ograc said:
For the record Tim this EBoard you speak of is the same one you supported and endorsed not long ago. This EBoard was to lead us to the promised land. All that was needed was to vote out the Canale leadership team. You have a long track record of second guessing leadership teams and switching sides dating back to the Teamster representation days. Many don't know your history and therefore find your opinions and views credible. Many of your viewpoints are very credible; while others are politically motivated for a self centered interest and agenda. A mix of truths, half truths and lies. Campaign promises again; that may or may not be able to be achieved.
Interesting comments although I don't agree with its entirety.
There is no full proof way that one can guarantee how good or bad a candidate will be, but elections keep accountability. In 2008, myself and 80% of the membership supported the New Direction. I, personally, decided to engage the issues because of Canale's failures, and the IAMPF issues. Instead of putting myself on a ballot with Delaney, I told him that I wanted to focus on cleaning up the insulting way that the IAM organizes and secure more members in hopes of keeping the IAMPF solvent. Essentially, Delaney would handle the representation arm, and I would handle the organizing arm.
Without the New Direction and 2008 and my organizing team, we wouldn't have United Airlines as IAM members today. Losing those members would have put more pressure on the IAMPF. So, when we look at the New Direction movement, we can say that its organizing success has helped secure the pensions of our members. I'm proud of that and it was the right choice to support Delaney over Canale. Canale had himself to blame.
Moving forward, I didn't change, Delaney did. My pledge was to the membership, but the entire eboard went south on the membership by lying and changing its tune, first with the United sUA negotiations.
I could no longer organize for him. And, just because someone supported someone 6 years ago doesn't mean such candidate is entitled to support. I stopped supporting Delaney and these brothers/sisters a full year before Delaney won re-election. He didn't have my support, that's for sure. And, I made everyone aware [review my post on here] what was coming for United Airlines. I knew what was being said in the office since I was there and I knew FIRSTHAND what these guys thought of the members and how they talked about them. It's amazing what was said in those offices. But it wasn't always like that. Back in 2008, I felt these guys all went in office as solid union people. That's why I supported them. But money corrupts people, and when someone goes from $40,000 to $110,000 in salary, sometimes their feet don't stay to the ground and they blindly serve the IAM [entity] interest over the interest of the members. That is why I was the first and maybe only member, ever, who drafted a bylaw change and got the support of my Local [no small feat in a big United local] to reduce the salary of officers. I did that back in 2002 and brought the bylaw change to the floor at the District convention in MCO but it was shot down.
Moving forward, I don't have all the answers, but, imo, we have to clean out the entire eboard which is rotten to the core. Should we vote for someone who endorsed the United TA? The answer should be no. I know enough about labor that if someone can't stand up against that, then no way in hell will they stand up against AH. No way in hell. And trust me, as someone who did stand up from an appointed position, it is a whole lot easier to stand up from an elected position where you can't get fired for doing so. I took a lot of heat on here for proclaiming how these guys were going to hose the United members. If you look at the post you will find 700 and Roabily pounding me for warning the United membership about what was to come. I wasn't a prophet. I knew what I knew.
Does that mean that reform candidates are going to be better? That is my hope, and I think collectively that they will make a difference. But it's the membership's say. And I can only speak for myself and be primarily responsible for myself if I'm elected.
We know the present environment is toxic at United. For those who are satisfied with what happened at United, they can vote for the current officers and can expect the same at US AIRWAYS. For the others, they can vote for change. There is still time at US AIRWAYS since our second bite, or joint contract, probably will take several years. So I still think we have a chance to change the direction that the current group decided to go in at United. There is no reason to suggest that they will treat the US AIRWAYS members as the "Golden Child". HAL and UAL got hosed by these guys but our members at US AIRWAYS still have a chance. I believe that chance starts with change. We have one chance, and with the nominations this week, our members are making the most of it.
