Fleet Service apathy

[pjirish317]

pjirish317,
The initial grievance was filed and faxed, with confirmation of receipt, to the Customer Service Director. Phone calls were made and voice mails were left. None of them were responded to. It was apparent the Customer Service Director, based on the inaction, was choosing to have the grievance proceed to Step 3 as outlined in the contract. Keep in mind the grievance and appeal for step 2 was also faxed, with confirmation of receipt, to the AGC at the time. Phone calls to him were never returned. Hell, at one point you couldn't even leave voice mail because his mailbox was full. Please refrain from deflecting blame on the committee. They did everything they could do. I suppose you would suggest the inability to leave voicemail messages with your AGC, or his failure to return phone calls, is the fault of the local committee as well... really? To your second point, I certainly did suggest we consider past performance. I believe the membership should do this as well. IMO... this is already the issue being considered in this election. I can only speak for my own past performance, dedication, involvement and credentials. Again, are you suggesting past performance should not be considered?
ograc

Well then I guess it would all depend on who the AGC was. I have had no problem at all getting in touch with the three active AGC's. Those being FO, NH, and MF. All have either answerd my call, or returned my call in a timely manner. No full voicemailbox. That would certainly not be the fault of the committee(s). But you failed to tell the entire story. Which AGC are you talking about? And again, you suggested that we consider past performance, not I. So again, are you going to endorse/defend MW for his past poor performance as an AGC? When you answer about MW, I will answer about past performance, if you are willing to give up who the alleged AGC was.

 

[ograc]

Well then I guess it would all depend on who the AGC was. I have had no problem at all getting in touch with the three active AGC's. Those being FO, NH, and MF. All have either answerd my call, or returned my call in a timely manner. No full voicemailbox. That would certainly not be the fault of the committee(s). But you failed to tell the entire story. Which AGC are you talking about? And again, you suggested that we consider past performance, not I. So again, are you going to endorse/defend MW for his past poor performance as an AGC? When you answer about MW, I will answer about past performance, if you are willing to give up who the alleged AGC was.

pjirish317,

I believe past performance will and should be considered. With that being said, I will tell you the AGC I speak of in this case was not FO, NH or MF. I will not call him out by name. As I have stated earlier, in previous posts, there are some Officers who strive to do the best they can and there are others who do not. Likewise, I do not believe I have the knowledge or authority to speak for anyone other than myself. Your issues with MW are just that ...your issues. Based on past performance let the membership decide. This was the bar of accountability past leadership teams were held to... so be it for the current leadership team.

ograc

please visit: http://lfp12

 

[nascarjoe]

pjirish317,
The initial grievance was filed and faxed, with confirmation of receipt, to the Customer Service Director. Phone calls were made and voice mails were left. None of them were responded to. It was apparent the Customer Service Director, based on the inaction, was choosing to have the grievance proceed to Step 3 as outlined in the contract. Keep in mind the grievance and appeal for step 2 was also faxed, with confirmation of receipt, to the AGC at the time. Phone calls to him were never returned. Hell, at one point you couldn't even leave voice mail because his mailbox was full. Please refrain from deflecting blame on the committee. They did everything they could do. I suppose you would suggest the inability to leave voicemail messages with your AGC, or his failure to return phone calls, is the fault of the local committee as well... really? To your second point, I certainly did suggest we consider past performance. I believe the membership should do this as well. IMO... this is already the issue being considered in this election. I can only speak for my own past performance, dedication, involvement and credentials. Again, are you suggesting past performance should not be considered?
ograc

Ograc,

Do your homework! PHL is a mess, because the committee chair can't do his job correctly. I bet GA didn't even try to contact FO about the grievances your talking about. It's not the AGC's fault, the CC can't handle his job!!!

 

[pjirish317]

pjirish317,

I believe past performance will and should be considered. With that being said, I will tell you the AGC I speak of in this case was not FO, NH or MF. I will not call him out by name. As I have stated earlier, in previous posts, there are some Officers who strive to do the best they can and there are others who do not. Likewise, I do not believe I have the knowledge or authority to speak for anyone other than myself. Your issues with MW are just that ...your issues. Based on past performance let the membership decide. This was the bar of accountability past leadership teams were held to... so be it for the current leadership team.

ograc

please visit: http://lfp12

All right so that leaves MC. Nuff said. I have not personally had a problem with MC as an AGC, he was always available when I called. It does not mean however that he was there for all. So are you trying to blame MC's actions on the entire ND team? That is the vibe I get. MC is not even on the ballot is he? And your inability to acknowledge MW's past AGC work, or lack thereof, speaks volumes. IMO, it shows that you are willing to turn a blind eye on someone's actions, and focus that same eye on someone else when it gains you the most.

 

[niblet]

Ograc,

Do your homework! PHL is a mess, because the committee chair can't do his job correctly. I bet GA didn't even try to contact FO about the grievances your talking about. It's not the AGC's fault, the CC can't handle his job!!!

Joe, do you work in PHL? When was the last time you spoke to GA?

 

[700UW]

To the spin master,

Unanimous means you got every single vote at the meeting where the votes were cast, so your telling me no other candidate for PDGC recieved a vote?

Something is rotten in Denmark.

Read it S L O W L Y this time and comprehend it.

 

[nascarjoe]

Joe, do you work in PHL? When was the last time you spoke to GA?

Hey Niblet,

I'm still waiting on my question to be answered by you!

What experience do your candidates running for AGC, from the hubs, have on your ticket? You haven't answered me yet........or are you afraid to answer the ?

 

[ograc]

All right so that leaves MC. Nuff said. I have not personally had a problem with MC as an AGC, he was always available when I called. It does not mean however that he was there for all. So are you trying to blame MC's actions on the entire ND team? That is the vibe I get. MC is not even on the ballot is he? And your inability to acknowledge MW's past AGC work, or lack thereof, speaks volumes. IMO, it shows that you are willing to turn a blind eye on someone's actions, and focus that same eye on someone else when it gains you the most.

pjirish317,
I specifically addressed FO, NH and MF were not the AGC I was speaking about. I don't understand how you interpret that to mean I am blaming the entire team. Your vibe is wrong and should stand to be corrected. IMO... it is clouded by an instinct to defend the ND team at any cost. I agree and hope that my inability to acknowledge MW's past work, as you put it, does speak volumes for my character. I cannot and will not speak for MW's work, or lack thereof, as you put it. I am not familiar with what alleged lack of performance you speak of. I believe only one person can address the issues and accusations you raise. I run on my past involvement, experience to this point, years of active union involvement and track record. If you interpret that as "turning a blind eye" that is your choice. Respectfully, I am inclined to disagree with your assesment.
ograc

 

[pjirish317]

pjirish317,
I specifically addressed FO, NH and MF were not the AGC I was speaking about. I don't understand how you interpret that to mean I am blaming the entire team. Your vibe is wrong and should stand to be corrected. IMO... it is clouded by an instinct to defend the ND team at any cost. I agree and hope that my inability to acknowledge MW's past work, as you put it, does speak volumes for my character. I cannot and will not speak for MW's work, or lack thereof, as you put it. I am not familiar with what alleged lack of performance you speak of. I believe only one person can address the issues and accusations you raise. I run on my past involvement, experience to this point, years of active union involvement and track record. If you interpret that as "turning a blind eye" that is your choice. Respectfully, I am inclined to disagree with your assesment.
ograc

Yet he is running for AGC on the vary same ticket you are. Yet you refuse to see that he was voted out for a reason, the very same reasons that you are citing now. I see it as you are blaming the entire ND team because you are extremely vague as to what you actually want to say. But that is because you are running, I understand that. And make no mistake, my mind is not clouded, IMO yours is. You refuse to acknowledge that the current US AGC's, minus MC, have been busting their collective arse's for the membership. You try to cite "poor performance" as a political tool. So who, in your opinion, in the current elected DL141 officials, from PDGC on down, have had poor performance? And need to be considered for replacement. That is a direct question btw.

 

[niblet]

Hey Niblet,

I'm still waiting on my question to be answered by you!

What experience do your candidates running for AGC, from the hubs, have on your ticket? You haven't answered me yet........or are you afraid to answer the ?

Joe please. For the third or fourth time now. Go to Facebook. I know you are there and probably already have seen it. Why are you questioning BK? He was working for the district on the organizing committee. He has been activly involved for years. What are your activities in the union? Are you a Committee person or shop Steward? So how do you know what the situation is in PHL? Either you work there or?

 

[ograc]

Yet he is running for AGC on the vary same ticket you are. Yet you refuse to see that he was voted out for a reason, the very same reasons that you are citing now. I see it as you are blaming the entire ND team because you are extremely vague as to what you actually want to say. But that is because you are running, I understand that. And make no mistake, my mind is not clouded, IMO yours is. You refuse to acknowledge that the current US AGC's, minus MC, have been busting their collective arse's for the membership. You try to cite "poor performance" as a political tool. So who, in your opinion, in the current elected DL141 officials, from PDGC on down, have had poor performance? And need to be considered for replacement. That is a direct question btw.

As I posted earlier, some officers are doing the best they can while others are not. Who needs to be replaced, based on past performance, will be for the members to decide. Likewise, who they are replaced with will also be decided by the members. This election in June, as in previous elections, past performance will be the bar to which the incumbents will be held. I'm sure you would agree the members' opinion, based on their vote, is the only true opinion that matters. As in elections past, once the members have decided, the loyal union members, myself included with the position held, must respect the wishes of the membership by supporting and continuing to work with those elected. Not biting PJ.
ograc

 

[ograc]

Ograc,

Do your homework! PHL is a mess, because the committee chair can't do his job correctly. I bet GA didn't even try to contact FO about the grievances your talking about. It's not the AGC's fault, the CC can't handle his job!!!

GA? Isn't he running for AGC?

ograc

 

[niblet]

Ograc, we are on opposing tickets. It sounds like PJ just has a gripe against you or MW. Good luck with that conversation. Its obvious some here are diehards for the ND team. Thats cool since it shows no apathy. I support the Occupy ticket and I respect you Ograc for putting yourself out there and your views. No matter what happens in June I will still remain dedicated to the membership as I'm sure you will too. Fraternally TIM

 

[pjirish317]

As I posted earlier, some officers are doing the best they can while others are not. Who needs to be replaced, based on past performance, will be for the members to decide. Likewise, who they are replaced with will also be decided by the members. This election in June, as in previous elections, past performance will be the bar to which the incumbents will be held. I'm sure you would agree the members' opinion, based on their vote, is the only true opinion that matters. As in elections past, once the members have decided, the loyal union members, myself included with the position held, must respect the wishes of the membership by supporting and continuing to work with those elected. Not biting PJ.ograc

Didn't figure you would. At least Tim has the gumption to say they all need to go. Not you though. You just dance around the subject and bring up "past performance". That's all I need to know. And you are right, the members who vote in June will be the only ones that matter.

 

[niblet]

GA? Isn't he running for AGC?

ograc

Philly is more complicated than Joe is letting on. GA is the CC.