Release Us!

[Bob Owens]

When Bob opens up, is that Bob's opinion or the stance of the negotiation committee, as Bob has said before, some of his comments are based on speculation. When speaking to the members the negotiators should speak as one.

Steve I think I've made it clear that I'm expressing my opinions and not those of the Committee unless stated otherwise.

You've already said that I should not say anything, that I should follow the same proceedures of the past, we can see where that has gotten us.

As I've said before the feedback I've recieved from the members is to keep doing what I've been doing, and they are the ones that count to me, not guys who want to do their ditry deeds in secret in the hopes of getting an International spot.

 

[Bob Owens]

Amen brother!

The committee should speak with one voice. You get your time to speak while the committee is in session. When you leave it is in solidarity. If the person can't work within that process they should either try to change the process but work within the one provided for the time being. How can we be taken seriously as professionals when we our leadership acts unprofessional.

We saw how professional it was when Don walked in last May when despite the fact that the committee had agreed that they would not bargain off bulett points Don walked in after a private session with the company and said here's the offer, dont discuss the merits we will do that tomorrow, then the next morning he , with the help of a few puppets, squashed any debate, any consideration of a counter offer, and brought it to a Roll call vote.

Then, without ever notifying the Negotiating committee they stuffed all the ballotts with that little Vote Yes insert. When we challenged them about it we were told "We can do that". Well, he was right, they own the process and we are just witnesses. And what are witnesses supposed to do? Testify as to what they saw, and I do that.

Whats professional about a guy who makes $150k a year ramrodding a concessionary deal through to a vote?

 

[Bob Owens]

And there under lies the problem.....the presidents think they know how the membership will vote WITHOUT conferring with their membership. This has happened time and time again. When the negotiating committee comes to an understanding with the company regarding a T/A, Why not bring it to the membership first, and then the membership will instruct the local president on whether to bring it forward or not? Makes lots of sense doesn't it, Bob? Maybe this should be part of the negotiating rules with the Intl and AA. I've got a better idea, why don't you make a motion to incorporate this process in the negotiating rules during the July session? Then let us know who voted against this, so we can vote them out in the next election.

Then in another 10 years we may actually get an agreement.

An easier way to address the problem is I think it should be published how committee members vote, some for obvious reasons dissagree. I voted against the TA and so did 94% of our members. Some claim it would give the company a tactical advantage, well I think they pretty much know already, look at how many people ove the years have gone from one side of the table to the other.

 

[Bob Owens]

I wonder how many of the 100 e-mail participants that you said you forwarded your letter to actually included those who are elected to serve on the negotiating committee. If any at all received the notification they had no voice in the matter because you had already made their decision for them!

Looks like your one man show is nearing its end bob....

Admittedly I neglected to send it to the full committee, I hit the wrong "group" tab on my E-mail and only sent it to the Table Committe, including Don Videtich.

Dont see where I made any decisions for anybody by asking the members to voice their opinion to Jim Little the man in charge. Lets face it we have the AA system coordinator running around the system saying that we should have accepted the TA, that the retiree medical in the TA was industry leading and SWA guys would have killed for that and that we are asking for too much and if fuel goes up a penny a gallon AA will file BK. Did Bobby Gless clear that with anybody? When the ballotts were sent out they included a little flyer that the committee was never informed about, so dont go saying that I'm out of line speaking directly to the people who elected me or asked to be put on my E-mail list because unlike Bobby Gless and Don Videtich I actually do work for the members. The members hired me and they can fire me, at any time as we have recall in our bylaws. How do we recall Gless or Videtich? The fact is my opponents are pushing for a concessionary deal, and I will not stand united for a deal that does not bring us relief.

 

[toroshark]

When the company wanted their concessions in 2003 we were insisted byInternational Attorny Art Luby and the international reps to stay engaged with the company, around the clock negotiations, we must get this done! Now we want to be engaged and for 3 years or more we have been dragged along like not a care in the world.
In 2003, We were promised full section 6 reopeners in 2006 of our concessions and we were suppose to fight to get it all back. the negotiating committee bought into it and what happened....nothing, all it did was get votes for the concessions.
Then we participate in the PLI company campaign and the company obtains 500 million more in concessions in Tulsa and 95 million in the line stations. what did we get for that?
Then past President of Tulsa Dennis Burchette goes on national television to say how great management is with us and that we will help the company make money so "we can reach into their pockets full of money" what happened there? Nothing!
Now the company wants more concessions and we hear the same bullshit.
The company does not need the mediator to give us a a contract we can live with. Everyone is using the mediator to stall and hope that the members will eventually cave in and get past the summer.
This is why we support Bob Owens with his "Release" theory. Where else can we go with this? The next step is to putit all on the table and move the process to bring it to a head. Don't you think 8 years is long enough of games?
Our members are frustrated and angry about the lack of progress and blame both the company and the International for it. They want results after all they have sacrificed, no excuses!

Your are either part of a solution or part of the problem
Ask yourself, which one are you?

FYI: our local 562 recieves many messages from other local members thanking us for putting out information for them to be informed. Maybe we should listen to the members more and less to personal opinions.

Chuck, come over here and drink some of this kool-aid. You will soon see the light. You might even enlist into the hallowed group of Intl. wannabees and help us get rid of that pesky Owens and sell out your brothers in turn. The sheer nerve of that Owens guy trying to expose all of our dirty little secrets.

 

[Bob Owens]

Isn't that what Bob wants? Then his gang of backers who knew what they were asking for can claim he is the martyr, the big bad Int'l are just what he always said they were, and he can continue to play his political game. Bob definitely has a job waiting for him at Fox News.

FOX News? Please. You are the first to accuse me of being a Conservative. Kind of like how FOX calls Liberals Fascists.

In reality what appears to be happening is Bob and his supporters are realizing that what they promised may not be possible. The realization that a variety of factors beyond Bob's fact twisting can't overcome and he is up against people that far out class him.

Outguned perhaps, after all they own the process and we are just witnesses but the Internet is a great equalizer and thats why I'm out here in full view while you hide behind an alias. Its also why you object to it so much.

In the end the really winner...AA. They are getting de facto pay cuts and might even reap a greater windfall of control over labor with the possibility of a new unfunded union or better yet, an ill advised request for release exposing all of us at AA to have a worse contract imposed on us.

Well its funny, because on the one hand you say We wont get released then you say that we will, which is it?

Meanwhile Bob and all his supporters will say it wasn't Bob's fault, it was the big bad Int'l. If the Int'l steps in Bob gets to say, "I told you they were running the show from behind the curtain." Bob, JR, Pike, and other so-called leaders who keep blaming the Int'l, mediator, and AA for stalling should really look at themselves.

Well the funny thing is that the plan to wait till August was inadvertantly revealed to me in May, so I wasnt suprised when it came up again in June. So tell me how could the International have known about the wait till August strategy in May if the Negotiating committee didnt? If we are running the show can we throw the International out like other TWU Locals have done in the past?

The fact is we've seen the tactics the International, the people who own our contract but dont have to live under it use to get substandard contracts through and you dont like the fact that with the internet we've pulled back the curtain.

The members need some relief now. Getting it all in one sitting, yeah that'll happen. Of course, Bob has said we can get full retro back to the amendable date so don't worry, in 2015 we will all get a big fat retro check!

We gave it all up in one sitting didnt we? Getting it all back would only bring us up to our peers.

 

[Bob Owens]

In TULE we get more information from Bob Owens than the TWU. It would seem that some of you are living in the past as far as unionism goes. Quoting history on this board, does not qualify anyone as a union historian. All of that history is fine except no one is listening. The young people today are more concerned about what is in their paycheck and what benefits they can obtain. It is not about unionism, for them. Its about what can "I" have and how soon can "I" have it.

People havent changed. Unions had to deal with the same issues 100 years ago. The leaders and their objectives are what has changed.

 

[Bob Owens]

Why does a non-A&P receive the some compensation for his/her one license? If you have a A&P you should be compensated for it. If you have a Journeyman's tick you should be compensated for it. Not the same as someone who has two licenses, right?

Probably because the going rate for that skill is higher than the going rate for an A&P.

 

[strikeforce]

Then in another 10 years we may actually get an agreement.

An easier way to address the problem is I think it should be published how committee members vote, some for obvious reasons dissagree. I voted against the TA and so did 94% of our members. Some claim it would give the company a tactical advantage, well I think they pretty much know already, look at how many people ove the years have gone from one side of the table to the other.

Oh, so you're against the membership instructing you on how to vote? Is this what I'm hearing from Bob Owens?

So what if it takes 10 years.....maybe these presidents and negotiators should stop sending POS T/A's back to the membership. Waste of time and waste of paper.

Publish how committee members vote....It's too late then....The POS T/A has been dropped on our lap.

If the negotiators did their job by listening to the membership, and engaging the membership to get involved, and providing some control over the non-sense that we're seeing first hand. Then, maybe the membership would have more respect for the union leadership, and they wouldn't care if you voted on their behalf because they would trust you. I don't trust the union leadership, especially after they sent back that POS T/A, and claiming that the NMB forced them to bring something back for a membership vote. BS!!!!

 

[Bob Owens]

Oh, so you're against the membership instructing you on how to vote? Is this what I'm hearing from Bob Owens?

So what if it takes 10 years.....maybe these presidents and negotiators should stop sending POS T/A's back to the membership. Waste of time and waste of paper.

Publish how committee members vote....It's too late then....The POS T/A has been dropped on our lap.

If the negotiators did their job by listening to the membership, and engaging the membership to get involved, and providing some control over the non-sense that we're seeing first hand. Then, maybe the membership would have more respect for the union leadership, and they wouldn't care if you voted on their behalf because they would trust you. I don't trust the union leadership, especially after they sent back that POS T/A, and claiming that the NMB forced them to bring something back for a membership vote. BS!!!!

What I'm against is bringing each and every Article back to the members one at a time before we can TA them if I read you correctly.

If the votes were published its possible that some would vote differently and you may end up getting a better TA.

Well I think I've done my best to do as you say. I've listened to my members, (94% voted NO) done what I can to keep them informed and asked them to get involved by contacting the person who has the ultimate authority over the contract. I dont recall ever saying that the NMB forced M&R to bring back that TA to a vote, although how do you not bring back a TA to a vote, after all if its a TA then it should be voted on, that offer should never have been TA'd, they pretty much did force Stores but M&R pretty much sealed their fate.

 

[Overspeed]

What I'm against is bringing each and every Article back to the members one at a time before we can TA them if I read you correctly.

If the votes were published its possible that some would vote differently and you may end up getting a better TA.

Well I think I've done my best to do as you say. I've listened to my members, (94% voted NO) done what I can to keep them informed and asked them to get involved by contacting the person who has the ultimate authority over the contract. I dont recall ever saying that the NMB forced M&R to bring back that TA to a vote, although how do you not bring back a TA to a vote, after all if its a TA then it should be voted on, that offer should never have been TA'd, they pretty much did force Stores but M&R pretty much sealed their fate.

"I've listened to my members." Now there is your problem. You are on the Table Committee aren't you? Then you were selected to serve in a new capacity, one of a representative of all members not just Local 562. If you cannot understand the situation you are in as representing all members instead of just Local 562 then you should remove yourself from the Table Committee. A 94% rejection rate is not what all member's voted in every Local. Many of us on the floor want the TA tweaked, not a do-over of the negotiations process.

As far as your argument on the TA process, are you saying we should be in joint negotiations with all groups so no one gets forced in to settling? That sounds like industrial unionism Bob. So are you campaigning against AMP? Blasphemy! HA! How many Team TWU buttons did you pass out?

 

[Buck]

Probably because the going rate for that skill is higher than the going rate for an A&P.

Ok then pay him them the going rate in their base rate and then add the one premium.

 

[Buck]

So what if it takes 10 years.....maybe these presidents and negotiators should stop sending POS T/A's back to the membership. Waste of time and waste of paper.

I believe the last T/A was shot down at around 68%? Most of those at OH.

 

[Bob Owens]

"I've listened to my members." Now there is your problem. You are on the Table Committee aren't you? Then you were selected to serve in a new capacity, one of a representative of all members not just Local 562. If you cannot understand the situation you are in as representing all members instead of just Local 562 then you should remove yourself from the Table Committee. A 94% rejection rate is not what all member's voted in every Local. Many of us on the floor want the TA tweaked, not a do-over of the negotiations process.

As far as your argument on the TA process, are you saying we should be in joint negotiations with all groups so no one gets forced in to settling? That sounds like industrial unionism Bob. So are you campaigning against AMP? Blasphemy! HA! How many Team TWU buttons did you pass out?

Well for your information I get a lot of direct feedback from members at other Locals as well. I take it all into consideration.

I passed out all the "Team TWU" buttons I recieved and I feel that since the Stores and M&R are pretty much mirrored contracts on most articles we should do them together. Are you saying we should be seperate? Do I want to join in with Fleet as well, NO. The fact is that we may be in an industrial union but like many in this industry we negotiate along craft lines. So we are an Industrial union negotiating like a craft union. SWA takes this a step further, they are organized into two essentailly craft unions, negotiate as craft unions yet belong to an Industrial union, and it has worked well for them. Probably because of the structure of their Locals.

 

[strikeforce]

What I'm against is bringing each and every Article back to the members one at a time before we can TA them if I read you correctly.

If the votes were published its possible that some would vote differently and you may end up getting a better TA.

Well I think I've done my best to do as you say. I've listened to my members, (94% voted NO) done what I can to keep them informed and asked them to get involved by contacting the person who has the ultimate authority over the contract. I dont recall ever saying that the NMB forced M&R to bring back that TA to a vote, although how do you not bring back a TA to a vote, after all if its a TA then it should be voted on, that offer should never have been TA'd, they pretty much did force Stores but M&R pretty much sealed their fate.

No. I said once the committee has an understanding in full on all the articles with AA....The committee then comes back and holds special membership meetings where you do a powerpoint presentation on the key points of the T/A. Then a hand or paper vote is cast by the membership on whether to bring the T/A forward. Essentially, the membership's vote is your vote when you go back, say a week or two later, and cast your formal vote with the negotiating committe or president's council to accept or reject the T/A in bringing it forward for a systemwide vote. You want to engage the membership....this is the perfect way of getting them involved in the process.