IAM Fleet Service topic

[roabilly]

pjirish317,

I supported the RC Team. This for a number of reasons. One, I did not, and still don't, believe the concessions we were forced to take, due to two bankruptcies, were the fault of the team in place. Two, I as a Chairperson and the members I represented, always received full support and dedication from our assigned AGCs. Our assigned AGCs visited the station frequently in good times and bad. They were there to face the tough questions through the bankruptcy proceedings. I'm not going to refer to them as negotiations. Three, the mouthpiece of the New Direction Team's campaign was none other than TN. His campaigning was effective. I'll give him that. But in the end what did it accomplish? Are we better off now than we were four years ago? Four years later the ND Team is responsible for all of our woes and TN is promoting himself as the savior. Four years ago we voted out a lot of experienced and dedicated officers. My honest opinion and thoughts.

ograc

Essentially, it accomplished the same thing that this election will accomplish, and that is to present a facade of control over our own destiny. I've said this before, and I'll continue to say it... no political ticket can change anything!

If we vote in new leadership, it may "feel good", but the reality is it will set us back...and not advance our interest. Nelson sells fantasy and false hope... your team is standing on the return of most of the old regime.

I say that we keep what we have... let them do their jobs!

Visit the 141 Rising Site... CLICK HERE!

 

[ograc]

Essentially, it accomplished the same thing that this election will accomplish, and that is to present a facade of control over our own destiny. I've said this before, and I'll continue to say it... no political ticket can change anything!

If we vote in new leadership, it may "feel good", but the reality is it will set us back...and not advance our interest. Nelson sells fantasy and false hope... your team is standing on the return of most of the old regime.

I say that we keep what we have... let them do their jobs!

Visit the 141 Rising Site... CLICK HERE!

roabilly,

I respect your opininion but respectfully disagree. The LFP Team is proposing issues, within our District, that we can be change for the betterment of the membership. It would be foolish for any team to propose they can change or control our collective destiny.The ND Team included. Our future destiny will be, and has always been, decided by many factors... carrier mergers, bankruptcy, fuel prices, industry wages, the company's agenda etc... The ND Team has no more control over these issues than any other team running for election. IMO...To propose we keep what we have... let them do their jobs is insinuating they can rise above these issues and deliver an industry leading contract. I heard this 4 years ago and I believe you did too. Negotiations aside... this election should be based on the satisfaction of the membership, with the representation received, by the ND Team the past four years. This issue is what they had direct control of. I heard this 4 years ago as well. If you don't see or hear from us vote us out in four years. This message was carried into the stations four years ago. IMO... based on the stations I have visited the past weeks they have come up short in many stations. That being said, I disagree there would be any "set back" by supporting and voting for a positive change.

ograc
please visit: http://lfp12.com

ograc
please visit: http://lfp12.com

 

[roabilly]

roabilly,

I respect your opininion but respectfully disagree. The LFP Team is proposing issues, within our District, that we can be change for the betterment of the membership. It would be foolish for any team to propose they can change or control our collective destiny.The ND Team included. Our future destiny will be, and has always been, decided by many factors... carrier mergers, bankruptcy, fuel prices, industry wages, the company's agenda etc... The ND Team has no more control over these issues than any other team running for election. IMO...To propose we keep what we have... let them do their jobs is insinuating they can rise above these issues and deliver an industry leading contract. I heard this 4 years ago and I believe you did too. Negotiations aside... this election should be based on the satisfaction of the membership, with the representation received, by the ND Team the past four years. This issue is what they had direct control of. I heard this 4 years ago as well. If you don't see or hear from us vote us out in four years. This message was carried into the stations four years ago. IMO... based on the stations I have visited the past weeks they have come up short in many stations. That being said, I disagree there would be any "set back" by supporting and voting for a positive change.

ograc
please visit: http://lfp12.com

ograc
please visit: http://lfp12.com

Cargo,

Out of all the candidates that are currently opposing the N/D, you seem to be the most realistic, and honest. However, I think you and I both know that changing leadership is not a panacea for anything that plagues Organized Labor.

Of course you will adamantly disagree… you HAVE to! After all, you have a six figure job with full benefits waiting for you if your team wins the election!

Now I’m going to present you with a question that will ultimately challenge your position on what is best for the membership.

Here is the question... if you were NOT running for the AGC position, and you were simply a F/S Agent with no Union ties whatsoever, would you support changing leadership at this critical time in our history?

If you answer this question honestly, it will require that you to drop all of your political bias, and do a lot of soul searching. Remember, the average IAM members (Like myself) are voting in June... not running for office!

 

[mike33]

roabilly,

I respect your opininion but respectfully disagree. The LFP Team is proposing issues, within our District, that we can be change for the betterment of the membership. It would be foolish for any team to propose they can change or control our collective destiny.The ND Team included. Our future destiny will be, and has always been, decided by many factors... carrier mergers, bankruptcy, fuel prices, industry wages, the company's agenda etc... The ND Team has no more control over these issues than any other team running for election. IMO...To propose we keep what we have... let them do their jobs is insinuating they can rise above these issues and deliver an industry leading contract. I heard this 4 years ago and I believe you did too. Negotiations aside... this election should be based on the satisfaction of the membership, with the representation received, by the ND Team the past four years. This issue is what they had direct control of. I heard this 4 years ago as well. If you don't see or hear from us vote us out in four years. This message was carried into the stations four years ago. IMO... based on the stations I have visited the past weeks they have come up short in many stations. That being said, I disagree there would be any "set back" by supporting and voting for a positive change.

ograc

Quite true, it is hard to control EVENTS you have no control over. But, you do have some control over the outcome of some of those events. So, that is where we are. Negotiating with a merger in mind and a Mediator on the horizon. Do you think that a new Team can just come in and start from where the old left off. Sounds simple enough but you should know that a large % of language in a contract is associated with " INTENT ". So a replaced negotiator in mid-stream wouldn't necessarily know what the intent of language was but the team that negotiates does. I know it sounds trivial but it's not.

I don't believe any new Ticket can make a larger contribution at this point. Especially considering the " EVENTS " at hand.

Because of the events unfolding i truly believe this Quote.............


" I Never Vote For Anyone...... I Always Vote Against " WC Fields

 

[rockit2]

Quite true, it is hard to control EVENTS you have no control over. But, you do have some control over the outcome of some of those events. So, that is where we are. Negotiating with a merger in mind and a Mediator on the horizon. Do you think that a new Team can just come in and start from where the old left off. Sounds simple enough but you should know that a large % of language in a contract is associated with " INTENT ". So a replaced negotiator in mid-stream wouldn't necessarily know what the intent of language was but the team that negotiates does. I know it sounds trivial but it's not.

I don't believe any new Ticket can make a larger contribution at this point. Especially considering the " EVENTS " at hand.

Because of the events unfolding i truly believe this Quote.............


" I Never Vote For Anyone...... I Always Vote Against " WC Fields

Hello TWU.......................godbye IAM

 

[mike33]

Hello TWU.......................godbye IAM

From what I'm hearing today the TWU mouthpieces aren't staying committed like the Pilots and Flight attendants are. Even the CSA CWA are putting up a good fight for their membership! ( and yes i do know they are not CWA yet )

 

[Jester]

Sounds simple enough but you should know that a large % of language in a contract is associated with " INTENT ".

That's part of the problem with our CBA as all the "intention" leads to misunderstandings and vagueness, and we should all know how "best intentions" go...


Let's stop with this "INTENT" to know what was meant, and just state it in writing, as to avoid the NC explain to the Membership, "I just want you to know how sorry we are..." and Management's reply, "You were saying something about best intention?"

I don't care who is leading the IAM or the NC... let's end the secret understandings, gentlemen's agreement, vagueness, intentions, or whatever else which screws-up the Membership in the process.

So Advises Jester.

 

[ograc]

Cargo,

Out of all the candidates that are currently opposing the N/D, you seem to be the most realistic, and honest. However, I think you and I both know that changing leadership is not a panacea for anything that plagues Organized Labor.

Of course you will adamantly disagree… you HAVE to! After all, you have a six figure job with full benefits waiting for you if your team wins the election!

Now I’m going to present you with a question that will ultimately challenge your position on what is best for the membership.

Here is the question... if you were NOT running for the AGC position, and you were simply a F/S Agent with no Union ties whatsoever, would you support changing leadership at this critical time in our history?

If you answer this question honestly, it will require that you to drop all of your political bias, and do a lot of soul searching. Remember, the average IAM members (Like myself) are voting in June... not running for office!

roabilly,
Fair question. If I was not running for office, F/S agent with no union ties, experience or involvement. Basically apathetic to the whole election and related issues. I believe my opinion would be not supportive to wholesale change. I have known from the day I decided to run this was a challenge the opposing teams faced. To persuade members to turn from the status quo and vote for change is challenging in any election. In reference to the example in your question... the challege facing all three teams running in this election is getting the average IAM member out to vote. Fair question...honest answer.
ograc (aka cargo)

 

[mike33]

Let's stop with this "INTENT" to know what was meant, and just state it in writing, as to avoid the NC explain to the Membership, "I just want you to know how sorry we are..." and Management's reply, "You were saying something about best intention?"

I don't care who is leading the IAM or the NC... let's end the secret understandings, gentlemen's agreement, vagueness, intentions, or whatever else which screws-up the Membership in the process.

So Advises Jester.

I hate irrelevent video portails with no content of interests to applied subjects of relevance that are used so i don't watch them. How do you know anyone is going to have to say I'm sorry?.... and intent will never ever end in any negotiations. I think you know that. Too many legal angles.

Jester...i have a simple Question for you?


Are You Going To Vote ????????????

 

[Jester]

I hate irrelevent video portails with no content of interests to applied subjects of relevance that are used so i don't watch them. How do you know anyone is going to have to say I'm sorry?.... and intent will never ever end in any negotiations. I think you know that. Too many legal angles.

Jester...i have a simple Question for you?


Are You Going To Vote ????????????

Personally, I think this is a Hegelian dialectic where the New Direction and the Old Boss Canale crew on one side and the anti-New Direction/anti-Boss Canale in opposition. Go with the Establishment or the Old Establishment, or think there needs to be serious need to our over all direction?

I don't want to go back to the old school union tactics of Boss Canale and the LFP ticket, where I haven't seen the moxie to confront Management, nor do I want to continue the ways of the New Direction which has demonstrated poor decision making, suspect negotiations and a lack of keeping campaign promises. Honestly, I wish New Direction had lived-up to its promises, in particular, the promises of fairness and actively addressing the Attendence Policy, but after 3 years, I fully expect to see more of the same in the coming 4 years.

Therefore, by default, the Devil I Don't Know looks more appealing that what I have experienced and seen within the IAM leadership while I have been a member of the organization. I don't always agree with Tim, but I have little doubt in his commitment to the union Members. I found it funny how Tim was accused of "dual unionism," while historically speaking some unions actually encouraged the practice in order to insure the survival or to enhance political power... is that the worse sin people can accuse Tim of committing? It seems that the accusation of "dual unionism" would be little more than a red herring to discourage conflicting points of view, and do we really want an organization which is afraid to consider opposing opinions?

So Endorses Jester.

 

[700UW]

That's part of the problem with our CBA as all the "intention" leads to misunderstandings and vagueness, and we should all know how "best intentions" go...

Let's stop with this "INTENT" to know what was meant, and just state it in writing, as to avoid the NC explain to the Membership, "I just want you to know how sorry we are..." and Management's reply, "You were saying something about best intention?"

I don't care who is leading the IAM or the NC... let's end the secret understandings, gentlemen's agreement, vagueness, intentions, or whatever else which screws-up the Membership in the process.

So Advises Jester.

It is quite apparent you have no idea about negotiations. Intent is everything, ever been to an arbitration?

Guess not as the arbiter will ask and rule on the "intent" of the language, why do you think both sides takes notes and keeps them?

The so called "intent" made the IAM win the Airbus Arbitration and many others.

 

[ograc]

Personally, I think this is a Hegelian dialectic where the New Direction and the Old Boss Canale crew on one side and the anti-New Direction/anti-Boss Canale in opposition. Go with the Establishment or the Old Establishment, or think there needs to be serious need to our over all direction?

I don't want to go back to the old school union tactics of Boss Canale and the LFP ticket, where I haven't seen the moxie to confront Management, nor do I want to continue the ways of the New Direction which has demonstrated poor decision making, suspect negotiations and a lack of keeping campaign promises. Honestly, I wish New Direction had lived-up to its promises, in particular, the promises of fairness and actively addressing the Attendence Policy, but after 3 years, I fully expect to see more of the same in the coming 4 years.

Therefore, by default, the Devil I Don't Know looks more appealing that what I have experienced and seen within the IAM leadership while I have been a member of the organization. I don't always agree with Tim, but I have little doubt in his commitment to the union Members. I found it funny how Tim was accused of "dual unionism," while historically speaking some unions actually encouraged the practice in order to insure the survival or to enhance political power... is that the worse sin people can accuse Tim of committing? It seems that the accusation of "dual unionism" would be little more than a red herring to discourage conflicting points of view, and do we really want an organization which is afraid to consider opposing opinions?

So Endorses Jester.

Jester,
With all due respect listen to yourself. You followed TN's advice 4 years ago. He endorsed and fully supported the ND Team with campaign promises, mud slinging and accusations. He not only endorsed but spearheaded their campaign on the US side. Four years later, by your own admission, you have witnessed poor decision making, suspect contract negotiations and a lack of keeping campaign promises. Many members have witnessed this and feel the same way. Yet, with this history, you choose to follow and support the same candidate who mislead you 4 years ago. "Insanity is doing the same thing in the same way and expecting a different outcome." (Chinese proverb)
ograc

 

[700UW]

Well said ograc

 

[Jester]

Jester,
With all due respect listen to yourself. You followed TN's advice 4 years ago. He endorsed and fully supported the ND Team with campaign promises, mud slinging and accusations. He not only endorsed but spearheaded their campaign on the US side. Four years later, by your own admission, you have witnessed poor decision making, suspect contract negotiations and a lack of keeping campaign promises. Many members have witnessed this and feel the same way. Yet, with this history, you choose to follow and support the same candidate who mislead you 4 years ago. "Insanity is doing the same thing in the same way and expecting a different outcome." (Chinese proverb)
ograc

Ograc,

Actually, I did not endorse TN or the New Direction team 4 years ago. Point of fact, I disparagingly referred to him as "Timmy" as I thought his silly cheerleading of New Direction team while using what I called "Amateur Hour" representatives passing themselves off as legal expert "bag smashers" would lead to more failures against an educated, better trained Management team that the ND08 would face. As it turned out, I was right.

Tim to his credit has come around, and during those 3 years saw the light about the use of attorneys and real experts to represent the interests of the Membership. Even during a brief Moment of Clarity, my Dear Mister Roability agreed with me in a public pronouncement to this forum, only to sadly find himself intoxicated from the powerful basking glow of association with the New Direction leadership.

I would fully encourage you to review my posts from 3 years ago instead of assuming that I endorsed Tim or the New Direction team during that time.

So Corrects Jester.

 

[ograc]

Ograc,

Actually, I did not endorse TN or the New Direction team 4 years ago. Point of fact, I disparagingly referred to him as "Timmy" as I thought his silly cheerleading of New Direction team while using what I called "Amateur Hour" representatives passing themselves off as legal expert "bag smashers" would lead to more failures against an educated, better trained Management team that the ND08 would face. As it turned out, I was right.

Tim to his credit has come around, and during those 3 years saw the light about the use of attorneys and real experts to represent the interests of the Membership. Even during a brief Moment of Clarity, my Dear Mister Roability agreed with me in a public pronouncement to this forum, only to sadly find himself intoxicated from the powerful basking glow of association with the New Direction leadership.

I would fully encourage you to review my posts from 3 years ago instead of assuming that I endorsed Tim or the New Direction team during that time.

So Corrects Jester.

Go to the light Jester. You have been warned it is an oncoming train. Hopefully, you will not mislead too many members to follow you. Because if you do, we will all be thrown in front of the train of deception.
ograc