2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[ograc]

One thing is certain. If members throughout the IAM are truly dissatisfied with the level of representation they are receiving across the board then that change must start at the top of the food chain. From the elected Grand Lodge Officers down through the District Officers. There are elections scheduled to take place in the coming months at both levels. Unfortunately, this democratic process within the IAM, is detrimental to solidifying the membership when it runs parallel with contract negotiations; such as the ongoing negotiations between US the Fleet and MTC. and Related. I regard this process as a necessary freedom of choice of which candidates the membership believes will best represent. Unfortunately, as in the case of the US contract negotiations, it leads to division when there is a need for solidarity. Some posters on this forum believe there is a desperate need for change within the leadership of the IAM. Today, as in the past, they choose to run for office in opposition. Members on this forum can agree or disagree with their opinion but continuing to debate the politics switches the focus from where it should be at this time. The focus should be on building solidarity in an effort to obtain a fair and equitible contract for the respective collective bargaining groups. If we want to discuss in house politics and certain candidates' credentials, history and credibility maybe there should be a seperate thread for this. In the meantime; can we focus on the task at hand?     

 

[WeAAsles]

ograc starting a separate thread for those with only politics in mind is a great idea. You're absolutely right that there is something else going on at the moment that should be given greater focus at the moment. The question is though if you start it will certain people restrict themselves to the topic only being discussed on that thread?

 

[roabilly]

One thing is certain. If members throughout the IAM are truly dissatisfied with the level of representation they are receiving across the board then that change must start at the top of the food chain. From the elected Grand Lodge Officers down through the District Officers. There are elections scheduled to take place in the coming months at both levels. Unfortunately, this democratic process within the IAM, is detrimental to solidifying the membership when it runs parallel with contract negotiations; such as the ongoing negotiations between US the Fleet and MTC. and Related. I regard this process as a necessary freedom of choice of which candidates the membership believes will best represent. Unfortunately, as in the case of the US contract negotiations, it leads to division when there is a need for solidarity. Some posters on this forum believe there is a desperate need for change within the leadership of the IAM. Today, as in the past, they choose to run for office in opposition. Members on this forum can agree or disagree with their opinion but continuing to debate the politics switches the focus from where it should be at this time. The focus should be on building solidarity in an effort to obtain a fair and equitible contract for the respective collective bargaining groups. If we want to discuss in house politics and certain candidates' credentials, history and credibility maybe there should be a seperate thread for this. In the meantime; can we focus on the task at hand?     

Perhaps any poster that carries a link to his personal political ticket should remove it from his signature to truly help remove the politics from this forum...

 

[ograc]

ograc starting a separate thread for those with only politics in mind is a great idea. You're absolutely right that there is something else going on at the moment that should be given greater focus at the moment. The question is though if you start it will certain people restrict themselves to the topic only being discussed on that thread?

With all due respect for the incumbent and opposition candidates running for election, or those who have a vested interest in the outcome of the upcoming elections, I would ask that, in the best interest of the memberships' ongoing contract negotiations, a seperate thread be started focusing soley on the upcoming officer elections. Many members, including myself, would weigh in regarding this issue. For the sake of solidarity at this critical time; I refuse to enter into discussion about in house politics on this thread. This thread should be a vehicle for obtaining information regarding ongoing contract negotiations and the immediate benefit of the membership. A vehicle to build the solidarity that will be required of the membership for a potential impending battle. If you want to talk fishin or politics well I guess that will be OK. Let's do it on a seperate thread. Let's begin Tim. 

 

[roabilly]

With all due respect for the incumbent and opposition candidates running for election, or those who have a vested interest in the outcome of the upcoming elections, I would ask that, in the best interest of the memberships' ongoing contract negotiations, a seperate thread be started focusing soley on the upcoming officer elections. Many members, including myself, would weigh in regarding this issue. For the sake of solidarity at this critical time; I refuse to enter into discussion about in house politics on this thread. This thread should be a vehicle for obtaining information regarding ongoing contract negotiations and the immediate benefit of the membership. A vehicle to build the solidarity that will be required of the membership for a potential impending battle. If you want to talk fishin or politics well I guess that will be OK. Let's do it on a seperate thread. Let's begin Tim. 

Cargo...
 
I love the idea, but I don't think the site will allow it, unless a moderator creates it, since in essence... it would be another Fleet Service (Labor) thread.
Perhaps you could appeal to a moderator to get this accomplished...

 

[Tim Nelson]

Keep it up, we should print how you speak to people, bet that will get you tons of votes. JS, JC, JR and RD have all told people of your exploits, keep up the lies.

People know me. If they want the same ole in there then they really should vote for the current folks and guarantee stupid. They don't have to like my personality but if they want an altar boy then surely they won't vote for me. But if they realize they aren't getting squat for their dues then they will have no option but to vote for change.  It's their choice and I'm fine with that.  I love my life and I am  plenty fine at where I'm at now.  You think I'm going to change my personality during this vote and back off?  LMAO.
My passion is to clean this mess up, stop the Bull **** games of stupid,  and sacrifice the next 4 years of my life serving the membership.  Yeah, I'm crude, rude, and I've been called a few other things and if that makes folks uncomfortable then they have other choices. I'll be there to do a job, not to win some popularity context. 

 

[ograc]

Cargo...
 
I love the idea, but I don't think the site will allow it, unless a moderator creates it, since in essence... it would be another Fleet Service (Labor) thread.
Perhaps you could appeal to a moderator to get this accomplished...

I will leave this up to the candidates running in opposition and those who continue to question the dedication of the leadership. If their true intent is solidarity and the betterment of the members... then a new thread should be established.

 

[WeAAsles]

Hey ograc:

It was a nice try but as you can see there is one candidate who will not go along with the idea you had which was an excellent and honorable one. If a person doesn't respect you or the membership he should not be afforded the privilege of your vote.

 

[Tim Nelson]

One thing is certain. If members throughout the IAM are truly dissatisfied with the level of representation they are receiving across the board then that change must start at the top of the food chain. From the elected Grand Lodge Officers down through the District Officers. There are elections scheduled to take place in the coming months at both levels. Unfortunately, this democratic process within the IAM, is detrimental to solidifying the membership when it runs parallel with contract negotiations; such as the ongoing negotiations between US the Fleet and MTC. and Related. I regard this process as a necessary freedom of choice of which candidates the membership believes will best represent. Unfortunately, as in the case of the US contract negotiations, it leads to division when there is a need for solidarity. Some posters on this forum believe there is a desperate need for change within the leadership of the IAM. Today, as in the past, they choose to run for office in opposition. Members on this forum can agree or disagree with their opinion but continuing to debate the politics switches the focus from where it should be at this time. The focus should be on building solidarity in an effort to obtain a fair and equitible contract for the respective collective bargaining groups. If we want to discuss in house politics and certain candidates' credentials, history and credibility maybe there should be a seperate thread for this. In the meantime; can we focus on the task at hand?     

The elections do force things and democracy always comes with dirty face, but we fight for it.  IMO, these 4 year terms shouldn't be staggered to force elections every two years. I don't see why we can't just have all of these 4 year AGC terms voted upon at the same time once every 4 years.  I've been told the reason we won't is due to politics and always claiming "We are in negotiations".  In that sense, the company offered a 5 year proposal plan like at AMR but the IAM turned it down flat for a dumb ass 2 year agreement. Why?  Because of politics, the leaders can claim they are always in negotiations.  Prolly get more bang for your buck agreeing to a longer term contract and our members won't be hammered with starvation after only receiving raises for two years then nothing for the next 5.  We gotta make some changes and there is definitely going to be some skull cracking [metaphor] and cleaning up if we get change through.  Otherwise, nothing will change and we will keep up with stupid.

 

[ograc]

People know me. If they want the same ole in there then they really should vote for the current folks and guarantee stupid. They don't have to like my personality but if they want an altar boy then surely they won't vote for me. But if they realize they aren't getting squat for their dues then they will have no option but to vote for change.  It's their choice and I'm fine with that.  I love my life and I am  plenty fine at where I'm at now.  You think I'm going to change my personality during this vote and back off?  LMAO.
My passion is to clean this mess up, stop the Bull #### games of stupid,  and sacrifice the next 4 years of my life serving the membership.  Yeah, I'm crude, rude, and I've been called a few other things and if that makes folks uncomfortable then they have other choices. I'll be there to do a job, not to win some popularity context. 

You are right! People know of you including myself. Are you willing to start a new thread regarding the long term solutions, as you see them, of what needs to happen in order to change the course the IAM and it's leadership is following? Are you willing to start a new thread that encompasses political opinions on where the membership is headed and what needs to be done to change the course? Tim. I respect your passion, opinion, engagement, past accomplishments as the Director of Organizing for DL 141 and education regarding the issues facing the members of the IAM. Specifically, the US members of DL 141. However, I believe it would be in the best interest of the membership if we seperate the politics from the immediate task at hand. That task, as I see it, is; building solidarity within the membership to achieve improvements in our working conditions and wages in current contract negotiations. I respect dissenting opinions on what needs to be done to change the course of the future of the IAM. I do not, however, respect anyone whose sole purpose is to divide the membership, regardless of the cost to the members, for political gain. With that being said...I ask you; for the betterment of the membership and your own credibility; are you willing to pursue starting a new thread? One that focuses on opinionated changes needed at the leadership levels of the Grand Lodge and the Districts. One, that by it's very nature, is divisive yet sometimes necessary. Can you agree to seperate politics from the immediate task at hand for the Fleet at US? I woud suggest you find a way to seperate the two. If not; you must choose to stand behind the will of the Fleet Sevice group or squarely in opposition and in front of it!

 

[robbedagain]

Tim  i do have one question for you.. 
 
should you get elected,  and say you get ahold of my grievance case,  how quick would you be able to get the arbitraitors to gather and where
 
keep in mind  if you get elected  how soon like in months weeks or days would it take to get it scheduled etc?
 
the way i understand it now is that harbinson and the girl are out in may and the other left already   and with the current nmb meetings going on now,,  if i were a betting man  id probably bet it would not happen before july   which would be exactly 5 yrs since the grievance was filed

 

[700UW]

He cant do a thing to help robbed.
 
He isnt the coordinator, nor would he be PDGC.
 
He is blowing smoke up your rear.
 
His solution is to push everything to arbitration which would logjam the process even more.
 
See he cant force the company to settle any grievance, no one can, and both parties have to agree to the arbiter and the dates.

He doesnt even know your case and would have to be brought up to speed.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim  i do have one question for you.. 
 
should you get elected,  and say you get ahold of my grievance case,  how quick would you be able to get the arbitraitors to gather and where
 
keep in mind  if you get elected  how soon like in months weeks or days would it take to get it scheduled etc?
 
the way i understand it now is that harbinson and the girl are out in may and the other left already   and with the current nmb meetings going on now,,  if i were a betting man  id probably bet it would not happen before july   which would be exactly 5 yrs since the grievance was filed

I don't know what kind of deal they made with your grievance. Truth is it may have already been settled.  I would talk to Frankie and see if he will call the mediator and get a decision rendered or allow me to.  Hell, by your admission the damn thing was mediated already.  Something will give, THIS I KNOW. Skulls will start getting cracked [metaphorically] as I don't play stupid too well.  I wouldn't be going in there to make friends and sing kumbuya and ring bells.  You will be kept completely informed.

 

[AANOTOK]

...and yet it's a five year old unsettled grievance. For a due paying member, that is totally unacceptable.

 

[Tim Nelson]

You are right! People know of you including myself. Are you willing to start a new thread regarding the long term solutions, as you see them, of what needs to happen in order to change the course the IAM and it's leadership is following? Are you willing to start a new thread that encompasses political opinions on where the membership is headed and what needs to be done to change the course? Tim. I respect your passion, opinion, engagement, past accomplishments as the Director of Organizing for DL 141 and education regarding the issues facing the members of the IAM. Specifically, the US members of DL 141. However, I believe it would be in the best interest of the membership if we seperate the politics from the immediate task at hand. That task, as I see it, is; building solidarity within the membership to achieve improvements in our working conditions and wages in current contract negotiations. I respect dissenting opinions on what needs to be done to change the course of the future of the IAM. I do not, however, respect anyone whose sole purpose is to divide the membership, regardless of the cost to the members, for political gain. With that being said...I ask you; for the betterment of the membership and your own credibility; are you willing to pursue starting a new thread? One that focuses on opinionated changes needed at the leadership levels of the Grand Lodge and the Districts. One, that by it's very nature, is divisive yet sometimes necessary. Can you agree to seperate politics from the immediate task at hand for the Fleet at US? I woud suggest you find a way to seperate the two. If not; you must choose to stand behind the will of the Fleet Sevice group or squarely in opposition and in front of it!

I chose to stand with fleet service a long time ago. I have no problem with a political thread as well, no big deal to me.  But you can't separate politics from discussion about our negotiators who have now made a mockery of this whole process.  And I don't have to be in negotiations to know that nothing happened the last two days.  Why?  Because they simply do NOT trust the membership.  AH knows this and is LHAO at them calling their bluff. 
 
This cuts and it cuts deep.  Nobody likes it but that's the truth fellas.  Very few can handle the truth and love the rah rah.  Anyone else want to stay in wonderland, go right ahead.  All the talk of solidarity starts at the top with the leadership trusting the members.  Sorry fellas but they just don't and their inaction proves it.