Do_it_for_Dave
Member
- Nov 20, 2002
- 78
- 0
January 14, 2003
Dear Colleagues:
Since the results of the ratification vote which passed by five (5) votes were announced, my office has received several complaints. Those specific complaints generally fall into five categories as follows:
1. Members who said they did not receive voting information;
2. Three members who claim that their personal identification number (PIN) didn't work;
3. Members who voted in the first period which was suspended after additional clarifications were made in the proposed agreement, but who did not re-vote;
4. A member who said she contacted AAA to get a PIN and was told she wasn't on the list and that someone would call her back. The member says no one called her; and
5. Members' claim to have more than one PIN.
An investigation was conducted concerning the five categories listed above, and the results of the research are attached.
There were two additional general complaints that I wish to address. Several members cite Article XV of the CWA Constitution, alleging improper behavior by the company. That article pertains to local officer elections only, not to contract ratification votes, therefore it does not apply in this case. Another complaint is that US Airways management attempted to influence the vote in Pittsburgh. There is credible evidence that management did attempt to influence the vote, including distribution of an IAM flyer in Pittsburgh. While this action is reprehensible, it was not illegal. CWA registered its strong disapproval of management's activities.
While there also was an allegation that PIT reservation members were being forced to vote in the presence of management on the last day of voting, upon closer investigation CWA found that was not the case. In any event, the voting period was extended by one hour to accommodate anyone who may have been confused by this allegation. Thus, there was no interference by management in the vote.
Through this very difficult period, the union made every effort to put in place a process that would provide an opportunity for our members to receive information and then vote. The vote count was handled by the AAA, an organization that has an enviable record for fairness and accuracy in record keeping. Our locals were provided with extra packages to give to members who may not have received them and methods were established to provide PINs to those who needed them. Every member who voted the first time was sent an individual letter advising them that they would have to re-vote. During this ratification process, the individual member also had to take responsibility for following through on the information and materials provided. All of this information was widely disseminated including on our website.
I, therefore, must conclude that the ratification process was handled in a fair and reasonable manner.
In Unity,
Morton Bahr
President
Dear Colleagues:
Since the results of the ratification vote which passed by five (5) votes were announced, my office has received several complaints. Those specific complaints generally fall into five categories as follows:
1. Members who said they did not receive voting information;
2. Three members who claim that their personal identification number (PIN) didn't work;
3. Members who voted in the first period which was suspended after additional clarifications were made in the proposed agreement, but who did not re-vote;
4. A member who said she contacted AAA to get a PIN and was told she wasn't on the list and that someone would call her back. The member says no one called her; and
5. Members' claim to have more than one PIN.
An investigation was conducted concerning the five categories listed above, and the results of the research are attached.
There were two additional general complaints that I wish to address. Several members cite Article XV of the CWA Constitution, alleging improper behavior by the company. That article pertains to local officer elections only, not to contract ratification votes, therefore it does not apply in this case. Another complaint is that US Airways management attempted to influence the vote in Pittsburgh. There is credible evidence that management did attempt to influence the vote, including distribution of an IAM flyer in Pittsburgh. While this action is reprehensible, it was not illegal. CWA registered its strong disapproval of management's activities.
While there also was an allegation that PIT reservation members were being forced to vote in the presence of management on the last day of voting, upon closer investigation CWA found that was not the case. In any event, the voting period was extended by one hour to accommodate anyone who may have been confused by this allegation. Thus, there was no interference by management in the vote.
Through this very difficult period, the union made every effort to put in place a process that would provide an opportunity for our members to receive information and then vote. The vote count was handled by the AAA, an organization that has an enviable record for fairness and accuracy in record keeping. Our locals were provided with extra packages to give to members who may not have received them and methods were established to provide PINs to those who needed them. Every member who voted the first time was sent an individual letter advising them that they would have to re-vote. During this ratification process, the individual member also had to take responsibility for following through on the information and materials provided. All of this information was widely disseminated including on our website.
I, therefore, must conclude that the ratification process was handled in a fair and reasonable manner.
In Unity,
Morton Bahr
President
![11.gif']](/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2F%5Bimg+src%3D%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usaviation.com%2Fidealbb%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2F11.gif%27%5D+%5Bimg+src%3D%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usaviation.com%2Fidealbb%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2F11.gif%27%5D&hash=1e73bf5e1dba9dcf96becbf1a1520d36)
