Fleet Service apathy

[700UW]

There is nothing in the RLA calling for it, but if you want to see critical financial information it is, otherwise the company will never disclose it.

When I was on the M&R NC during chapter 11 part 2, we had to sign confidentiality agreements in regards to the companies finances and pertinent information in regard to GECAS, Boeing, Airbus etc...

Even when AMFA had observers in negotiations at NW, there were times they had to leave the room when confidential information was exchanged.

SEC regulations and Sarbanes-Oxley come into play.

And Tim has never been on the negotiating committee.

So why would you want someone who has never been an AGC, as your DL President in charge of negotiations who is making empty promises just like he did to get the New Direction Team elected, how has that worked out for you?

 

[roabilly]

There is nothing in the RLA calling for it, but if you want to see critical financial information it is, otherwise the company will never disclose it.

When I was on the M&R NC during chapter 11 part 2, we had to sign confidentiality agreements in regards to the companies finances and pertinent information in regard to GECAS, Boeing, Airbus etc...

Even when AMFA had observers in negotiations at NW, there were times they had to leave the room when confidential information was exchanged.

SEC regulations and Sarbanes-Oxley come into play.

And Tim has never been on the negotiating committee.

So why would you want someone who has never been an AGC, as your DL President in charge of negotiations who is making empty promises just like he did to get the New Direction Team elected, how has that worked out for you?

Thank's 700...

In essence you are telling me from your experience, Confidentiality Agreements were "required" to exchange financial information that is not within the public domain between the two parties?

Is there anyway someone involved in negotiations could circumvent this practice... perhaps with a battery of attorneys?

 

[Jester]

Thank's 700...

In essence you are telling me from your experience, Confidentiality Agreements were "required" to exchange financial information that is not within the public domain between the two parties?

Is there anyway someone involved in negotiations could circumvent this practice... perhaps with a battery of attorneys?

My Dear Mister Roabilly,

There is nothing to prevent a limited confidentially agreement between the parties as such not to discuss or disclose any direct finance matters. So for example, discussions about non-financial issues such the Attendance Policy, increased vacation time, base closures and alike could be discussed without violating Federal laws. Simple statements such as, "The Company is balking on changing the Attendance Policy" or "The Company is willing to increase pay, but wants a trade-off in less vacation time," would be acceptable as they are not disclosing financial information or even dollar amounts.

Of course, a Company would be uneasy in such an arrangement because it would allow the negotiation team to whip-up the Membership with inflammatory rhetoric during talks which would probably lead to unsatisfactory outcomes in PAWOB's and D0's. The general rule is those who would be most harmed by public comments are more likely to demand their negotiations to be kept secret and not to allow the discussions to be tried in a court of public opinion.

So Counsels Jester.

 

[necigrad]

roabilly, there's two separate issues in regards to confidentiality. The legal one is what 700 was talking about, any information regulated by the SEC must be kept in confidence. This could simply be gotten around by, as I believe several said NW did. Quite simply the company says "OK, we are about to discuss privileged information. Everyone that has not signed the confidentiality agreement (which are only signed by those that need to) must leave. Once that topic is done they can come back in.

The second part is actually the bigger problem with Tims plan. He's right, there's nothing that says negotiations must be confidential. There's also nothing that says they can't be either. If the company demands an NDA and the union refuses we have an impass, with neither side right or wrong. On the flip side, maybe Tim can say "Look, my members will not accept confidential meetings. If you can't accommodate this we'll be at an impass, so is there some way we can work this out?" If the company is open to this there is no problem. Now, tell me which was they'll go, and no one knows.

 

[roabilly]

Hello Mr. Jester... hello... grad... etc


OK... so... if I understand this correctly, if the N/C decides not to engage in a NDA it may create an impasse as outlined under the RLA. Would this not prolong negotiations by triggering lengthy scheduled mediation?

The RLA also provides mandatory dispute resolution procedures (outlined below) that preclude strikes over union representation and grievance disputes, and postpone the ability of the parties to take action in bargaining disputes until they have completed an elaborate, time-consuming process involving negotiation, mediation by the NMB, possible review by a Presidential Emergency Board ("PEB"), and cooling-off periods.


We need to ferret out fact from fiction when it comes making broad statements regarding our future. This not a political game, a popularity contest, or a means to exact revenge on those that we feel wronged us.

 

[john john]

IAM doesn’t like to tell its members article content and what articles have been agreed on because they could go back and change them

 

[niblet]

He cant, the salary is set by the bylaws. Only changing the bylaw can you change the salary. Is it even legal under LMRDA to give salary money back?

A union is a non-profit organization, so they would be making a profit by a salary return.

True the only way to change the salary is to change the by-laws. The union is not for profit organization. The give backs would be the same as donations. Local lodges do it all the time. As long as donations and dues are spent on the membership this is obtainable. You have to recieve your salary but then it would be a donation back to the district. The district would reciept in into districts monies. This is not tax deductible to the AGC it would be post tax. There is not anything stopping the member from giving the money to the district or the district from recieving it. I'm not sure what your reading in the LMRDA, but interested to know. As for what you would call a profit. The international, district and local sell items to make money for the members. Would that be the same?

 

[roabilly]

One more point of observation...

I think what must be understood here is that the idea of keeping the membership completely in the loop in the "daily grind" of negations as they are outlined under the RLA could prove to be detrimental. What I mean is this... if the membership is "whipped into frenzy" and consequently engages in activities that could be construed as Illegal Job Actions the Union could be dragged into the court system and forced to spend enormous amounts of money defending itself from huge fines. All of this would consume more time and resources i.e. membership money.

Didn't we just watch this play-out in real time with the Pilots in the (wink...wink) Safety Campaign?

 

[niblet]

One more point of observation...

I think what must be understood here is that the idea of keeping the membership completely in the loop in the "daily grind" of negations as they are outlined under the RLA could prove to be detrimental. What I mean is this... if the membership is "whipped into frenzy" and consequently engages in activities that could be construed as Illegal Job Actions the Union could be dragged into the court system and forced to spend enormous amounts of money defending itself from huge fines. All of this would consume more time and resources i.e. membership money.

Didn't we just watch this play-out in real time with the Pilots in the (wink...wink) Safety Campaign?

I think the membership wants to be updated with real information in real time. Not hearsay or other second hand info. Are you not wanting to be kept IN THE LOOP?

 

[roabilly]

True the only way to change the salary is to change the by-laws. The union is not for profit organization. The give backs would be the same as donations. Local lodges do it all the time. As long as donations and dues are spent on the membership this is obtainable. You have to recieve your salary but then it would be a donation back to the district. The district would reciept in into districts monies. This is not tax deductible to the AGC it would be post tax. There is not anything stopping the member from giving the money to the district or the district from recieving it. I'm not sure what your reading in the LMRDA, but interested to know. As for what you would call a profit. The international, district and local sell items to make money for the members. Would that be the same?

The question regarding AGC give-backs is not in the mechanics or the logistics, but in the enforcement and regulation of them.

How can anyone guarantee the membership that everyone will participate in the program consistently month to month, year to year? How would the membership be able to confirm this is actually taking place after the Occupy Ticket is in office? What if an AGC was not very frugal, had a family illness or other unexpected expenses and decided he or she needs the full salary? Would there be provisions to waive and account for this in an honor system?

 

[roabilly]

I think the membership wants to be updated with real information in real time. Not hearsay or other second hand info. Are you not wanting to be kept IN THE LOOP?

"Kept in the loop" is not involvement in day to day negotiations... they are just that negotiations... nothing is enforceable until the Membership ratifies the negotiated language.

 

[niblet]

"Kept in the loop" is not involvement in day to day negotiations... they are just that negotiations... nothing is enforceable until the Membership ratifies the negotiated language.

I would like to know what is being discussed. Article topics and possible language changes. Proposals. We are out here in the field with little or no information about anything. Where do we stand? Is the company negotiating or bartering. Where do we look for information to at least inform members that we are moving forward? Look agents ask everyday whats happening in negotiations. How do we help ease their minds that The negotiating team is doing a good job?

 

[niblet]

The question regarding AGC give-backs is not in the mechanics or the logistics, but in the enforcement and regulation of them.

How can anyone guarantee the membership that everyone will participate in the program consistently month to month, year to year? How would the membership be able to confirm this is actually taking place after the Occupy Ticket is in office? What if an AGC was not very frugal, had a family illness or other unexpected expenses and decided he or she needs the full salary? Would there be provisions to waive and account for this in an honor system?

Payroll deduction.

 

[Dog Wonder]

Shakedown every payday.

 

[necigrad]

OK... so... if I understand this correctly, if the N/C decides not to engage in a NDA it may create an impasse as outlined under the RLA. Would this not prolong negotiations by triggering lengthy scheduled mediation?

The RLA also provides mandatory dispute resolution procedures (outlined below) that preclude strikes over union representation and grievance disputes, and postpone the ability of the parties to take action in bargaining disputes until they have completed an elaborate, time-consuming process involving negotiation, mediation by the NMB, possible review by a Presidential Emergency Board ("PEB"), and cooling-off periods.


We need to ferret out fact from fiction when it comes making broad statements regarding our future. This not a political game, a popularity contest, or a means to exact revenge on those that we feel wronged us.

In my OPINION your analysis is correct, however, I want to point out the other side. The company can accept this, say "Sure, no problem" and it's not an issue at all. They can also accept it but with conditions, like limits on people, only wanting the same people on a particular day, or every day, or anything really. It's NEGOTIATIONS so it comes down to what both parties accept. I think it's a good idea in theory, and maybe in practice, but only maybe for reasons I'm getting into shortly.

Yeah, this is our contract, which I expect to be around for 5 years. You can't politic negotiations, it's too important to stain with political rhetoric.

IAM doesn’t like to tell its members article content and what articles have been agreed on because they could go back and change them

Yup, and there's some logic here. I know I am intelligent enough to understand this. Many other members are too. But a lot are, quite simply, stupid and.or ignorant, and even smart people can get blinded by something they REALLY like, or confused with all the changes. When things like that happen people get pissed and say "But you said this was agreed to!" and the response is "It was, but in order to get something else (or a specified point) we have to give that up (or change it)". It dumbs down the process for those that aren't negotiating at the cost of conspiracy theories.

The question regarding AGC give-backs is not in the mechanics or the logistics, but in the enforcement and regulation of them.

How can anyone guarantee the membership that everyone will participate in the program consistently month to month, year to year? How would the membership be able to confirm this is actually taking place after the Occupy Ticket is in office? What if an AGC was not very frugal, had a family illness or other unexpected expenses and decided he or she needs the full salary? Would there be provisions to waive and account for this in an honor system?

Ya know, I've asked Tim this on this forum at least twice. The best answer I've seen is that each person on his ticket has signed an agreement to do it. The only problem is I don't know if that agreement would be legally binding.