June - IAM Fleet Service Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tim,
You know as well as I Bios can and have been created that are "over inflated" at best or simply not true. The membership takes the bios as "the truth' and you know this. This is what you have done regarding your ticket. Same strategy 4 years ago. I was actively involved in positions of Shop Steward, Grievance Committee and eventually Committee Chair in PIT prior to 1998 before transferring to my current station. The PIT candidates' credentials for the ND Team, that you fully supported, were at best inflated if not fabricated in that election. That being said... at this point they have 4 years of "true" experience. Although I respect the campaign strategies you use (i.e. create a team that represents diversity, ethnicity and candidates from large US hubs) in order to be elected I do not believe this strategy represents the best interests of the memberships' representation. You're developing a pattern here 4 years later. I don't believe I am the one "full of crap" as you put it. My advice is to campaign cities that don't know of your history. Wait... I'm sure you have already thought of that.
ograc

please visit: lfp12.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Tim,
You know as well as I Bios can and have been created that are "over inflated" at best or simply not true. The membership takes the bios as "the truth' and you know this. This is what you have done regarding your ticket. Same strategy 4 years ago. I was actively involved in positions of Shop Steward, Grievance Committee and eventually Committee Chair in PIT prior to 1998 before transferring to my current station. The PIT candidates' credentials for the ND Team, that you fully supported, were at best inflated if not fabricated in that election. That being said... at this point they have 4 years of "true" experience. Although I respect the campaign strategies you use (i.e. create a team that represents diversity, ethnicity and candidates from large US hubs) in order to be elected I do not believe this strategy represents the best interests of the memberships' representation. You're developing a pattern here 4 years later. I don't believe I am the one "full of crap" as you put it. My advice is to campaign cities that don't know of your history. Wait... I'm sure you have already thought of that.
ograc

please visit: lfp12.com
Cargo,

Huh? I won the nomination of the stations that know me best, i.e., CLT. And in doing so, the membership went completely against the establishment to nominate me by a comfortable margin. So, I'm not sure what you are talking about??? OTOH, all 3 US AIRWAYS hub members slammed the door shut on your candidates. How many times does CLT have to vote against MW for you to finally understand that they don't trust him and know his past performance? Cripes, your PHX candidate was on two tickets and couldn't come close. BTW, your PHX candidate doesn't even support you guys as he was dogging your ticket in PHX so don't use him as one of your own.

And you are wrong about the strategy of the occupy ticket. You better check your ticket and compare your ticket against the occupy ticket again. I'm from a non hub station so I'm sensitive to non hub stations. You have 3 non hub US AIRWAYS candidates. Occupy has more US AIRWAYS non hub candidates [4] than your slate so get your facts straight. And we do so without leaving PHL alone. It's time that US AIRWAYS has its fair share amount of representation on the eboard of this union also. Me and you will just have to disagree in your philosophy that you can represent your biggest station, PHL, from JAX.

And cargo, you have been a fine union man since I can remember so I'll give you credit where credit is due but you are stuck having to support a ticket that goes cheap on US AIRWAYS representation once again. Especially, going through a merger, US AIRWAYS members need to make sure that they have an equal amount of representation on the Union eboard where all of the decisions are made. The retro ticket that cargo supports has less US AIRWAYS potential board members than any other ticket and removes more representation from the union eboard than what is currently established.

Onward!
 
"The airline seems to prefer to negotiate with employees it doesn't even have yet," Joe Tiberi, spokesman for the International Association of Machinists, has said. The IAM, the largest union at US Airways, is currently negotiating contracts for US Airways fleet workers and mechanics and is "not going to waste time entertaining somebody's merger fantasy," Tiberi said.

Yet, our District President said he is neutral on a merger. Brothers and sisters when a airline steps over your leaders after getting them to sign off on contracting out IND, MSY, and SNA, then 6 weeks later signs a tentative agreement with the TWU stipulating terms, including protections for TWU members in IND, MSY, and SNA....something is wrong and certainly no union official should be neutral on such injustice.

Onward!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New thread, same dividing the union makes it stronger nonsense.

Carry on.
Dog wonder, we need to keep the leadership accountable. Being neutral on these current injustices is simply not acceptable. It's the clearest indication that 'here we go again' with this union which constantly treats US AIRWAYS members as second best.

There is a reason why 2% doesn't mean 2%.

Onward!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New thread, same dividing the union makes it stronger nonsense.

Carry on.

Tim uses the word " Won" like the vote is over in the hubs and he is their candidate. Yet there are 2 other slates vying for votes still. You always have to read between the lines and seek out whats real....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Dog wonder, we need to keep the leadership accountable. Being neutral on these current injustices is simply not acceptable. It's the clearest indication that 'here we go again' with this union which constantly treats US AIRWAYS members as second best.

There is a reason why 2% doesn't mean 2%.

Onward!

and there is a reason why " Won " doesn't really mean WON yet!.

You may have been nominated but you have't won anything yet!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Cargo,

Huh? I won the nomination of the stations that know me best, i.e., CLT. And in doing so, the membership went completely against the establishment to nominate me by a comfortable margin. So, I'm not sure what you are talking about??? OTOH, all 3 US AIRWAYS hub members slammed the door shut on your candidates. How many times does CLT have to vote against MW for you to finally understand that they don't trust him and know his past performance? Cripes, your PHX candidate was on two tickets and couldn't come close. BTW, your PHX candidate doesn't even support you guys as he was dogging your ticket in PHX so don't use him as one of your own.

And you are wrong about the strategy of the occupy ticket. You better check your ticket and compare your ticket against the occupy ticket again. I'm from a non hub station so I'm sensitive to non hub stations. You have 3 non hub US AIRWAYS candidates. Occupy has more US AIRWAYS non hub candidates [4] than your slate so get your facts straight. And we do so without leaving PHL alone. It's time that US AIRWAYS has its fair share amount of representation on the eboard of this union also. Me and you will just have to disagree in your philosophy that you can represent your biggest station, PHL, from JAX.

And cargo, you have been a fine union man since I can remember so I'll give you credit where credit is due but you are stuck having to support a ticket that goes cheap on US AIRWAYS representation once again. Especially, going through a merger, US AIRWAYS members need to make sure that they have an equal amount of representation on the Union eboard where all of the decisions are made. The retro ticket that cargo supports has less US AIRWAYS potential board members than any other ticket and removes more representation from the union eboard than what is currently established.

Onward!

Tim,

You seem to have it out for PR in PHX but the people I talk to say he is running a positive campaign and not bashing anyone including Occupy. Occupy on the other hand is talking trash.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Tim uses the word " Won" like the vote is over in the hubs and he is their candidate. Yet there are 2 other slates vying for votes still. You always have to read between the lines and seek out whats real....
Mike, kindly reread my comments and stop quote mining me. I specifically said'nomination'. Much hard work remains Mike.

Onward!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
"The airline seems to prefer to negotiate with employees it doesn't even have yet," Joe Tiberi, spokesman for the International Association of Machinists, has said. The IAM, the largest union at US Airways, is currently negotiating contracts for US Airways fleet workers and mechanics and is "not going to waste time entertaining somebody's merger fantasy," Tiberi said.

Yet, our District President said he is neutral on a merger. Brothers and sisters when a airline steps over your leaders after getting them to sign off on contracting out IND, MSY, and SNA, then 6 weeks later signs a tentative agreement with the TWU stipulating terms, including protections for TWU members in IND, MSY, and SNA....something is wrong and certainly no union official should be neutral on such injustice.

Tim, I'm trying to figure out the degree to which Delany's policies are misguided and ruiness to FS. So I want to start by trying to understand how damaging his being neutral in regards to the possible merger is. But before I try to understand that I need to understand to what degree you think he is nuetral. And nuetral on what part of the merger? Are you nuetral on the merger? For or Against to what degree?

I may be beating to death a red herring but let me continue. Has Joe Tiberi made it known his disgust toward Delany's neutrality?

I don't know the details of Delany signing off on the above stations so I will assume that FS got nothing in return and that it was somehow negligent, expedient, or perhaps even nefarious.Nevertheless I'm a little unclear as to where the injustice is the me and my brothers and sisters are to feel in regards to DP's offer to AA FS. (actually I think there is none at all but let me continue... this red herring seems to have nine lives). Is it that in the event of a merger and DP honors his promise to AA then no US fs will be allowed to return to any of these stations? I guess that could happen.

Another question: Do you think Delany is neutral in regards to the possiblity of US FS becoming TWU?

And Yet another? At what point in time does it become politically correct to get chummy with the TWU? Here are several options for that:

1. Yesterday

2. Today

3. Sometime after the elections. (the most sensible)

Thanks BF
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Cargo,

Huh? I won the nomination of the stations that know me best, i.e., CLT. And in doing so, the membership went completely against the establishment to nominate me by a comfortable margin. So, I'm not sure what you are talking about??? OTOH, all 3 US AIRWAYS hub members slammed the door shut on your candidates. How many times does CLT have to vote against MW for you to finally understand that they don't trust him and know his past performance? Cripes, your PHX candidate was on two tickets and couldn't come close. BTW, your PHX candidate doesn't even support you guys as he was dogging your ticket in PHX so don't use him as one of your own.

And you are wrong about the strategy of the occupy ticket. You better check your ticket and compare your ticket against the occupy ticket again. I'm from a non hub station so I'm sensitive to non hub stations. You have 3 non hub US AIRWAYS candidates. Occupy has more US AIRWAYS non hub candidates [4] than your slate so get your facts straight. And we do so without leaving PHL alone. It's time that US AIRWAYS has its fair share amount of representation on the eboard of this union also. Me and you will just have to disagree in your philosophy that you can represent your biggest station, PHL, from JAX.

And cargo, you have been a fine union man since I can remember so I'll give you credit where credit is due but you are stuck having to support a ticket that goes cheap on US AIRWAYS representation once again. Especially, going through a merger, US AIRWAYS members need to make sure that they have an equal amount of representation on the Union eboard where all of the decisions are made. The retro ticket that cargo supports has less US AIRWAYS potential board members than any other ticket and removes more representation from the union eboard than what is currently established.

Onward!

Tim,
Thank you for your acknowledgement of being a "fine union man". I likewise, will give credit where credit is due. My involvement with the union representation of the US Fleet goes back to the early eighties. Since I can remember you too have been involved, engaged and tenacious. You have great skills in campaigning, organizing and persuading the membership. Unfortunately, since I've known of you, your energies for the most part have been focused on criticism of any current union leadership team in place. Subsequently, IMO... the end result of your efforts continues to divide the membership and is counter productive to solidarity. Both on the US and UA side.
I have visited many stations in the past 6 weeks including PHL and CLT. I could be wrong... but I have not seen, or heard of, the support you speak of. In June the members will decide.
ograc

please visit: http:lfp12.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Cargo,

Huh? I won the nomination of the stations that know me best, i.e., CLT. And in doing so, the membership went completely against the establishment to nominate me by a comfortable margin. So, I'm not sure what you are talking about??? OTOH, all 3 US AIRWAYS hub members slammed the door shut on your candidates. How many times does CLT have to vote against MW for you to finally understand that they don't trust him and know his past performance? Cripes, your PHX candidate was on two tickets and couldn't come close. BTW, your PHX candidate doesn't even support you guys as he was dogging your ticket in PHX so don't use him as one of your own.

And you are wrong about the strategy of the occupy ticket. You better check your ticket and compare your ticket against the occupy ticket again. I'm from a non hub station so I'm sensitive to non hub stations. You have 3 non hub US AIRWAYS candidates. Occupy has more US AIRWAYS non hub candidates [4] than your slate so get your facts straight. And we do so without leaving PHL alone. It's time that US AIRWAYS has its fair share amount of representation on the eboard of this union also. Me and you will just have to disagree in your philosophy that you can represent your biggest station, PHL, from JAX.

And cargo, you have been a fine union man since I can remember so I'll give you credit where credit is due but you are stuck having to support a ticket that goes cheap on US AIRWAYS representation once again. Especially, going through a merger, US AIRWAYS members need to make sure that they have an equal amount of representation on the Union eboard where all of the decisions are made. The retro ticket that cargo supports has less US AIRWAYS potential board members than any other ticket and removes more representation from the union eboard than what is currently established.

Onward!

Tim,
We all know you achieved nomination in the said cities. What you failed to address was the experience of your team. Is it made up of the most experienced candidates running for election? If not, then what does the team represent in regards to the betterment of the membership? Your posts continue to focus on you, rather than the team, you propose should lead the district. Again, I respect your campaign strategy, but it is just that. I too am from an outline station. One that is much more vulnerable to outsoursing than yours. ORD is not even on the radar. Where we are in agreement on is accountability of the current leadership team for the past four years of representation both on the US and UA side. Did you not fully endorse and aggresively campaign four years ago for this very team? A simple yes or no please.
ograc

please visit: http://lfp12.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
Tim,
We all know you achieved nomination in the said cities. What you failed to address was the experience of your team. Is it made up of the most experienced candidates running for election? If not, then what does the team represent in regards to the betterment of the membership? Your posts continue to focus on you, rather than the team, you propose should lead the district. Again, I respect your campaign strategy, but it is just that. I too am from an outline station. One that is much more vulnerable to outsoursing than yours. ORD is not even on the radar. Where we are in agreement on is accountability of the current leadership team for the past four years of representation both on the US and UA side. Did you not fully endorse and aggresively campaign four years ago for this very team? A simple yes or no please.
ograc

please visit: http://lfp12.com
Yeah, I supported the New Direction, it was the only option other than keeping Canale. 75% of US AIRWAYS went against Canale and for good reason.

The occupy ticket has experience. 15 of which are/were Local chairman or committee persons. Many more were/are local officers. And all of our US AIRWAYS hub AGC's secured their hub nomination by a comfortable margin. It is fairly obvious that the membership interprets experience as good experience or bad experience, otherwise MW or PR would have done quite well.

I'm hopeful you are right about ORD, it is a class 2 station so not sure what's in the future for it.

Onward www.occupyiam141.com
 
Status
Not open for further replies.