Locals Stripped of Representation

[Runwaysticker]

I can tell you why it was removed. I asked a few reliable sources around the system.
The local prez from MIAMI and DFW stated that GEO pay was not fair. It seems that they were not happy that the Northeast and the West coast locals would get more than Miami and DFW. Last time I checked those places are more expensive to live than MIA and DFW. That is why it is called GEO pay.
As for my opinion I believe that the Miami Prez was under orders to remove it from higher union officials. I think they call that licking my boots or attaching lips to a certain part of the body.

As far as keeping secrets inside the negotiating committee? Good luck. I get info from various sources from different stations and confirm it all to be the same before I spew it off. Either everyone is lying or everyone is telling the truth. With the TWU they can not differentiate between the two. They believe their own lies to be the truth.

MIA should get a extra bump in pay its not like living in TUL/AFW/DFW and to raise a kid outside DADE county it can be real tight....

 

[Bob Owens]

Bob, that's just way on the high side of disingenuous. You know, and you know that I know that you know who in my Local would even know you.

There's only three people in your Local that I can think of that I know, so you must be one of those three otherwise how could you know what I know. But since I dont know who you are here since you choose to be anonymous how could I possibly know what you know that I know? Who's being disengenous here?

The fact remains that Gilboy came JFK campaigning for my opponent, criticized the way our Stores guy was handling negotiations (because they never deviated from their table position and kept control out of the Internationals hands)and told the guys here that the only reason why the committee took the companys offer, rewrote it and presented it to the members back in 2008 was because oil had spiked to $150 a barrell and they figured they would get some quick cash in the members pockets. He told my guys that was gone and not coming back, then he spearheaded bringing it back in June for an even longer term. It had grown from two to three with an attempt to make it four years.

I will check on that and get back to you; however, it doesn't change the fact about how it survived as long as it did on this go around.

Well last time it survived to within a week of the final TA. So far its been pulled from the table twice, once in August of 2008 and in June of 2009. Last time it was there until the final week before the TA was announced.

I don't claim it, I proclaim it; you did and you were wrong, period. Of course you don't see it that way, to do so would require you to acknowledge that you were wrong, which you are apparently incapaable of doing.

Period? Is that an edict from the bench? What gives you such authority to claim that my opinion is wrong? Then you claim that I'm incapable of acknowledging I'm wrong. Well obviously you didnt read our membership update where I did just what you claim I'm incapable of, so you are wrong. Unlike your opnion that I'm wrong I can produce facts that show that you are wrong. You may need to look in the mirror on that count squire.

Aside from the fact that the above statement further detracts from the force of your rhetorical question above about the extent of your association with members of 563, it seems that this is a weak basis for such a strong, and wrong, opinion, given the attenuation of time and circumstances from from then to the present day, and the sense of certainty I'm feeling now about the identity of those "fellow" officers of ten years past, makes me chuckle, because they daily go about here chanelling the spirit of what you and your fellow travellers do on this forum.

The basis for my opinion stems mainly from my observations over the last year. He was introduced to me as a company man ten years ago but thats not what formed my opinion, I took it as they were just busting his chops. Yes he takes a hard stance on language issues and enforcing them, I support him when he does that. Its his repeated insistance that the status quo is just fine, his attempts to get long term concessionary deals put in place, his indifference to other clasifications, and his fear mongering against pushing the company harder or even trying to shoot for an industry leading contract that helped form my opinion. You dont like it? Fine. You dont agree? Fine again but it doesnt make me wrong.

 

[shthslwyr]

There's only three people in your Local that I can think of that I know, so you must be one of those three otherwise how could you know what I know. But since I dont know who you are here since you choose to be anonymous how could I possibly know what you know that I know? Who's being disengenous here?

First you ask the question "Who in your Local would even know me?", implying from the context that it was asked in that the inevitable answer is "no one". Now you admit to at least three. I would call that game, set, and match on the disingenuousness matter.

The fact remains that Gilboy came JFK campaigning for my opponent, criticized the way our Stores guy was handling negotiations

The fact remains that it it not a fact, it is an accusation that was never substantiated by the people that made it to those in Local 563 whose responsibility it was to investigate it, so supply names dates, times, and places in a formal complaint to those persons, or have the decency to stop declaring it to be a fact.

Period? Is that an edict from the bench? What gives you such authority to claim that my opinion is wrong?

Bob, bottom line is: You were wrong to express such an unfair negative opinion about a fellow president, negotiating committee member, and union brother in a public forum. The fact that you based the opinion on nothing more than the fact that you and Gilboy disagree on certain issues makes it even more wrong.

Well obviously you didnt read our membership update ...

There's a good reason for that Bob, I live in the blissfully ignorant of the real problems our Members face Midwest. Your updates are of little concern to me. I'm more interested in what you say in the general public, which is here, on this forum.

He was introduced to me as a company man ten years ago but thats not what formed my opinion, I took it as they were just busting his chops.

That's not quite exactly waht you said yesterday

Yes he takes a hard stance on language issues and enforcing them, I support him when he does that. Its his repeated insistance that the status quo is just fine, his attempts to get long term concessionary deals put in place, his indifference to other clasifications, and his fear mongering against pushing the company harder or even trying to shoot for an industry leading contract that helped form my opinion. You dont like it? Fine. You dont agree? Fine again but it doesnt make me wrong.

Bob, I've said as much as can be said without repeating myself. The assertions you made above are your interpretations of his action based on your own particular view of what you believe the right course of action is. Gilboy refuses to discuss any opinion he might have about what your motives and aims are, and whether they are the right course of action to take. You should extend the same courtesy to him, and to the extent you do not do that, you are wrong, period.

 

[Bob Owens]

First you ask the question "Who in your Local would even know me?", implying from the context that it was asked in that the inevitable answer is "no one". Now you admit to at least three. I would call that game, set, and match on the disingenuousness matter.

You claim that Gilboy never said anything about me to people in his local but thats not true because both of the other people from your local that I know approached me on issues where its obvious that he was talking about me to them.

You never did address how I would know what you know that I know.

The fact remains that it it not a fact, it is an accusation that was never substantiated by the people that made it to those in Local 563 whose responsibility it was to investigate it, so supply names dates, times, and places in a formal complaint to those persons, or have the decency to stop declaring it to be a fact.

Its a fact, where you there? Complaint about what, free speech? If he wants to come here and say "You dont want Owens in there", thats his opinion and he is free to express his opnion, and if I think he's a company man because of the various positions he takes thats my right.

Bob, bottom line is: You were wrong to express such an unfair negative opinion about a fellow president, negotiating committee member, and union brother in a public forum.

Like I said I base it on what I've seen over the last year, you claim its unfair, how so?

The fact that you based the opinion on nothing more than the fact that you and Gilboy disagree on certain issues makes it even more wrong.

There you go with your so called "facts" again, we are talking about opinions here. If you have facts that support your opinion then by all means put them out here but you cant factually state that my opinion is wrong, only that you dont agree with it. Obviously if we disagree on critical issues I can use that as a basis of my opinion of what he represents to me.

There's a good reason for that Bob, I live in the blissfully ignorant of the real problems our Members face Midwest. Your updates are of little concern to me. I'm more interested in what you say in the general public, which is here, on this forum

That reply just proved my point. You made a claim, I proved it to be false so you ducked away.

Bob, I've said as much as can be said without repeating myself. The assertions you made above are your interpretations of his action based on your own particular view of what you believe the right course of action is.

Thats usually how opinions are formed.

Gilboy refuses to discuss any opinion he might have about what your motives and aims are, and whether they are the right course of action to take. You should extend the same courtesy to him, and to the extent you do not do that, you are wrong, period.

Once again thats your opinion, period. He was not nearly as reserved as you claim as far as sharing his opinions about me last year when he came through JFK.

I feel that the members should know whats going on. If their leaders are pushing for concessionary deals I dont feel that it should be kept secret. If they feel thats the right course of action then there should be no problem in debating it publically as well as privately.

 

[TWU informer]

Do I know anyone that would know what you two know that we all should know about those affecting our lives and what they might know that not many of us really know about?

 

[iluvaa]

If there were no secret double hand shakes and private neg sessions where presidents are threated to keep quite or else. maybe this would all be a non childish issue he said she said nonsense. Last time I checked the union worked for me how dare they keep secrets. Imagine that you hire a lawyer to neg a deal with a local bussiness that you want sell goods to, and he tells you that he cant tell about any of the talks until they hash it out. Everyone on this site would have to admit that they would fire that lawyer in a heart beat. I will say this I dont know Bob from adam except from reading this board for years, at least he tells us whats going on, if he's wrong who would know they dont tell us anything. So Im going to just have to believe what he says. His opinons are his as mine are mine and yours are yours ect. Stop the back and forth finger pointing. I want a detailed play by play of every session by all the presidents then we all can come to our own understanding about things. Rant over

 

[TWU informer]

All I know is they know what we should all know and they both know that we should know but instead they know what happens if they inform us so we don't know.

 

[iluvaa]

That sums up what I said in one simple sentence, thats why I dont post here offten lol

 

[TWU informer]

And in the end, we still don't know

 

[iluvaa]

well they did stop there petty back and forth, we know that. see thats progress

 

[TWU informer]

Funny how a big dose of truth stops a thread on this forum.

 

[Hopeful]

Funny how a big dose of truth stops a thread on this forum.

Maybe they're using a secret decoder ring!

 

[enough already]

All I know is they know what we should all know and they both know that we should know but instead they know what happens if they inform us so we don't know.

I know that you think you know what I know is that you think I know what you knew, but I'm not sure that what you think I said, to who I said it, is not what I really said. :huh:

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

It is the democracy of the TWU
Tell them nothing
If someone leaks out info get rid of them
I understand it perfectly.

 

[iluvaa]

Chirp chirp the silence is deafening