2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[700UW]

This situation is very odd, time for the IAM and its members to put pressure on the Secretary of Labor and the President, its very strange the board hasnt ruled one way or another and the release was filed over six months ago.
Thanks CB.
 
Linda Puchala
 
http://www.nmb.gov/directory/puchala-linda_bio.html

 

[robbedagain]

Agree there 700 its way too long

 

[roabilly]

maybe roabilly has a room you could rent....lol

I don't have anything available with enough floor space to contain his ego...

 

[700UW]

Maybe he can live in the Heavy Maintenance Hangar, that should be large enough, it can hold one widebody and four narrowbodies, lol

 

[Tim Nelson]

 
Why would he be outside handing out ballots?
 
 
That would be the RS and the Tellers who are in charge of the election who are inside, if you are running on the ticket you are not involved handing out ballots.

Properly termed, slate cards.  My apologies

 

[Tim Nelson]

This situation is very odd, time for the IAM and its members to put pressure on the Secretary of Labor and the President, its very strange the board hasnt ruled one way or another and the release was filed over six months ago.
Thanks CB.
 
Linda Puchala
 
http://www.nmb.gov/directory/puchala-linda_bio.html

I wouldn't be surprised if the IAM is doing exactly that. If it is, I'm sure it isn't public.  I can't be sure, but I think the IAM and Obama have mended fences over the years and I think the fact that the NMB hasn't ruled in the company's favor is a hint at the politics at hand.  When Obama's NLRB ruled against Boeing, that was a strong indicator that the IAM had some strong pull in DC.  One thing about the IAM, its political pull, when aligned, is UNMATCHED imo.  Even stronger than the IBT"s. The IAM is VERY WEALTHY for a union and has political ties that go deep. 
 
IMO,  AH is banking on the single carrier application, but I'd have to say that I'd be surprised if the NMB rules on it.   The NMB has taken only a few weeks to rule on single carrier applications, and also YEARS in other cases.  I say the NMB jerks AH off and brings AH to the table.   Until then, I'd say AH is compelled to hold his cards and wait.  Remember, the TWU has to file it within six months.  I think the chances of the NMB delaying a ruling on it are very great, or at least moreso than the TWU refusing to fill it out.   If the TWU files the single carrier as I anticipate, AH will be hosed if the NMB postpones any ruling on it.  That's the strength and the architect behind the association and I give the AFLCIO incredible points for bringing these two airline unions together.  I think there is a helluva lot of strength in this and AH won't have a bankruptcy judge to go to.  AH will be at the mercy of the NMB.  Again, maybe I'm wrong, but I can't see the NMB ruling quickly on the single carrier.  The only thing that can get in the way would be if our NC panicked [not saying it will] and brought a TA back that wasn't fair and with AH signature on it. 
 
At any rate, that should be the focus for our membership.  Not, 'will the NMB release us', but rather, 'will the NMB support a single carrier application and back management'.  I don't think we do anything stupid by signing a half arse ta.  With the release request, I don't think we get worked up that the NMB hasn't ruled on it as of yet, I think we allow the processes to continue and see if the NMB allows our release request to purposely muddy up the single carrier ruling.  I think we have to let the processes continue because it is PAINFULLY clear that AH does NOT want to negotiate.  Fact is that we don't have any choice but to let things continue since AH has put our NC in a corner where no good TA can be presented.  We can't force AH"s hand so we should stay cool, not fear, and hold our position.  It is simply that simple.  As they say, all good things for those who wait.

 

[Tim Nelson]

First of all on your previous post. I wouldn't say you and I never agree. I would just say we have a different way of going about things. And Tim look, I'm not going to debate you on the UA T/a. I'm sure we will be debating plenty when a US t/a comes out. And I have never been a fan of lack of communication, that's the main reason I started a email briefing of my own which hundreds are now on, to better communicate with our members. I was merely answering Mikes question. But let's save your and my debates for the election and us T/a time.

First of all, you engaged me and interjected yourself into a conversation I was having with someone else. I'm fine not debating you. I dont have to.  I chose to because that's who I am and although you said you have no respect for me, I am not returning the favor and I will give you the respect of engaging with you. Fact is, I think you mean well but politics have swallowed you up enough to support terrible United airline candidates.
 
You have to debate me since your ticket is terrible and you chose to align yourself with 15 United Airline members who  are going to get their arses handed to them and have themselves to blame for it.  In fact, you can't even discuss the issues and I guess your main argument is going to be up-playing a trustee spot which isn't a representation spot but a admin spot that isn't even full time.  Color me wrong for saving the membershp money by being practical but having a SFO walk down the hall to sign the checks and go over expenses is not only cost effective but also time effective and incredibly more practical.  Your argument is incredibly weak on this I'd have to say.
 
Listen, I just hope that you don't divide the US AIRWAYS membership in June.  I can respect you giving it your best shot, but if your slate falls way behind during the first week of June then I trust that you do the right thing and don't ask the US AIRWAYS membership to divide our votes in the second week of June and risk not having any reps at all.  You and I both know that any US AIRWAYS candidates, including you and I, on ANY ballot, will be the low hanging fruit, simply due to numbers.  So, although I believe your slate will get eaten alive [and I fully admit my opinion is bias due to only seeing what i see here in ORD], even the US AIRWAYS candidates on a winning slate are still at a risk of having a United guy slip in from the losing ticket. We might even see this in nominations.
 
Like I said, go for it and I wish you the best as we go to our corners, but, if, and once it is known that Delaney's slate isn't going to make it, I hope yourself and the other US AIRWAYS AGC's can unify and support the US AIRWAYS candidates on the opposition ticket as opposed to risking NO representation and blindly supporting United members who otherwise would have zero chance.

 

[700UW]

And its getting ugly:
 

 

[Tim Nelson]

Ouch.  Well, that's politics.  The reality is that I worked with Jay Cronk who was Buffenbarger's guy for the United ramp campaign. So the above caption is false for sure. Jay was never reassigned, at least when I was Directing the United campaign for the District.  As far as the Delta campaign.  Roach completely screwed that one up, and the United stew campaign.  Roach had absolutely no clue on organizing and always got terrible information about what was happening because he always used his staff instead of putting on non-political members on your team and using them in the front lines as they empowered the people you were organizing.
 
I told Roach he was going to lose the Delta ramp campaign because after I came back from ATL on a organizing mission, I assessed it as a loser unless we took some aggressive moves. I was finally able to get them to buy into the house visits and maybe that brought up the score.  But at the end of the day, Roach didn't listen to me until after he lost the Delta ramp.
Essentially, the Tommy R's, and Steve Gordon's, were all covering their own arses saying "ATL looks Good",   "MSP looks great".  I remember being on one conference call with a guy from the INTL organizing team who was assigned to a campaign.  The guy spoke the truth and said something like, "Station X needs more work".  Roach blasted him and said he didn't want any negativity.  So from that point on, the guy said "Station X looks great".  
 
One of the paradigm shifts we brought in at DL141 was NOT to rely on AGC's or others who felt compelled to Bull S.  AGC"s are not organizers anyways, they don't know this stuff.  I brought in our own rank and filers and that created the honesty I needed to hear instead of "Sunny and 70' reports from folks who are getting paid but won't lose their job if the organizing drive lost.  For instance, Bill K from CLT.  Rick R...Gene B.....all rank and filers I used because I knew I could count on their reports.  Tommy R was terrible as he always gave Roach exactly what he wanted to hear.  I told Tommy just to come clean but he didn't want to risk losing his GLR job because Klemma  was saying how he had SLC, and other stations wrapped up.  So it wouldn't have sounded to good for Tommy to speak the truth.  Dora was the absolute worst though.  That's why we needed two organizing teams in IAH. Roach insisted upon her for the sCO IAH so I convinced Delaney that if he wanted to win against the IBT that we needed our OWN team in IAH.  So we did and we won.
 
As far as the Continental stew campaign. Ira screwed that one up as well.  He claimed if he left ORD alone, his plan would work because he didn't want to stir up a hornets next in ORD, since AFA had like 7,000 stews based here.  I fell off my chair.  At any rate, those organizing failures gave me more credibility and leverage so that I was able to continue the Airtran campaign and incorporate more of the new techniques for the United ramp campaign.  FINALLY, I convinced them to use social media and allow it to be uncensored. It worked!
 
But I find it interesting that Buffy would blame Cronk.  IMO, Buffy probably actually believes it as well since Roach reported to him and probably said Jay F it all up.  WHo knows.

 

[charlie Brown]

First of all, you engaged me and interjected yourself into a conversation I was having with someone else. I'm fine not debating you. I dont have to.  I chose to because that's who I am and although you said you have no respect for me, I am not returning the favor and I will give you the respect of engaging with you. Fact is, I think you mean well but politics have swallowed you up enough to support terrible United airline candidates.
 
You have to debate me since your ticket is terrible and you chose to align yourself with 15 United Airline members who  are going to get their arses handed to them and have themselves to blame for it.  In fact, you can't even discuss the issues and I guess your main argument is going to be up-playing a trustee spot which isn't a representation spot but a admin spot that isn't even full time.  Color me wrong for saving the membershp money by being practical but having a SFO walk down the hall to sign the checks and go over expenses is not only cost effective but also time effective and incredibly more practical.  Your argument is incredibly weak on this I'd have to say.
 
Listen, I just hope that you don't divide the US AIRWAYS membership in June.  I can respect you giving it your best shot, but if your slate falls way behind during the first week of June then I trust that you do the right thing and don't ask the US AIRWAYS membership to divide our votes in the second week of June and risk not having any reps at all.  You and I both know that any US AIRWAYS candidates, including you and I, on ANY ballot, will be the low hanging fruit, simply due to numbers.  So, although I believe your slate will get eaten alive [and I fully admit my opinion is bias due to only seeing what i see here in ORD], even the US AIRWAYS candidates on a winning slate are still at a risk of having a United guy slip in from the losing ticket. We might even see this in nominations.
 
Like I said, go for it and I wish you the best as we go to our corners, but, if, and once it is known that Delaney's slate isn't going to make it, I hope yourself and the other US AIRWAYS AGC's can unify and support the US AIRWAYS candidates on the opposition ticket as opposed to risking NO representation and blindly supporting United members who otherwise would have zero chance.

I like how you think what you say means something to me. First off, let me make it clear. I love a good debate. Ask anyone. Secondly maybe if you say something enough people will believe you. I told you it's not about a trustee PT position. It's your taking that position off the board, and a VP position that you still haven't gave reason for. And Tim again, we already have a trustee in Sfo that walks down the hall and signs checks. I don't think your a good debate person at all. You never answer anyone's questions. You merely ask another question and change the subject. And I know what you think about the election. I know what you thought about last election also, and you were wrong. So your opinion to me really doesn't do anything. And I'll make a deal with ya. If my slate looses. I'll give you my word, I'll work as hard at uniting the us side as you have done the last several years. The company couldn't have hired anyone and paid a six figure salary that would have done a better job than you at splintering the work group. But I'll try to do as good as you. And by the way, engaging you? Not that I care who engaged who first, that seems like a you hit me first statement I used to say growing up. But go back and read the post. I think you said we got scared and scattered like cockroaches. But your right that's not engaging I guess. Taking 2 positions off of the current board no matter how you want to spin it, is and should be a big deal to all us members. So yes I will let them know, your willing to do whatever you have to to get a position. Including giving up slots from the side, when we are already far outmanned as it is. But keep spinning Tim.

 

[roabilly]

I like how you think what you say means something to me. First off, let me make it clear. I love a good debate. Ask anyone. Secondly maybe if you say something enough people will believe you. I told you it's not about a trustee PT position. It's your taking that position off the board, and a VP position that you still haven't gave reason for. And Tim again, we already have a trustee in Sfo that walks down the hall and signs checks. I don't think your a good debate person at all. You never answer anyone's questions. You merely ask another question and change the subject. And I know what you think about the election. I know what you thought about last election also, and you were wrong. So your opinion to me really doesn't do anything. And I'll make a deal with ya. If my slate looses. I'll give you my word, I'll work as hard at uniting the us side as you have done the last several years. The company couldn't have hired anyone and paid a six figure salary that would have done a better job than you at splintering the work group. But I'll try to do as good as you. And by the way, engaging you? Not that I care who engaged who first, that seems like a you hit me first statement I used to say growing up. But go back and read the post. I think you said we got scared and scattered like cockroaches. But your right that's not engaging I guess. Taking 2 positions off of the current board no matter how you want to spin it, is and should be a big deal to all us members. So yes I will let them know, your willing to do whatever you have to to get a position. Including giving up slots from the side, when we are already far outmanned as it is. But keep spinning Tim.

+1000

 

[737823]

Buffy the hypocrite:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGUMyxeLv2M

and now he condones giving up pension

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7cm7o4XTlk

all he cares about is dues! Democratic? The IAM's idea of democrat is effectively nullifying a vote, overstepping DL leadership, instilling fear and scheduling a revote with two weeks notice during a shutdown period?

Josh

 

[Tim Nelson]

I like how you think what you say means something to me. First off, let me make it clear. I love a good debate. Ask anyone. Secondly maybe if you say something enough people will believe you. I told you it's not about a trustee PT position. It's your taking that position off the board, and a VP position that you still haven't gave reason for. And Tim again, we already have a trustee in Sfo that walks down the hall and signs checks. I don't think your a good debate person at all. You never answer anyone's questions. You merely ask another question and change the subject. And I know what you think about the election. I know what you thought about last election also, and you were wrong. So your opinion to me really doesn't do anything. And I'll make a deal with ya. If my slate looses. I'll give you my word, I'll work as hard at uniting the us side as you have done the last several years. The company couldn't have hired anyone and paid a six figure salary that would have done a better job than you at splintering the work group. But I'll try to do as good as you. And by the way, engaging you? Not that I care who engaged who first, that seems like a you hit me first statement I used to say growing up. But go back and read the post. I think you said we got scared and scattered like cockroaches. But your right that's not engaging I guess. Taking 2 positions off of the current board no matter how you want to spin it, is and should be a big deal to all us members. So yes I will let them know, your willing to do whatever you have to to get a position. Including giving up slots from the side, when we are already far outmanned as it is. But keep spinning Tim

Nah. I realized going up against Delaney's lies was going to be tough going for anyone until his words came to pass. His words have since come to pass as a pack of lies, so only a few, including you, still support him. For sure, time will tell and it's coming quickly but I'm excited for change and it looks like the membership is unified to make this happen and take back our union.  Our union is at the crossroads, and quite honestly, it's hard to see where the union starts and management ends. Especially when our union leaders open up their mouths, it's as if we all hear management mouthpieces. 
 
Everything else you said is inaccurate and honestly not worthy of a response. You have changed indeed.
 
At any rate, I still hold out hope that you will be able to reason with me and unify, for the sake of the membership, instead of nonsensically asking US AIRWAYS members, in the second week of June,  to support candidates that could put our representation at risk due to inherent bylaw rules.  I wish you the best, until then.  Again, to be sure, if your ticket isn't dragging by the second week of June, then I understand, but if you continue supporting undesirable candidates by the time CLT rolls around to vote, even after the outcome is fairly certain, then my hope is that you put the membership first.  Hopefully, by then, you will be the same advocate of US AIRWAYS spots as you portray today and not be a participant to scorch all the US AIRWAYS spots just because you are losing.

 

[mike33]

i'm losing track of what this forum is suppose to accomplish for us near term!

 

[charlie Brown]

Nah. I realized going up against Delaney's lies was going to be tough going for anyone until his words came to pass. His words have since come to pass as a pack of lies, so only a few, including you, still support him. For sure, time will tell and it's coming quickly but I'm excited for change and it looks like the membership is unified to make this happen and take back our union.  Our union is at the crossroads, and quite honestly, it's hard to see where the union starts and management ends. Especially when our union leaders open up their mouths, it's as if we all hear management mouthpieces. 
 
Everything else you said is inaccurate and honestly not worthy of a response. You have changed indeed.
 
At any rate, I still hold out hope that you will be able to reason with me and unify, for the sake of the membership, instead of nonsensically asking US AIRWAYS members, in the second week of June,  to support candidates that could put our representation at risk due to inherent bylaw rules.  I wish you the best, until then.

Lol
Inaccurate?? Nah I don't think so!! I think Tim has to say that because someone is letting the US people know how you turn your back to people. You don't want to address things because you know you have said differently on here. Just like last election when you were bashing us for taking a VP position from US out west. But we didn't take a position off the board. We gained a AGC position out west, but you didn't tell anybody that. Now you take two positions off the board for US and all the sudden it's ok. You also don't want to answer about the picks for AGC on education and experience, why?? Is it because you have stated on here many times how important experience and education are, and now your running with people that may not be?? Hmm. Maybe that's why all my other stuff is not worthy of a answer. Maybe you can't spin it away. Tim I have always said, you are your own worst enemy. Once people get to know you they see who you truly are. People see who truly changes. Like I said you flop more times on this board than anyone else. I wish you would get to clt in time for the people that wasn't here when you were before to get to know you before the election. That's probably why your waiting till April, so they can't figure you out before they vote in June.