Teamsters false promise to open your contract

That is because he is aware of management rights clauses. It doesn't matter it be AMFA or the Teamsters the company would introduce the CBA they have with their employees and point out Article 28b to the new union on the property and say we intend to impose all terms of this agreement that don't conflict with other articles of the agreement and the new union would have to take it on the chin since they would have no past practice arguments to make to slow the company from imposing their will. With the TWU we have room to argue the issues and with a new union we would really be screwed in my opinion...I see a new union as un-effective and a false promise Informer <_<
 
That is because he is aware of management rights clauses. It doesn't matter it be AMFA or the Teamsters the company would introduce the CBA they have with their employees and point out Article 28b to the new union on the property and say we intend to impose all terms of this agreement that don't conflict with other articles of the agreement and the new union would have to take it on the chin since they would have no past practice arguments to make to slow the company from imposing their will. With the TWU we have room to argue the issues and with a new union we would really be screwed in my opinion...

The Legal Beagle speaks again.

If you are so up on the law, then why do you continue to be a machinist voting for concession after concession?
Why not put your legal credentials to work?

The truth is the TWU has never stopped AA from imposing its will.
I still await my share of the CFM56 greivance award. What Article gets that for me and my coworkers?

Seham is clear, not one Article is in play here, the whole agreement is you fool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
That is because he is aware of management rights clauses. It doesn't matter it be AMFA or the Teamsters the company would introduce the CBA they have with their employees and point out Article 28b to the new union on the property and say we intend to impose all terms of this agreement that don't conflict with other articles of the agreement and the new union would have to take it on the chin since they would have no past practice arguments to make to slow the company from imposing their will. With the TWU we have room to argue the issues and with a new union we would really be screwed in my opinion...

Just curious , what would happen to all the past practice? As far as new terms, if we agreed to the new terms then past practice becomes irrelevant. Are you saying that we can keep our Wallen report because we've had it the last 50 years because of past practice?
 
That is because he is aware of management rights clauses. It doesn't matter it be AMFA or the Teamsters the company would introduce the CBA they have with their employees and point out Article 28b to the new union on the property and say we intend to impose all terms of this agreement that don't conflict with other articles of the agreement and the new union would have to take it on the chin since they would have no past practice arguments to make to slow the company from imposing their will. With the TWU we have room to argue the issues and with a new union we would really be screwed in my opinion...I see a new union as un-effective and a false promise Informer <_<

I disagree with you. IMO, a change in representatives does not wash the slate clean as far as past practices. But if you have a citation to some authority that supports your fear-mongering, I'd love to read it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Just curious , what would happen to all the past practice? As far as new terms, if we agreed to the new terms then past practice becomes irrelevant. Are you saying that we can keep our Wallen report because we've had it the last 50 years because of past practice?

Maybe High Speed should go get our pensions and retirement medical back since it was also past practice?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Sorry you guys don't like the way I think but changing to any new union would only empower the company in my opinion...
 
Just now watched the Seham video and it looks like I'm right on point with my argument here as he pointed out in his video AMFA would get their goose cooked too at AA... B)

Thanks for the video Informer :p
 
Sorry you guys don't like the way I think but changing to any new union would only empower the company in my opinion...

Any citation to authority or is it just your "opinion?"

Just now watched the Seham video and it looks like I'm right on point with my argument here as he pointed out in his video AMFA would get their goose cooked too at AA... B)

Thanks for the video Informer :p

I watched the video as well and saw nothing that supported your earlier post.

Lots of uneducated nonsense, but no intelligent response to my post. I'll ask again:

Do you (or any of your TWU cronies) have any citation to any legal authority to support your proposition that a change in representatives cancels all past practices arguments that the former union might have been able to raise?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
Sorry you guys don't like the way I think but changing to any new union would only empower the company in my opinion...

Has the company not been empowered since you hired in?
You have lost everything from your pension to your job security and scope.
And you have the nerve to make that stupid comment.

Hillbilly
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
Sorry you guys don't like the way I think but changing to any new union would only empower the company in my opinion...

Everyone has a right to their opinion I'm trying to figure out what you are saying about Past practice and the language of the contract. To me it seems like you are saying that even though we agreed to all these changes in the contract that the company cant impliment them because of past practice. Is that your opinion?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
The only time I have seen the TWU really fight was when we had the petition to revote in 2003 when the pension fund for exectutives was released the day after the vote passed. The TWU, who had to have knowlege of this but kept it from us, went to a federal judge to stop us. To my knowlege they have never gone to a judge to try to stop AA from anything. But Jim Little got a federal judge to say that he doesn't even have to let us vote. That alone calls for action on our part. A new union will be a challenge, but we have all kinds of examples on what not to do by looking at the TWU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
The only time I have seen the TWU really fight was when we had the petition to revote in 2003 when the pension fund for exectutives was released the day after the vote passed. The TWU, who had to have knowlege of this but kept it from us, went to a federal judge to stop us. To my knowlege they have never gone to a judge to try to stop AA from anything. But Jim Little got a federal judge to say that he doesn't even have to let us vote. That alone calls for action on our part. A new union will be a challenge, but we have all kinds of examples on what not to do by looking at the TWU.

Well Said
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I really can't believe that the teamsters supporters are buying into that crap that they will reopen the contract. Even if we vote in AMFA, we'll have to live with what we have until it becomes amendable...