anything for the nothing you get back and get independent coverage. And if they won't let you have the $777, go to the judge and demand it. You are not legally responsible to take a pay cut unless the judge ordered it to be ok.
I hope managment got the same thing from the judge. If they didn't there is grounds to remove the judge for the proceedings.
We had a local business shrink around here because of pig headed management. People can be just too stupid and stubborn to realize what the longer term is. And many times these are the people are in charge.
There is something on the tax forms to cover part of health insurance premums if they are a certain percentage over your total income. Not much.
And if the plan was like most corporate sponsered plans it sucked to begin with.
Better to not pay the company anything for the nothing you get back and get independent coverage. And if they won't let you have the $777, go to the judge and demand it. You are not legally responsible to take a pay cut unless the judge ordered it to be ok.
I hope managment got the same thing from the judge. If they didn't there is grounds to remove the judge for the proceedings.
We had a local business shrink around here because of pig headed management. People can be just too stupid and stubborn to realize what the longer term is. And many times these are the people are in charge.
Return to “Non-Cantr-Related Discussion”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest