Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How the Teamsters Beat Goldman Sachs

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-08-10 11:15 AM
Original message
How the Teamsters Beat Goldman Sachs

By ANDREW COCKBURN

Among the causes of the ongoing financial meltdown, many experts cite the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, smuggled through Congress late on a December evening in 2000. The law exempted Credit Default Swaps (CDS) which are essentially bets on the value of securities from all regulation, including state gambling laws. This allowed Wall Street to conclude that any risk could be hedged with a bet. The result, of course, was disaster, with economic consequences that we will be feeling for a very long time.

“When I wrote part of that legislation with these hands on my little keyboard,” a former financial industry lobbyist who helped craft the law recently told me, “I didn’t realize that this was going to make people lose their jobs, pension funds their reserves, universities their endowments. But that’s what happened”

There are now shelves full of books describing the disaster caused by the enabling of Wall Street as a wide open casino. Butt amidst the wreckage and plaintive cries for “reform,” Wall Street is full tilt in the business of destroying companies and throwing thousands of men and women out of work in order to turn a quick profit on a CDS trade.

In recent weeks the 30,000 employees of YRC Worldwide, one of the nation’s largest trucking companies, discovered that they had unwittingly been drafted as chips in the casino. The company, built up through a series of misguidedly overpriced takeovers in the years of the credit bubble, had hit a financial wall thanks to the fall off of business in the recession. Unless investors holding the company’s bonds could be persuaded to swap their debt for equity, the company would go bankrupt and its employees thrown out of work.

In a sane world the bondholders would have had little trouble in seeing the wisdom of the plan and signing on. But the world we live in does things differently. We have, for example, the practice known as “basis packaging” in which a company such as YRCW, while attempting to restructure its debt, discovers that some of the bondholders have simultaneously bet, through the use of credit default swaps, on the company going bankrupt. As bondholders, they can sabotage any rescue operation by refusing to cooperate and thus collect on their winning bets even as the truck drivers begin collecting unemployment.

This was exactly what was happening in the case of YRCW. According to Michael Greenberger, the University of Maryland law professor who headed Trading and Markets at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in the Clinton Administration, this was a case of “Goldman (Sachs) et al seemingly forcing the country’s biggest truck company into bankruptcy in order to get pay-offs under CDS, with 50,000 jobs at stake.

Hedge fund entrepreneur David Einhorn, who denounced the malign practice at an investors’ conference earlier this year, claims that “basis packaging” has already been a major contributor to the bankruptcy of companies such as Abitibi-Bowater, General Growth Properties, Six Flags and even General Motors. Deriding calls for regulation of the CDS business, he declared that “trying to make safer CDS is like trying to make safer asbestos. How many real businesses have to fail before policy makers decide to simply ban them?”

Waiting for policy-makers to do the right thing will take a while. Credible reports indicate that Rahm Emanuel is counting on Wall Street cash to get the Democrats through the 2010 election. But fortunately the YRCW workers had the backing of their union, the Teamsters.

With strategic input from Greenberger, the Teamsters were able to identify whom they were up against. “We picked up intelligence that Goldman (Sachs) was making markets (in CDS) and then we got some direct evidence,” Teamster spokesman Ian Ball tells me. But Goldman was not alone. “All of Wall Street” was trying to bring the company down.

In response, the union made it clear that they were prepared to name names. “We would make it our mission to hold people accountable,” says Gold. Following advice from Greenberger on strategy, Teamster President James Hoffa wrote to relevant Senators, Congressmen, State Attorneys General and regulators detailing how “Certain financial firms, have been or are marketing and/or underwriting a strategy where bonds in YRCW would be bought by investors with the intent of voting against the exchange, thereby triggering a bankruptcy that would pay the investors and possible other financial firms huge profits from the high CDS payments which would be triggered by a YRCW bankruptcy or liquidation. The profit from the YRCW CDSs would far outweigh losses from the failed YRCW bonds.”

Widely reviled as “the vampire squid” of the financial world, Goldman proved unwilling to be charged with throwing 30,000 truckers out of work. The bank not only caved, but offered its help. “As well it should have,” notes Greenberger. In a sudden turnabout, the company began cooperating in an effort to recruit bondholders who would do the right thing and vote for the restructuring. Even so, time was running out. YRCW was forced to postpone the crucial vote on the structuring no less than six times. By December 30, Brigade Capital, a $5 billion New York hedge fund, was the last major holdout. Only when the Teamsters prepared to picket Brigade’s Park Avenue offices did the fund fold.

continued>>>
http://www.counterpunch.org/andrew01082010.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
nykym Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-08-10 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
1. After reading this
I could not help but think of the Mel Brooks movie "The Producers". Springtime for Hitler anyone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-08-10 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. The reviled "the vampire squid"
Yup that is Goldman Sachs all right. These are the creeps getting the billions in bonuses and now we find out they are doing it by forcing bankruptcies and loss of jobs to feather their own nests.

Surely there must be a special hell for these jokers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cowpunk Donating Member (572 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-08-10 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
3. Now that's class warfare you can believe in .
Good on them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-08-10 11:23 PM
Response to Original message
4. K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mopar151 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-09-10 01:10 AM
Response to Original message
5. Any more questions about "why do we still need unions?" n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-09-10 07:18 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Damn Socialists! Commie, pinko dirtbags!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bleve Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-09-10 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Well,
There's no mention by Cockburn that YRCW employees haven't had raises in, at least, four years, had to give up benefits and have been cut to working 30 hours so that the Teamsters bosses can get their protection money. There's no mention either of YRCW's competitors taking away their customers by spreading false information. There's no mention of YRCW buying a Chinese shipping firm and then failing to profit from it. But what we do have is a manufactured article asserting the Teamsters have "saved" the company. It's absurd when you look at the big picture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mopar151 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-09-10 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. I would merely observe
That you need a union which fits the particular workplace. If I, Joe Unionworker, am gonna send someone to negotiate with ruthless, corrupt assholes, they ain't gonna be so nice themselves. My wife is a state employee, represented by SEIU, who send good, fair people to deal with our fair and reasonable governor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bleve Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 06:55 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Really?
I used to work in an IBEW shop. I was non-union mostly because I didn't want to put up with the hassle. Also, non-union got the same pay and benefits as union so I didn't see any point. The only difference was that it took longer for useless union employees to be fired.

I've observed, over the years, that the "ruthless, corrupt assholes" were the union folks. I've seen shakedowns and intimidation tactics used to get employees to join and what not. I've never knowingly worked for anyone who was ruthless and corrupt. I make it a point not to work in places like that. If my boss turned out to be an asshole, and there have been a few, I've dealt with it and moved on asap.

I've seen too many good folks have to give up a lot so the union folks get paid. I know someone who works for YRC who had their pay cut 12% and their hours just got cut all so the Teamsters could be paid. Some supervisors had their pay cut by 30%. Doesn't sound fair to me. A friend of mine was a sheriff's deputy in Charleston, SC. He never joined the union because he wouldn't be able to get a take-home car or free dry cleaning for his uniforms and what not.

One of the oldest complaints of the working man is that they're working to make their boss "rich". I've always wondered why one would join a union and add even more bosses into the mix. Yes, I've heard many a spiel about what's so great about them, but I've looked at them very carefully and have found that I'm much better off, in the long run, without them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 07:28 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC