April/May 2013 IAM Fleet Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.

roabilly

Veteran
Feb 17, 2008
2,136
2,355
Visit site
Thanks Falcon... I just want to say one more thing regarding an inquiry from the previous thread...

@IAM Informer-- NO Informer, the ONLY way I will come out of retirement to vote in any elections is if YOU are on the ballot. Then... and only then... would I come back for the sole purpose to vote against you!

@Rat-- I did not see you get "creeped out" when your idol Nelson accused Bluto of being Dave... I guess it's only cool to be paranoid if you're Nelson!

@Kev-- It's not a "tone of resignation"; it’s an observation of facts. I was taught long ago to "know your enemy"... that means every nuance, every trait, every weakness, and every facet of their strength. All I see here are blind accusations and foolish wastes of energy on manufactured “boogie men” that are not even the real enemy to begin with!
 

Kev3188

Veteran
Oct 5, 2003
18,348
9,391
Right in the middle.
@Kev-- It's not a "tone of resignation"; it’s an observation of facts.

Sure it is. Here's what you said:

My suggestion to all of you is to educate yourself on the realities of your position as an IAM worker in this industry. You will not and cannot “fix” perceived and/or invented injustices by changing leadership or unions... that’s a fact... I’ve been in this industry for several decades… and I’ve seen it tried over and over… to no avail!

Like I said in the other thread, this sense of hopelessness is part of what's keeping labor down.

If that's not a sense of resignation, what is it, then?

You also equated people agitating for change to a "circle jerk." It's not. It's the exact opposite. That change- that engagement of the membership- is *exactly* what is needed to move labor as a whole forward in this country.

You know what's not gonna do that? Advocating for the same top down, sclerotic system that's in place now in many organizations, including 141.

I'm not trying to bust your balls here ROA, but look around; people all over the nation are working for this change. There are signs of it everywhere. Union leaders need to either acknowledge it and get on board, or get out of the way.


I was taught long ago to "know your enemy"... that means every nuance, every trait, every weakness, and every facet of their strength. All I see here are blind accusations and foolish wastes of energy on manufactured “boogie men” that are not even the real enemy to begin with!

That's just it; they're not blind accusations. I'd be with you 100% if they were, but the fact is that this latest UA T/A shows just how out of touch 141's leadership team is. If 141 was on their sh*t, I'd agree that dissent is unecessary. Fact is, they're not delivering what the the membership is looking for. To call that out isn't "anti union," nor does it undercut solidarity. What undercuts solidarity, is a bunch of dissatisfied/disconnected people, who thing give up all hope for change. 141's current structure/way of doing things (and the TWU at AA, for that matter) fosters just that... Guess who wins then?
 

IAM Informer

Advanced
Nov 29, 2011
107
65
Roabilly,
Typical Delaney cult response I never mentioned anything about an election. I simply asked you the educated member a question but you like the rest of 141R mouthpieces have been silenced by this districts lack of leadership all that change you advocated for a few years back has come back at bit you and others in the ass. But ha your retiring so I wish you the best of luck in the future.

Since delaney has Roabilly s tongue Can anyone answer the question . What has delaney done for the membership in the last 5 years besides contract out jobs and escalate members out the door under his company endorsed attendance program
 

cltrat

Veteran
Aug 29, 2007
5,484
3,067
Thanks Falcon... I just want to say one more thing regarding an inquiry from the previous thread...

@IAM Informer-- NO Informer, the ONLY way I will come out of retirement to vote in any elections is if YOU are on the ballot. Then... and only then... would I come back for the sole purpose to vote against you!

@Rat-- I did not see you get "creeped out" when your idol Nelson accused Bluto of being Dave... I guess it's only cool to be paranoid if you're Nelson!

@Kev-- It's not a "tone of resignation"; it’s an observation of facts. I was taught long ago to "know your enemy"... that means every nuance, every trait, every weakness, and every facet of their strength. All I see here are blind accusations and foolish wastes of energy on manufactured “boogie men” that are not even the real enemy to begin with!

lmao, I can assure you I do not bow at the altar of Nelson but then I am not obessed by him like you seem to be actually I voted for the 141r group ,(not that it is any of your business} in both times they ran.

But then unlike you, I don't bow at the altar of Delaney either, it's starting to look more and more like he has sold the membership a pig in a poke. There is a hellava lot of members in CLT that don't think they get much for their union dues and that my friend comes from the top of the leadership tree.

hey if Delaney is your guy, Informer has been offering folks a chance to list the good things he has done for the membership.Here's your chance at the plate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

T5towbar

Veteran
Sep 24, 2008
575
208
All I know is there has to be a change. Some fresh ideas and new blood. Bottom line is they did not listen to us. And people are understandably upset at the union. What the hell are we paying dues for?

BTW: What is "interested based bargaining"? I'd like to know, since that was the negotiation strategy.
 

Tim Nelson

Veteran
Jan 5, 2003
10,919
4,871
Bartlett
www.usaviation.com
Thanks Falcon... I just want to say one more thing regarding an inquiry from the previous thread...

@IAM Informer-- NO Informer, the ONLY way I will come out of retirement to vote in any elections is if YOU are on the ballot. Then... and only then... would I come back for the sole purpose to vote against you!

@Rat-- I did not see you get "creeped out" when your idol Nelson accused Bluto of being Dave... I guess it's only cool to be paranoid if you're Nelson!

@Kev-- It's not a "tone of resignation"; it’s an observation of facts. I was taught long ago to "know your enemy"... that means every nuance, every trait, every weakness, and every facet of their strength. All I see here are blind accusations and foolish wastes of energy on manufactured “boogie men” that are not even the real enemy to begin with!
Roabilly, I certainly am not as interesting as you make me out to be and I'm surprised you see me behind every bush. I do think that the informer gave you a chance to mention just two things that your boy has done in 5 years. I'll mention a few things he has done to sorta help you out. 1. Hawaiian airline contract where he signed for part timers to top out at only 60% of full time. 2. The United Airline anti labor TA with unlimited part time, scope only for 7 stations and unlimited split shifts! I suppose you could mention that he won organizing drives against the Teamsters and organized 3,200 non union workers at AirTran that would have otherwise been used as anti union leverage against the unionized Southwest workers, but for some reason you don't mention such wonderful works! Oh yeah, that's when you were paying me and I actually did my job and plenty good at it. Ha! Which brings me back to what in the world have I done to you? Did I sit on my ass when you paid me? Did I not deliver like I said I would when YOU paid me? Was it wrong for me to set up a campaign to shut down the United TA and build solidarity? Don't get me wrong, I have been wrong plenty in my life, one of which was actually supporting Rich Delaney who ended up worse than the previous regime which was also terrible. I suppose I could have been stubborn and kept my mouth shut and continued supporting him, it would have been easy to do with the money you were paying me, but my hope for our people is that somehow the idea of representation is still worthy. And if someone else wants to give it a shot, why shouldn't I give him/her a chance? Many want to give another labor union a chance. Either way, since I have been an IAM member, I have been b*&%^ because quite honestly the representation has sucked balls from day one. Me and you realized that and supported Delaney. We gave him and his crew a shot. You still support them, I don't. I moved on from them because we gave them a shot and they are not their own men, they listen to Delaney. You wouldn't know because you weren't in the same rooms I was when your AGC's balked each and every time when Delaney spoke. MC wanted to arbitrate the attendance policy but Delaney brought the AGC's in and told them he didn't want problems with the company so the AGC"s did as Rich said. MC still tried to push it and got stuck on the west coast with 20 stations because he went against Delaney. Then all the other AGC"s threw him under the bus and dogged him because they were all kissing Rich butt. Don't get me wrong, MC seemed to get stubborn and dialed out after that but you weren't there and you are told only what MF or MB tells you. MB hasn't a clue either because he wasn't there. Speaking of MB, unless your negotiation team breaks from the other negotiation teams and don't get mesmerized with Delaney's philosophical thinking, this negotiation team will end up like those before it....all losing credibility just like this United negotiation team. For starters, I don't think our negotiation team is doing d$*ck and I point to the fact that the company is LIAO at them and didn't even bother showing up for like the 5th time. Did your negotiation team even know IAM142 was going to ask for a cooling off? Delaney's style is to suck company balls so at what point is your negotiation team going to make a difference and walk out on Delaney to get him off of his arse? or are they all sucking Delaney balls as he talks to them individually about how they are the next 'up and comers?" Roabilly, these negotiation team members aren't doing D879ck if they don't get Delaney to file like IAM142 did. And they need to put up pressure on the IAM for both districts to work together. The IAM is the biggest union on the property but acts like two separate unions. Is it a crime for IAM141 and IAM142 to informational picket? What to lose? regards,
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people

pjirish317

Veteran
Sep 21, 2007
1,240
743
tim,

You and I both know that the IAM (MTC) at the time, used the "promise" of sticking together as a tool to win the election back in 94 or so(I may be off on the date). Then we were treated as the redheaded step child of the IAM. Remember 141M? MTC wanted nothing to do with fleet! We were a bargaining chip is all we were to them. And they still don't! If they did, maybe DL142 (US MTC) should have come to us and offered to work together. Why does it ALWAYS have to be DL 141 (US Fleet) asking to work together? MTC kicked us to the curb. Plain and simple. Now you want us to ask to work with DL142? Why should we? They clearly didn't want us before, why would they now? For solidarity? To show the company we are together? Yeah right, MTC is only concerned for MTC! No I am not saying that it wouldn't be a good thing, but be realistic, it aint gonna happen. Deep down you know it also, you just like painting the current leadership in a bad light, I get it, but it is not all DL141's fault for not working together now is it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

700UW

Corn Field
Nov 11, 2003
37,637
19,488
NC
Maintenance didnt kick you to the curb, it was our dues money that paid for your negotiations and representation.

Maintenance going into DL 141M had nothing to do with fleet, it had to do with stopping the AMFA raid, NW just was raided and AMFA started to raid US.

And at a conference the

Barely anyone voted in the election to separate.

Your own fleet service didnt want mtc negotiating your CBA.

So 141 was just made up of Fleet, and CSA from UA, US and a few small carriers.

You had your own elected leadership who represented you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

john john

Veteran
Contributor
Sep 12, 2004
5,742
636
tim,

You and I both know that the IAM (MTC) at the time, used the "promise" of sticking together as a tool to win the election back in 94 or so(I may be off on the date). Then we were treated as the redheaded step child of the IAM. Remember 141M? MTC wanted nothing to do with fleet! We were a bargaining chip is all we were to them. And they still don't! If they did, maybe DL142 (US MTC) should have come to us and offered to work together. Why does it ALWAYS have to be DL 141 (US Fleet) asking to work together? MTC kicked us to the curb. Plain and simple. Now you want us to ask to work with DL142? Why should we? They clearly didn't want us before, why would they now? For solidarity? To show the company we are together? Yeah right, MTC is only concerned for MTC! No I am not saying that it wouldn't be a good thing, but be realistic, it aint gonna happen. Deep down you know it also, you just like painting the current leadership in a bad light, I get it, but it is not all DL141's fault for not working together now is it?



That is a shame
 

pjirish317

Veteran
Sep 21, 2007
1,240
743
Maintenance didnt kick you to the curb, it was our dues money that paid for your negotiations and representation.

Maintenance going into DL 141M had nothing to do with fleet, it had to do with stopping the AMFA raid, NW just was raided and AMFA started to raid US.

And at a conference the

Barely anyone voted in the election to separate.

Your own fleet service didnt want mtc negotiating your CBA.

So 141 was just made up of Fleet, and CSA from UA, US and a few small carriers.

You had your own elected leadership who represented you.

Our dues money,

Now that's not very brotherly and union like now is it? And why would we want MTC negotiating for us? Would MTC want fleet negotiating for them? short answer is NO! DUH. Was MTC always 142? Why the 141M?
 

IAM Informer

Advanced
Nov 29, 2011
107
65
PJ,
Nice post your absolutely right and it is a shame that both districts will probably never come together and it's for all the reason you mentioned but you would think that since both are dealing with the same company they would be able to reach an understanding to work together as one but sadly there is to much arrogance on both sides of the aisle between the too
 

pjirish317

Veteran
Sep 21, 2007
1,240
743
informer,

For once you and I agree....lol. We should be working together, both with MTC, and each other, unfortunately, IMO, there are too many political, & personal agendas for that to happen. We need to put aside personal vendettas and work together to make OUR workplace better for everybody, not just the individuals, or the hubs, but everybody. OUR NC has not even brought anything back yet, and I attribute that to the comapny dragging their feet. Yet there are people who, by blaming the DL, basically nullifies anything our NC tries to accomplish through negotiations, therefore killing solidarity, and the company knows we are a divided group, we always have been, and they play on that fact.
I will even go so far as to admit I am part of the problem. I have ZERO desire to ever work with Tim Nelson ever again. IMO, he has these grandiose ideas, and he can spin them, and sell the membership on them, and whip the membership into a frenzy with those ideas. Most of which, again, IMO, never would ever come to fruition. Empty political promises so to speak. So I guess I would be at fault also. Just my two cents worth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts