2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[Tim Nelson]

Tim
Your getting boring!! Again your posting things that I never said. I've told you to prove it, and you can't. You said carry on. Are going to carry on, or do you want to keep posting lies. Post where I said that the UA has no influence on AH. You won't. Again your getting boring to the members on here I'm sure. Either put up or shut up!! You tell people to carry on, but you can't heed your own words.

carry on

 

[700UW]

Distract, Deflect, Divide and Conquer.
 
This is US not UA.

 

[mike33]

Tim
Your getting boring!! Again your posting things that I never said. I've told you to prove it, and you can't. You said carry on. Are going to carry on, or do you want to keep posting lies. Post where I said that the UA has no influence on AH. You won't. Again your getting boring to the members on here I'm sure. Either put up or shut up!! You tell people to carry on, but you can't heed your own words.

CB
 
  I appreciate all you guys are doing i really do! For me its a matter of principles as i consider myself somewhat of a leader also. The problem is, is you would wish the UA guys support our contract that will come, even though they may not have read it. That is a problem with me. I personally would never support something i haven't read. Even if it is bipartisan. 
  The UA debacle is past. It was a chance that slipped away. That is why i will not read any summary sheet without a contract to back it up.  I guess you could say that it is a matter of trust at this point. The process should be you guys have my back first, then each others. Thats the way the UA deal should have gone.............Just my opinion. 
 But that being said, i know we all are on the right path.

 

[charlie Brown]

CB
 
  I appreciate all you guys are doing i really do! For me its a matter of principles as i consider myself somewhat of a leader also. The problem is, is you would wish the UA guys support our contract that will come, even though they may not have read it. That is a problem with me. I personally would never support something i haven't read. Even if it is bipartisan. 
  The UA debacle is past. It was a chance that slipped away. That is why i will not read any summary sheet without a contract to back it up.  I guess you could say that it is a matter of trust at this point. The process should be you guys have my back first, then each others. Thats the way the UA deal should have gone.............Just my opinion. 
 But that being said, i know we all are on the right path.

Mike
I appreciate your opinion. I guess I just look at it different than you. Take our negotiating team for instance. We have been negotiating for 2 1/2 years now. I feel that nobody knows what's going on around our system and going on in the negotiations table better than the committee. UA people aren't put on the board for US people. Vise versa, I'm on the board to represent US people, not UA. If the negotiating committee came out with a T/A next month after 2 1/2 years that the committee supported 100%. And we were sure it was what our members wanted, would you expect a UA guy that knows nothing about what the US members want or what's been going on in negotiations to step in and say he won't support us on that? Now maybe you would expect him to, but I personally would have a big issue with that person if the negotiating team said this is what we want. I personally would feel that the UA guy would be overstepping his authority for what he was put on the board to do. This is just my opinion and not the IAM,s. But I would be pissed if a UA guy tried to block our T/A for our members. It's fine if you disagree with that, I'm sure others do. I'm just saying, that's how I feel. Do I wish the UA agreement was better? Yes. But they were in a much different place than we are now. They left section 6 and lost all their leverage. Then they were negotiating with a Continental CEO that had all continental employees with absolutely zero job protection. Since UA couldn't strike or anything, Smisek pretty much had the leverage with the CO teamster contract giving him a right to do anything he wanted. It was a position the we at US watched, and knew for sure, we didn't want to go that route.

 

[ograc]

  Hoffa would roll over in his grave !!!

Hoffa would deal with this in house fighting in his own way.

 

[mike33]

Mike
I appreciate your opinion. I guess I just look at it different than you. Take our negotiating team for instance. We have been negotiating for 2 1/2 years now. I feel that nobody knows what's going on around our system and going on in the negotiations table better than the committee. UA people aren't put on the board for US people. Vise versa, I'm on the board to represent US people, not UA. If the negotiating committee came out with a T/A next month after 2 1/2 years that the committee supported 100%. And we were sure it was what our members wanted, would you expect a UA guy that knows nothing about what the US members want or what's been going on in negotiations to step in and say he won't support us on that? Now maybe you would expect him to, but I personally would have a big issue with that person if the negotiating team said this is what we want. I personally would feel that the UA guy would be overstepping his authority for what he was put on the board to do. This is just my opinion and not the IAM,s. But I would be pissed if a UA guy tried to block our T/A for our members. It's fine if you disagree with that, I'm sure others do. I'm just saying, that's how I feel. Do I wish the UA agreement was better? Yes. But they were in a much different place than we are now. They left section 6 and lost all their leverage. Then they were negotiating with a Continental CEO that had all continental employees with absolutely zero job protection. Since UA couldn't strike or anything, Smisek pretty much had the leverage with the CO teamster contract giving him a right to do anything he wanted. It was a position the we at US watched, and knew for sure, we didn't want to go that route.

CB
  We can argue the opinion each time the situation changes. Don't get me wrong i would just obstain rather than agree with what they negotiated. You guys are doing a great job....Keep up the pressure. We do have your back no matter what opinions are expressed on this board>>>>>

 

[charlie Brown]

CB
  We can argue the opinion each time the situation changes. Don't get me wrong i would just obstain rather than agree with what they negotiated. You guys are doing a great job....Keep up the pressure. We do have your back no matter what opinions are expressed on this board>>>>>

Mike
I appreciate that. We have met before, I know what a stand up guy you are. Don't get me wrong, this board is for everyone to discuss and sometimes disagree with each other. That's how it should be. But it shouldn't be used to express lies and deceiving people like some try to do, to benefit their cause. Like I said, the above post is how I feel, I'm sure some will disagree. I have no problem with that. Personally I would never abstain from a vote that I am present for. Always looked at that as the easy way out. Like I said. I'm glad we aren't in the same position as The UA negotiating team was. But you and I can disagree anytime, I know your there for the members, and that's what counts for me.

 

[ograc]

Cb
Interesting. Well, i dont know if i ever thought that i didnt like u as a human being, my comments certainly are meant objectively. I also have nothing against AH either as a person but he has been used as a vehicle to destroy jobs.
Objectively, you endorsing that pos ua agreement was wrong. Saying it has no influence on AH is also wrong.
Your team lied out their ass cloyding the vote at united. What difference have you made on the eboard? You guys make canale look like an angel.
And your lies on this side are just as bad but, like at united, they wont come to pass until they are revealed by your future actions. You dont want to step out of line as you are comfortable supporting your team that did the dirty deed at united.

Moving forward, you guys havent been successful in moving AH off of a lousy contract and havent covered your bases as a real negotiations team would. Why should AH move to something that could be considered fair if you guys have left big chips off the table?

"Canale look like an angel." The "you guys" you speak of are the very leadership team you endorsed 6 years ago to vote the Canale team out is it not? Tell me Tim; has the new leadership team, you endorsed 6 years ago, made a positive change in the  livelihoods of the US Fleet? Doesn't matter what leadership team is elected... all are up against the same parameters. The past 6 years have proven this. If a new leadership team is elected in June the parameters and the enemy will not change.On another note... I agree the UA agreement was a disgrace. Disgraceful that a union leadership team and NC would endorse it! Disgaceful that a membership would ratify it!  An opportunity to "raise the bar" of working conditions for the represented above and below wing employees in the industry has been squandered. On the US side; contract negotiations are at an impasse. The NC and the current leadership is being forced to fight to the very end for any improvements in working conditions. The NC and the leadership team has stated they are committed to remaining in Section 6 negotiations. Unless given a reason to think otherwise, regarding the current status of our contract negotiations, I will give the current NC team the benefit of the doubt and remain supportive. Your speculations of what may happen going forward are credible and respectfully duly noted Brother. Let's wait and see. The truth tends to rise like cream in coffee. In the meantime... Deal the cards!   

 

[cltrat]

CB what's the general feeling among you  if the NMB will make a decision this week or kick the can down the road?

 

[charlie Brown]

CB what's the general feeling among you  if the NMB will make a decision this week or kick the can down the road?

Rat
I'm not sure. We will see. I hope at the very least we can at least get her to put a date that she will release us if no agreement. AH is just not going to negotiate until he absolutely has to. We need to be released to give us the leverage we need. The company will test us. They have already test us. The membership needs to stand strong. AH is counting on the membership folding and settling for a POS last offer is what I think. But that's just my guess. Hopefully I'm wrong, and we can work out a T/A next week.

 

[cltrat]

a pos last offer would have to be voted on correct? along with a strike vote.

 

[charlie Brown]

a pos last offer would have to be voted on correct? along with a strike vote.

That is correct. If we are released and go to the 30 day cooling off period, the last offer will be brought out to the membership for a vote, with a strike vote being held at the same time.

 

[Tim Nelson]

That is correct. If we are released and go to the 30 day cooling off period, the last offer will be brought out to the membership for a vote, with a strike vote being held at the same time.

being that myself, AH, and others who understand this, you havent given AH a reason to do anything but offer a pos ta since you have either naively or purposely decided to sit on leverage by not doing two things required to give AH space to move forward of his pos proposal. Putting all your eggs in one basket is going to cause "great pain" to this group because the timetable is ticking but you guys dont trust the membership and AH is calling your bull S because of it. Cripes! Wake up or get the hell out of the way.

Yeah go do another station tour without finishing the test. Morons

 

[ograc]

That is correct. If we are released and go to the 30 day cooling off period, the last offer will be brought out to the membership for a vote, with a strike vote being held at the same time.

speaking of a "strike vote" let me say this... If a member thinks the last offer is a POS he or she had damn well vote for a srike! To vote against a TA and not vote for a strike is simply moronic! The message sent by the membership must be "we reject the current TA and are willing to strike to gain what we have sent our NC to obtain on our behalf"! Without a strong strike vote the NC has no leverage.  The company's position has been very clear; We're not getting anything without a fight. We must fall in and stand united behind our NC. There is no other options available to gaining the improvements in working conditions we deserve. LOCK and LOAD!  

 

[ograc]

being that myself, AH, and others who understand this, you havent given AH a reason to do anything but offer a pos ta since you have either naively or purposely decided to sit on leverage by not doing two things required to give AH space to move forward of his pos proposal. Putting all your eggs in one basket is going to cause "great pain" to this group because the timetable is ticking but you guys dont trust the membership and AH is calling your bull S because of it. Cripes! Wake up or get the hell out of the way.

Yeah go do another station tour without finishing the test. Morons

And these two things that you speak of are???