Does the vote violate 141 Bylaws?

[redeye]

As the rumer mill has it; PHL votes Thursday CLT votes Friday.
Outstations are voting throughout the week.

Article XIII of the District 141 Bylaws state that
"Contract ratification voting shall occur on the same day system-wide"

I'm confused. This Article is supposed to protect the membership
from manipulation of the vote. Why would the District do this against
their own bylaws?

hmmmmm :down:

 

[Harry Callahan]

I would love to see the answer on this one.

 

[philly rocks]

If it states that in your Constitution and Bi-laws then all members should be voting on the same day. I believe there are a certain number of days for posting first. Re-read bi-laws and constitution and let your executive board members know you want to protest this if it isn't being followed by the "book"!

 

[diogenes]

They did it last time, too.

Votes were held on different days during the vote on the company's last best offer.

Additionally, D141's by-laws state the leadership must give a yes/no recommendation. They did not during the last best offer. D141 hid behind the fig leaf that since it was not a negotiated agreement, they did not have to make a recommendation.

Interestingly, Armedio and Canale spent the bulk of the info meeting explaining how they had improved the last best offer, which sounded to many observers like negotiations.

The outcome on this one was decided before the first vote was cast. IAM wants a US/UA merger, and this smooths the way, by throwing senior employees under the bus twice.

 

[philly rocks]

Under RLA you must go to the NMB to file charges regarding the ratification vote that is being mishandled against the IAM bi-laws and constitution. DFR charges must be made asap if they are in violoation.

 

[redeye]

Look what I found at the NMB Web site!
Pass the Buck;

Internal Union Matters under the LMRDA

The NMB has no authority to investigate or remedy employee grievances against a union. If you believe your union is in violation of its constitution and bylaws; is not properly conducting union affairs such as the ratification of union/management agreements, to strike or not, election of union officials, the conduct of union officials, and the application of union dues or agency fees; or is otherwise in violation of your rights as a union member under the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosures Act (LMRDA), you may contact the Office of Labor Management Standards of the Department of Labor at 202 513-7300 or consult with a private attorney.


Think I'll Give a Ring a Ding <_<

 

[philly rocks]

Yes forgot the LMDRA, NMB will also point you in the right direction for DFR charges. You see you are not filing them against a member, it would be the National Union-unfair labor practice issues. Get someone to fill you in asap on how the group can file under the LMDRA and make sure you tell them you operate under the RLA.

There are plenty of attys that would take this on pro=bono.

 

[Tim Nelson]

As the rumer mill has it; PHL votes Thursday CLT votes Friday.
Outstations are voting throughout the week.

Article XIII of the District 141 Bylaws state that
"Contract ratification voting shall occur on the same day system-wide"

I'm confused. This Article is supposed to protect the membership
from manipulation of the vote. Why would the District do this against
their own bylaws?

hmmmmm :down:

redeye, give me a call. Send me the file of their current bylaws if you don't mind. I have been very viligant against worker rights and ironically that means fighting the union, not the company.

District 141 has been found to be criminal before as they violated worker rights of the US AIRWAYS fleet service members. However, a settlement was reached. In that case, no monetary damages were necessary.

In this case, if the IAM is in violation then monetary damages would most likely be 'painful' to the IAM.

regards,

 

[727_4_Ever]

I asked about our ballots (CLT) which will be cast about 2 weeks before being counted and was told by a shop steward that they will be sent to the district lodge and held there. I feel real comfortable with that (not). A lot can happen in two weeks and not much of it good. Hell Federal evidence has disappeared in that amount of time. I will cast my vote and hope it counts. I feel a neutral company should be in charge of holding the vote and counting the results. I'd be willing to use some of my dues to pay for that and forgo a convention or two in Las Vegas.

 

[redeye]

I Called the DOL OLMS.
The Investigator is checking the merit of the case and
will get back with me as to the enforcement mechanisms
available.

I hear that stations have already voted:
RDU, ORD, DCA,
"Rumor" is a BIG NO vote

PHX voting ends 6pm their time

 

[allstrike]

I Called the DOL OLMS.
The Investigator is checking the merit of the case and
will get back with me as to the enforcement mechanisms
available.

I hear that stations have already voted:
RDU, ORD, DCA,
"Rumor" is a BIG NO vote

PHX voting ends 6pm their time

Someone please post PHX vote ya or nay.....Gotta love this..good job redeye

 

[philly rocks]

Tim, article XIII I believe of your bi-laws state voting same day system-wide. This gives all of you the heads up the vote should be NOOOOOOO!

 

[Tim Nelson]

I Called the DOL OLMS.
The Investigator is checking the merit of the case and
will get back with me as to the enforcement mechanisms
available.

I hear that stations have already voted:
RDU, ORD, DCA,
"Rumor" is a BIG NO vote

PHX voting ends 6pm their time

 

[NevadaHP]

i heard from a credible source about 70% voted and about 85% voted yes in PHX today :down:

 

[sunnyinsd]

Hello all...I've been checking this site for the last two years and finally signed up to let you know what I have heard. I'm a westie and can tell you that LAX also voted today and that the US East employees mostly voted "yes" and the US west employees voted "no". As far as PHX goes I have heard from a very reliable source that the guess is about 60% showed up for the vote and majority voted "yes".
I really didn't sign up for this site to debate my position but wanted to let anyone who is interested know what I have heard . I have had the pleasure to meet some very senior (30+) year US East employees and work with them.. So before anyone jumps on the band wagon and tells me I have now idea what I'm talking about etc,etc, I do know everyone's pain and suffering that each has endoured.
I've got a letter that I want to share with everyone that was written by a PHX ramper. I'm totally new to this so forgive me if I totally screw this up, but here goes nothing......well that didn't work so I'll just type it out. I'll also ask in advance for a little slack in the misspelling dept. because I'm going to be typing very fast and I'm sure I'll make some mistakes....without further delay....

August 21, 2007


For the better par of a week, I have been listening to my coworkers comments and reading the many message boards writing s regarding this Transition Agreement contract offering.

As a "westie", I must admit that the lure of a long overdue pay increase is very enticing. Working the same jobs as our "eastie" counterparts for the past two years at a pay level substantially below what tthey have been getting has been hard to swallow. On the surface, it looks that this offer is "a slam dunk" or " a no brainer" to quote what I have been hearing from my "westie" coworkers.

But there has been something about this whole porcess that has bee n troubling me and I had been unable to my finger on it. In listening to and reading about all of two prime emotions, fear and greed. And although these emothins are quite valid, I have tried to keep them out of my decision making process.

Then yesterday, as I was cutting the grass ( and sweating like a pig) it finally dawned on me why I was troubled by this agreement. It was that the processfor handling a grievance, any grievance, was being circumvented. Now I will be the first to tell you that I am not a strong union person. Although I have worked under labor union in the past )most notably the UAW). I was never at the front of any fight. But two things I have always believed in are principal and integrity, For me, that is what this comes down to.

As I said before, on the surface, the lure of a pay increase is very enticing. But there is something larger at work here. If the show were on the other foot and it was the "westies" that thought they had been wronged and had filed a grievance to remedy the situation, our perspective on this being a "slam dunk" or "no brainer" might be different. Even if it wasn't about the Change of Control, which we can all agree is a big issue, the fact that someone has filed a grievance and we are going to be denied the "due process" to have the situation remedied doesn't sit well with me. Perhaps the next grievance that is filed will be the one that more directly affects me. I want to know that I will get my "due process" and have that situation resolved.

You can certainly call me naive on this issue. I'm sure that "back room" deals are made all the time and on a variety of issues. I must also admit that I have many questions remaining on this agreement and the negotiations that got us to this point. But for me, this remains a bigger picture issue, one of principal and integrity.

Every one of us will have their own reason for voting one way or another. It is not my intent to sway you in either direction. All that being said, I have no choice but to vote no on this transition agreement. I hope that you can respect the reason for my vote just as I respect yours.

I have not made wide distribution of this rambling. I have instead chosen to give you a copy as I feel you are an informed and objective person. After you read it , feel free to shred it, burn it, flush it or share it. That choice is yours.
get it right so I'll have to type it out.



So there you have it...it hit home with me and I hope it does the same with you. I'll be voting "NO" and thanks for your time.