Jack Kane Sucks!

[700UW]

To be released one or both parties have to request it, the mediator makes his recommendation to the NMB and the NMB releases the parties, not the mediator.

 

[Bob Owens]

I think FURP is mistaken about the role of a mediator. He's not a judge or an arbitrator. He's there to facilitate. Pushing one side or the other towards common ground isn't his job -- it is to try and keep the conversation going.

If he's declaring that there is "insufficient progress, and insufficient hope for progress," then maybe, just maybe, the problem is with the two parties involved.

If you want someone to split the differences, request binding arbitration.

If you want someone to make the decisions for the two parties, wait long enough and you'll probably get your wish in front of a judge.

I agree that Jack kane is just doing his job, and the job of the NMB is to try and prevent labor disputes from causing disruptions to commerce, so if we are looking for neutrality we are misguided. I believe that the decision to pull out the Mediator can only be made by the NMB and not the Mediator himself. In case you missed it Larry Gibbons, Jack Kane's Boss came in this week.

http://www.nmb.gov/directory/gibbons-larry_bio.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_Express

http://www.aircon.org/what_is_aircon/index.htm

I dont think when they crafted the law that the intent was to allow negotiations to drag on forever, or until labor gives in to the companys demands. If thats the case then its in our best interests to take on the RLA the way African Americans took on the Jim Crow laws.

I was always under the impression that when the NMB declares that "No further progress can be made" and pulls their Mediators out that the parties are proffered binding arbitration and if refused, released, not put on ICE. Then if the NMB feels that the system will be impaired that they can inform the President and then the President can establish a PEB, if that fails then Congress can impose an agreement. Nowhere have I seen where it says they just put you into a holding pattern until labor agrees to whatever the company wants to offer.

 

[strikeforce]

I agree that Jack kane is just doing his job, and the job of the NMB is to try and prevent labor disputes from causing disruptions to commerce, so if we are looking for neutrality we are misguided. I believe that the decision to pull out the Mediator can only be made by the NMB and not the Mediator himself. In case you missed it Larry Gibbons, Jack Kane's Boss came in this week.

http://www.nmb.gov/directory/gibbons-larry_bio.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_Express

http://www.aircon.org/what_is_aircon/index.htm

I dont think when they crafted the law that the intent was to allow negotiations to drag on forever, or until labor gives in to the companys demands. If thats the case then its in our best interests to take on the RLA the way African Americans took on the Jim Crow laws.

I was always under the impression that when the NMB declares that "No further progress can be made" and pulls their Mediators out that the parties are proffered binding arbitration and if refused, released, not put on ICE. Then if the NMB feels that the system will be impaired that they can inform the President and then the President can establish a PEB, if that fails then Congress can impose an agreement. Nowhere have I seen where it says they just put you into a holding pattern until labor agrees to whatever the company wants to offer.

Well Bob, then I guess it's time you and the other presidents around the system get a game plan together to make AA understand that stalling will no longer be tolerated. Get my drift?

 

[Frank Szabo]

I agree that Jack kane is just doing his job, and the job of the NMB is to try and prevent labor disputes from causing disruptions to commerce, so if we are looking for neutrality we are misguided. I believe that the decision to pull out the Mediator can only be made by the NMB and not the Mediator himself. In case you missed it Larry Gibbons, Jack Kane's Boss came in this week.

http://www.nmb.gov/directory/gibbons-larry_bio.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_Express

http://www.aircon.org/what_is_aircon/index.htm

I dont think when they crafted the law that the intent was to allow negotiations to drag on forever, or until labor gives in to the companys demands. If thats the case then its in our best interests to take on the RLA the way African Americans took on the Jim Crow laws.

I was always under the impression that when the NMB declares that "No further progress can be made" and pulls their Mediators out that the parties are proffered binding arbitration and if refused, released, not put on ICE. Then if the NMB feels that the system will be impaired that they can inform the President and then the President can establish a PEB, if that fails then Congress can impose an agreement. Nowhere have I seen where it says they just put you into a holding pattern until labor agrees to whatever the company wants to offer.

... it also helps immensely if the party negotiating opposite the company is not a defacto wholly owned subsidiary of that company ...

It would seem more lkely the company and the twu international have agreed on a contract and are waiting until the membership has had enough of the everlasting delays to vote for whatever is tossed in front of them. Some are ready to do so now, talking about how much money they've "lost".

You guys know it doesn't have to be a very good contract, just one that can garner 50% + 1 of the vote - hardly a mandate and guaranteed to keep everyone pissed off for a long time.

 

[Frank Szabo]

... snip

If you want someone to make the decisions for the two parties, wait long enough and you'll probably get your wish in front of a judge.

Mr. E:

The lack of a "union's" signed employment contract has never forced any company into bankruptcy, if that's what you're implying.

Byhaps afterwards but never before.

 

[Bob Owens]

... it also helps immensely if the party negotiating opposite the company is not a defacto wholly owned subsidiary of that company ...

It would seem more lkely the company and the twu international have agreed on a contract and are waiting until the membership has had enough of the everlasting delays to vote for whatever is tossed in front of them. Some are ready to do so now, talking about how much money they've "lost".

You guys know it doesn't have to be a very good contract, just one that can garner 50% + 1 of the vote - hardly a mandate and guaranteed to keep everyone pissed off for a long time.

Some were ready to accept the TA. They only "lose" it if they approve a contract without Retro. We can always vote NO again.

Not everyone voted against the TA, so its to be expected that those who voted in favor of it complain.

The election cycle, while painfully slow has changed the makeup of the committee, while those of us on the more agressive side used to lose along the lines of 12 to 5 in the full committee now its more like 8 to 7.

 

[Frank Szabo]

Some were ready to accept the TA. They only "lose" it if they approve a contract without Retro. We can always vote NO again.

Not everyone voted against the TA, so its to be expected that those who voted in favor of it complain.

The election cycle, while painfully slow has changed the makeup of the committee, while those of us on the more agressive side used to lose along the lines of 12 to 5 in the full committee now its more like 8 to 7.

Regardless - whatever comes out of this latest round of "negotiations" is probably DOA, much like the last "contract" the company was told would pass. OOPSEY!!

The nearly 70% vote-down says to me many are tired of the Kool-Aid being served by the company and its "union". That means many people, who at one time believed the BS spoon-fed to them aren't buying into the crap anymore. The 30% remaining aren't enough to do much else than make noise in defense of their social club, which they're quite welcome to do.

We do not need to pay $600+ per year in dues apiece to a so-called "union" when then company will be quite pleased to screw us around for free.

 

[Crapdog]

I think he got word that AMP has enough cards to vote TWU goodbye. He's fed up with the silly games. This is the direction we are heading.

 

[PHAAT DON]

I think he got word that AMP has enough cards to vote TWU goodbye. He's fed up with the silly games. This is the direction we are heading.

CRAPDOG......GET INTO MY BELLY!!!! I LOVE ME SOME CRAPDOG. GIVE ME MY BABYBACK BABYBACK BABYBACK

 

[IORFA]

Mr. E:

The lack of a "union's" signed employment contract has never forced any company into bankruptcy, if that's what you're implying.

Byhaps afterwards but never before.

I've seen you write it on many occasions, but what in the world does the word "byhaps" mean? It isn't really a word and I can't for the life of me figure out what you are intending it to mean. Thanks.

 

[Frank Szabo]

I've seen you write it on many occasions, but what in the world does the word "byhaps" mean? It isn't really a word and I can't for the life of me figure out what you are intending it to mean. Thanks.

Oh, please - it's a silly-ass way of saying "perhaps" - on the same order of "methinks".

Now - if you really want some imagination re: making up words, read "Jabberwocky" - Lewis Carrol was a master at it.

from The Jabberwocky by Lewis Carrol

`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"
.............


the rest is all over the net if you're interested.

 

[eolesen]

Mr. E:

The lack of a "union's" signed employment contract has never forced any company into bankruptcy, if that's what you're implying.

Byhaps afterwards but never before.

I'm not implying that you're going to be in front of a judge simply because of your contract. Bankruptcy will probably happen on its own merits.

 

[Frank Szabo]

I'm not implying that you're going to be in front of a judge simply because of your contract. Bankruptcy will probably happen on its own merits.

... and that, Sir, I agree with.

I misread/misunderstood/mis something re: your opinion.

 

[DallasConehead]

I didn’t know there was such a thing as "being put on ice" in the RLA. It seems, this is a violation of the law and our representation should aggressively seek to correct the situation through the courts since the law is being violated. However, I’m sure there is a crackpot shyster labor lawyer somewhere in the mix advising that’s it is legal for the NMB to do what they have done.

And so, once again it appears our rights as citizens and union folk are trampled on. America will be a third world country in my child’s lifetime. SAD….

 

[eolesen]

A lawyer once told me when it comes to the law, if something isn't prohibited, it's allowed.

So, show me where the RLA says you can't be "put on ice" and I'll believe they're in violation... There are no time limits specified outside the cooling off period, and there's nothing I've ever seen which says the mediator can't go at a pace they feel is appropriate, even if it means doing nothing for months at a time.