2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[Tim Nelson]

you're right CB check out thoroughly the people you vote then hope they don't change when they start getting that big check.

once folks start making the big money, it can really corrupt someone, anyone, if one isnt careful.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Again... it's up to the individual member to make an educated choice. Until the membership chooses to engage and starts making informed choices regarding their elected officials and future contracts the path we are on will not change. Vote for candidates who lack the dedication and experience and you get that level of representation. Vote for sub par TAs and you get that level of working conditions. Ultimately... it's the members' choice.

The whole voting method is ridiculous and should have been fixed.

 

[charlie Brown]

Again... it's up to the individual member to make an educated choice. Until the membership chooses to engage and starts making informed choices regarding their elected officials and future contracts the path we are on will not change. Vote for candidates who lack the dedication and experience and you get that level of representation. Vote for sub par TAs and you get that level of working conditions. Ultimately... it's the members' choice.

Tim
Let's stop putting all this on the members ok. Let's start putting some of it or most of it on the people who make up the tickets and tell the members how great of an AGC they would be.
For instance there was a ticket last election that the person choosing the candidate from clt chose a guy in catering to run for AGC. This same guy ( who wasn't even a shop steward with 0 experience ) came up to me and said " I don't know the first thing about being an AGC, I'm just in it for the money" but the person that chose him for the ticket was telling everyone what a great guy he was. And I agree!! He is a great guy!! But he would have made a terrible AGC for the members. Being a good guy doesn't mean a good AGC. Now tell me, do you think the person that chose him to run for a AGC and ask people to vote for him was looking out for the membership?? I think you know who's ticket I'm referring to. IMO the person that chose him was deliberately deceiving the membership just to get votes. That's not being there for the members.

 

[ograc]

Im simply uncomfortable blaming the membership for things when there has not been any socializing processes engaged to change the culture. Organizing was no different but when the internalizing processes were applied, the organizing arm took off with incredible success.
the same processes could be applied in the representation arm but there needs to be members with the skillset to apply, and teach to other leaders.
The culture shifts all the time and having leaders who may have the right motivation but are not academically equipped will always put a handicap on solidarity building.

So you're implying those leaders who are not "academically equipped" handicap the building of solidarity? Not sure where you're going with this. Would you say Jimmy Hoffa was more of one with the right motivation or "academically equipped"?   

 

[mike33]

I have always been a non-believer in the words " The writing is on the Wall". I firmly believe the writiing is always on the paper that is presented to you. . Until then it's just hearsay.

 

[ograc]

Tim
Let's stop putting all this on the members ok. Let's start putting some of it or most of it on the people who make up the tickets and tell the members how great of an AGC they would be.
For instance there was a ticket last election that the person choosing the candidate from clt chose a guy in catering to run for AGC. This same guy ( who wasn't even a shop steward with 0 experience ) came up to me and said " I don't know the first thing about being an AGC, I'm just in it for the money" but the person that chose him for the ticket was telling everyone what a great guy he was. And I agree!! He is a great guy!! But he would have made a terrible AGC for the members. Being a good guy doesn't mean a good AGC. Now tell me, do you think the person that chose him to run for a AGC and ask people to vote for him was looking out for the membership?? I think you know who's ticket I'm referring to. IMO the person that chose him was deliberately deceiving the membership just to get votes. That's not being there for the members.

I ran on the KA slate. We had no candidate from catering in CLT on our ticket. I know the candidate you refer to. Good guy. Not sure what his past union experience has been but he was obviously chosen for the slate because of the size of the station he worked in and potential votes. Unfortunately, all 3 slates were structured in the same manner. Many good, dedicated, educated and experienced candidates fall through the cracks on getting put on a slate because of the politics and percieved votes you can bring in during an election. As a result slates are put together, not on experience or dedication of a candidate, but rather how many votes, based on popularity, you can deliver. At the end of this process... this is what the membership must vote on. A mixed bag of candidates. Some who are in it for the right reasons along with candidates who are in it, not for the membership, but for themselves. Leading up to an election... all candidates proclaim to be in it for the members. As years go by it becomes quite evident many are not. This is why the membership must be vigilant and try to sort the good from the bad apples during elections. Once again though... the responsibility and subsequent outcomes are determined by the membership. 

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim
Let's stop putting all this on the members ok. Let's start putting some of it or most of it on the people who make up the tickets and tell the members how great of an AGC they would be.
For instance there was a ticket last election that the person choosing the candidate from clt chose a guy in catering to run for AGC. This same guy ( who wasn't even a shop steward with 0 experience ) came up to me and said " I don't know the first thing about being an AGC, I'm just in it for the money" but the person that chose him for the ticket was telling everyone what a great guy he was. And I agree!! He is a great guy!! But he would have made a terrible AGC for the members. Being a good guy doesn't mean a good AGC. Now tell me, do you think the person that chose him to run for a AGC and ask people to vote for him was looking out for the membership?? I think you know who's ticket I'm referring to. IMO the person that chose him was deliberately deceiving the membership just to get votes. That's not being there for the members.

I think you aren't representing the facts correctly.  First off, at the time, I asked you to be on an opposition ballot, and you declined. Right?  Second off, not one person chose someone to be on a ballot.  Regarding the guy who did make it on the ballot, CLT went against your own recommendation and supported him.  That says a lot.  In fact, I was there and saw his own people come out for him, over your concerns and as you were telling people that the guys on your slate are good AGC's.  My opinion of the guy was and still is that he would have made a good AGC.  You can defer, but  I didn't have to tell his own members in CLT how great of an AGC he would make. Cripes, his own members trusted him, as well they should have, and hoped that he would be voted in.  Unfortunately, he couldn't carry the United Airline side of the equation.  But I came to you first, at the time.
 
At any rate, will you be pushing the entire Delaney ticket?  And will you be telling folks that those United AGC's [insert the ones who not only negotiated the contract but also lied with 'date stamped comments saved'] are good AGC's and that CLT should vote for them?

 

[Dog Wonder]

carry on

I have a trademark on that.

 

[charlie Brown]

I think you aren't representing the facts correctly.  First off, at the time, I asked you to be on an opposition ballot, and you declined. Right?  Second off, not one person chose someone to be on a ballot.  Regarding the guy who did make it on the ballot, CLT went against your own recommendation and supported him.  That says a lot.  In fact, I was there and saw his own people come out for him, over your concerns and as you were telling people that the guys on your slate are good AGC's.  My opinion of the guy was and still is that he would have made a good AGC.  You can defer, but  I didn't have to tell his own members in CLT how great of an AGC he would make. Cripes, his own members trusted him, as well they should have, and hoped that he would be voted in.  Unfortunately, he couldn't carry the United Airline side of the equation.  But I came to you first, at the time.

 
At any rate, will you be pushing the entire Delaney ticket?  And will you be telling folks that those United AGC's [insert the ones who not only negotiated the contract but also lied with 'date stamped comments saved'] are good AGC's and that CLT should vote for them?

First of all, I never said it was your ticket, but since you want to man up to it, ok, I can respect that. And yes you did ask me to run, and the main reason I turned you down was number 1. I wasn't ready for AGC. Even with my experience, I felt I needed more before AGC. Second, was some of the people you were choosing for your ticket was clearly you not being there for the membership but going after popular vote.
And stop being a hypocrite. Your on this site all the time talking about how the district is so outmanned by the company due to not enough experience and education on our part as district officers, and then because someone turns you down, it's ok to put someone on with 0 experience. Come on Tim, which side do you truly believe. And Get your facts straight about about who won clt, I told everyone on my team that clt would be a split ticket. Again the guy in catering is a great guy, but he even admitted he wasn't ready for AGC. I wonder if he would have won, if you would have been on dogging him for the lack of experience and education. As far as tickets go. Of course I'll support Delaneys ticket, can you show me a better one? Surely your not talking about the one your on, that has decided to leave our US members with two less members on the board are you?? Or maybe I seen that wrong. Maybe you can correct me.

 

[Tim Nelson]

So you're implying those leaders who are not "academically equipped" handicap the building of solidarity? Not sure where you're going with this. Would you say Jimmy Hoffa was more of one with the right motivation or "academically equipped"?   

That's a good question.  I believe there has to be a helluva lot of education to equip our leaders in today's world.  Not having the proper education will always handicap representation and organizing.  I'd scrap many classes at the Center and add others.  I fully admit that I'm biased but I'd say our fundamental problem with the American Labor movement entire is a failure to adapt to the ever changing culture.  The one given is that management is and will continue to F employees, so there will always be a market for representation IF the unions evolved with the culture. 
 
Jimmy Hoffa, the old man, knew the language, knew the gathering places, spoke the language, and kept his feet to the ground from what I understood.  Some things transcend cultures, one of which is trust.  Other things like having 'stones' so that the membership can see where you stand as opposed to where management stands, also transcends. My hunch would be that Jimmy Hoffa would probably have adapted to the culture.  I'd say VH would still be fine as well. The reason why these two, imo, would still be successful today is because they also had it in their blood.  They just didn't fall into it and weren't just placed on a ballot. 

 

[Tim Nelson]

I have a trademark on that.

It helped me so I like it.

 

[Tim Nelson]

First of all, I never said it was your ticket, but since you want to man up to it, ok, I can respect that. And yes you did ask me to run, and the main reason I turned you down was number 1. I wasn't ready for AGC. Even with my experience, I felt I needed more before AGC. Second, was some of the people you were choosing for your ticket was clearly you not being there for the membership but going after popular vote.
And stop being a hypocrite. Your on this site all the time talking about how the district is so outmanned by the company due to not enough experience and education on our part as district officers, and then because someone turns you down, it's ok to put someone on with 0 experience. Come on Tim, which side do you truly believe. And Get your facts straight about about who won clt, I told everyone on my team that clt would be a split ticket. Again the guy in catering is a great guy, but he even admitted he wasn't ready for AGC. I wonder if he would have won, if you would have been on dogging him for the lack of experience and education. As far as tickets go. Of course I'll support Delaneys ticket, can you show me a better one? Surely your not talking about the one your on, that has decided to leave our US members with two less members on the board are you?? Or maybe I seen that wrong. Maybe you can correct me.

The ticket that I'm on has the same amount of full time US AIRWAYS slots as the one you support.  If you have got 4 AGC's then I'll give you points. There are other non-full time spots like trustee that we felt should be geographically situated to save the membership money.  For instance,the trustee is someone who goes to SFO once a month to audit checks and sign checks after comparing expenses. IMO, it doesn't make any sense to have someone from BOS fly to SFO and spend for hyatt hotel and perdiems on the membership dime when we can simply be practical and just allow someone from SFO, who already has an office in the building to walk down the hall and do it, regardless of airline. What I would like to see is that if the District expands the special rep program then it shouldn't do so at the exclusion of US AIRWAYS.  Don't get me wrong, I don't believe there is a need to waste more money by having all of these special reps now, but if the District insist on spending hundreds of thousands of more dollars and  upping the dues to another record amount then I suppose US AIRWAYS ought to have special representation as well. 
 
And certainly, I couldn't, in good conscience, be on any ballot or vote for any ballot that had even one United AGC who supported management and pimped off his/her own United members.  GROSS!    At any rate, those are my thoughts, and nominations are always fun!  I'm definitely open to a new method in how we should elect officers but that's not for me to say. At least, we should be thankful we are in a union that allows this.  I'm excited.  I think our union is at the crossroads and that we have one chance to make change happen and to start the rebuilding from ground zero. We have one chance to make this happen and I say we make the best of it!

 

[Tim Nelson]

you're right CB check out thoroughly the people you vote then hope they don't change when they start getting that big check.

Actually, anyone pushing the Delaney ticket will most certainly increase the risk on US AIRWAYS membership. It is critical, come June, that US AIRWAYS be unified. My hope is that that also means me and CB, among others.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Rat-- I agree...
 
No institution, Entity, or Bureaucracy is perfect. I suppose one could criticize the maker himself for allowing the Universe to exist in the turmoil of colliding planets, stars, and galaxies. However, when those that criticize have personal vendettas and political agendas it gets obscene. I’m all for checks and balances, and “keepin’ um honest”... but when ambiguous disinformation and rhetoric are spun to attack the Union Leadership at a critical time in negotiations ... you have to question the motives.
 
So far... you personally have not seen any form of a T/A from these 6 talks. Further, until you actually do see the Tentative, and consequently find obvious inconsistencies and inequities in compensation, scope, healthcare etc. you have NO argument.
 
What supposedly happened at UA or HA is not our fight... we are still under a Bankruptcy Agreement courtesy of the Company, and a Corporate friendly Court System. The IAM Leadership did not make the court rulings that set us back decades.
 
Constantly slamming the leadership along with the institution does not strengthen Fleet at the table. I’m sure when the Company assesses how far they can push Fleet, these boards are big part of the equation. 

I'm interested in you clarifying what you mean that United wasn't our fight?  It seems as if you have a sorta 'closed environmental system' for our US AIRWAYS world.  I don't think it can be argued, except due to politics, that this industry is an open environment in that what affects United will necessarily have an affect US AIRWAYS. Not saying I'm right but it seems as if you want to disassociate from what just happened at United due to me being right about how your boys were going to hose everyone.  Why wouldn't I, or even you slam the hell out of those punks pimping on our brothers and sisters at United?  What happened at United is betrayal, first class.

 

[cltrat]

you're spot on about that Tim betrayal is about the kindest way you can put it.