IAM DL141 AGC

[freedom]

If the charge were just recieving stolen property that wouldn't be so bad , we all make mistakes ,sometimes we look the other way when we shouldn't , but the charge of criminal conspiracy speaks to something much more serious ,what that maybe i'm not sure But lets just say i'm not going to sleep any sounder tonight thinking that we might have someone who handles our union dues who might have at one time helped to comssion a crime . hello ENRON !!!!!!!!

as for it not being a felony , i highly DOUBT that they would have handed out a 5 year probation for a misdemenor and this is him pleading GUILTY .

While i don't relish the thought of calling for anyone to be investigated within our own union , we MUST ask ourselves if this individual is trust worthy to serve and represent our interests and our fiances .This man IS a convicted crminal after all .Like someone pointed out , is our union even aware of his past ?


AFTER EDIT : i see you said he doesn't controll any monies 700 , but i still don't know what it is he does for us ? what is he a shop steweard ?

 

[Tim Nelson]

He has no control nor access to IAM funds, he has no authority to sign checks.

Agree.
But my question would be a legal one. If this is the same guy, then how would he have been able to work at the airport if he had a prior felony? And did the IAm know about this?

I remember things got tougher after 911 and those with felonies couldn't get badged.

regards,

 

[D M G]

He has no control nor access to IAM funds, he has no authority to sign checks.

What was his position at LL1776 starting in 2002? Wasn't he an Auditor or Trustee?


Freedom,

He's an Assistant General Chairman for DL141. I believe the previous convictions were felonies, maybe 3rd degree, but felonies.

 

[diogenes]

He has no control nor access to IAM funds, he has no authority to sign checks.

District VP's and AGC's have expense accounts. I'm sure the gentleman has creative skills.

Tim makes another telling point. After 9/11, airlines tightened up on security, and one aspect was for employees to get fingerprinted and go thru an FBI background check. I remember some folks raised Cain until they got assurances the company wasn't going to maintain the fingerprints on file (as usual, no help from the IAM).

I know employees resigned/retired because they knew they could not withstand the scrutiny.

So, how to explain the presence of Mr. Armedio?

I'd heard thru the grapevine Crellin had something on him - could this be it?

 

[IAM1776PHL]

I'd heard thru the grapevine Crellin had something on him - could this be it?
[/quote]

ouch ! I believe Uncle Al owned him .
i.m.o. Al's gone and Tony's now got to rely on the iam.
ouch again !

 

[700UW]

I believe the background checks only went back like 10 years and only certain convictions barred people from getting a SIDA badge.

Disqualifying convictions:

d) Disqualifying criminal offenses. An individual has a disqualifying criminal offense if the individual has been convicted, or found not guilty of by reason of insanity, of any of the disqualifying crimes listed in this paragraph (d) in any jurisdiction during the 10 years before the date of the individual's application for unescorted access authority, or while the individual has unescorted access authority. The disqualifying criminal offenses are as follows—

(1) Forgery of certificates, false marking of aircraft, and other aircraft registration violation; 49 U.S.C. 46306.

(2) Interference with air navigation; 49 U.S.C. 46308.

(3) Improper transportation of a hazardous material; 49 U.S.C. 46312.

(4) Aircraft piracy; 49 U.S.C. 46502.

(5) Interference with flight crew members or flight attendants; 49 U.S.C. 46504.

(6) Commission of certain crimes aboard aircraft in flight; 49 U.S.C. 46506.

(7) Carrying a weapon or explosive aboard aircraft; 49 U.S.C. 46505.

(8) Conveying false information and threats; 49 U.S.C. 46507.

(9) Aircraft piracy outside the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States; 49 U.S.C. 46502(B).

(10) Lighting violations involving transporting controlled substances; 49 U.S.C. 46315.

(11) Unlawful entry into an aircraft or airport area that serves air carriers or foreign air carriers contrary to established security requirements; 49 U.S.C. 46314.

(12) Destruction of an aircraft or aircraft facility; 18 U.S.C. 32.

(13) Murder.

(14) Assault with intent to murder.

(15) Espionage.

(16) Sedition.

(17) Kidnapping or hostage taking.

(18) Treason.

(19) Rape or aggravated sexual abuse.

(20) Unlawful possession, use, sale, distribution, or manufacture of an explosive or weapon.

(21) Extortion.

(22) Armed or felony unarmed robbery.

(23) Distribution of, or intent to distribute, a controlled substance.

(24) Felony arson.

(25) Felony involving a threat.

(26) Felony involving—

(i) Willful destruction of property;

(ii) Importation or manufacture of a controlled substance;

(iii) Burglary;

(iv) Theft;

(v) Dishonesty, fraud, or misrepresentation;

(vi) Possession or distribution of stolen property;

(vii) Aggravated assault;

(viii) Bribery; or

(ix) Illegal possession of a controlled substance punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of more than 1 year.

(27) Violence at international airports; 18 U.S.C. 37.

(28) Conspiracy or attempt to commit any of the criminal acts listed in this paragraph (d).

(e) Fingerprint application and processing. (1) At the time of fingerprinting, the airport operator must provide the individual to be fingerprinted a fingerprint application that includes only the following—

(i) The disqualifying criminal offenses described in paragraph (d) of this section.

(ii) A statement that the individual signing the application does not have a disqualifying criminal offense.

(iii) A statement informing the individual that Federal regulations under 49 CFR 1542.209 (l) impose a continuing obligation to disclose to the airport operator within 24 hours if he or she is convicted of any disqualifying criminal offense that occurs while he or she has unescorted access authority. After February 17, 2002, the airport operator may use statements that have already been printed referring to 14 CFR 107.209 until stocks of such statements are used up.

 

[diogenes]

700,

So, you're ok with a convicted thief being an IAM AGC?

 

[700UW]

As long as he is reformed I have no problem with it, people deserve a second chance in life.

He who is without sin shall cast the first stone.

 

[diogenes]

As long as he is reformed I have no problem with it, people deserve a second chance in life.

He who is without sin shall cast the first stone.

Nonsense. You wouldn't let a guy convicted of aggravated assault babysit your kids, nor an embezzeler do your taxes, no matter how far in the past the crime was.

Should he get his basic rights back and get on with his life? Sure.

Should we pretend it never happened? We both know - no.

I'd bet large if the membership were aware of this AND IAM ran a fair election, Armedio would be out on his ear.

Plus, you were all too willing to hold Doug's past against him, and I agree. A series of DUI's should do him out of his job.

I hold Armedio to the same standard.

 

[insp89]

Nonsense. You wouldn't let a guy convicted of aggravated assault babysit your kids, nor an embezzeler do your taxes, no matter how far in the past the crime was.

Should he get his basic rights back and get on with his life? Sure.

Should we pretend it never happened? We both know - no.

I'd bet large if the membership were aware of this AND IAM ran a fair election, Armedio would be out on his ear.

Plus, you were all too willing to hold Doug's past against him, and I agree. A series of DUI's should do him out of his job.

I hold Armedio to the same standard.

It's a crying shame that the IAM Constitution and Bylaws do not contain provisions that would enable the membership to recall their [so-called] leadership if it became necessary.
Yeah, I'm talking about ACCOUNTABILITY..

If such a Provision were in place, there would be a lot less back door BS taking place.

 

[delldude]

It's a crying shame that the IAM Constitution and Bylaws do not contain provisions that would enable the membership to recall their [so-called] leadership if it became necessary.
Yeah, I'm talking about ACCOUNTABILITY..

If such a Provision were in place, there would be a lot less back door BS taking place.

Try Article L-'CODE'........pg 127

Sec.2-Improper Conduct of Officers and Representatives

Sec.3- Improper Conduct of a Member

Sec.4-Suspensions

Sec.5-Trial of LL,DL,Council or Conference

Sec.6-Trial of Officers or Representatives

Its all there...all above board,no secret rules 😉

 

[diogenes]

Try Article L-'CODE'........pg 127

Sec.2-Improper Conduct of Officers and Representatives

Sec.3- Improper Conduct of a Member

Sec.4-Suspensions

Sec.5-Trial of LL,DL,Council or Conference

Sec.6-Trial of Officers or Representatives

Its all there...all above board,no secret rules 😉

I see there's more than one adept on this thread! 😉

 

[delldude]

I see there's more than one adept on this thread! 😉

:wub:

 

[insp89]

Try Article L-'CODE'........pg 127

Sec.2-Improper Conduct of Officers and Representatives

Sec.3- Improper Conduct of a Member

Sec.4-Suspensions

Sec.5-Trial of LL,DL,Council or Conference

Sec.6-Trial of Officers or Representatives

Its all there...all above board,no secret rules 😉

Dell,
Thank You for listing the Sections concerning Union officials.
There's a problem though, -ENFORCEMENT-
Seems to me this is a good opportunity for the IAM to step up and ENFORCE their own language.

 

[allstrike]

So thats how they do it,get the goods on ya then when ya become an AGC,hey its...the fix is in.Well just kidding...I hope.