Teamster Organizer caught forging Authorization Cards

[700UW]

How is it democracy when half the UA mechanics in SFO are members in LAX, kinda hard to participate in meetings and etc....

And at HP the lead rep and negotiator for the mechanics was Andy Marshall, a UPS package delivery man, not an airline mechanic and not even an airline employee.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

Not so quick there Mrs. Honesty.....

Other than Denver Local 455, I understand that Local 19, Local 769, Local 781, and Local 964 also elected their negotiators.

The others on the team are elected Chief Stewards from the various stations. All except for one. We have a representative from the line in SFO who is simply a rank and file member. He holds no union position and has spoken against the Teamsters several times in the past. He is a former amfa leader and very vocally did not trust the Teamsters during the first round of negotiations. He still does not, and for that reason as well as his experiance and professionalism, was appointed to the negotiation team.

Elected or not, most of us on the line look to him as a leader and for a reasonable view of how the negotiations are going. I have not heard him complain.

As you understand? Wow! okay ... why don't you be a good little girl and provide a link to those election results, because other than Local 455(DEN), they must've been closely held secrets.

Oh, and by the way, since you obviously are having trouble grasping the concept, electing someone to a Chief stewards position is not a default to electing them to a negotiating committee position. They were "elected" as Chief stewards, they were "appointed" to the negotiating committee.

As for Joe Prisco, I'll pass on your glowing endorsement. Yes, I know him. He'll be happy to know you boys in Seattle have his back.

So again, (excluding your forthcoming links to Local election results)the rest of our negotiating committee was appointed.

Should I go on about the glaring inequities of how some teamster locals get to elect their negotiating reps and others do not?

 

[Bob Owens]

Not so quick there Mrs. Honesty.....

Other than Denver Local 455, I understand that Local 19, Local 769, Local 781, and Local 964 also elected their negotiators.

The others on the team are elected Chief Stewards from the various stations. All except for one. We have a representative from the line in SFO who is simply a rank and file member. He holds no union position and has spoken against the Teamsters several times in the past. He is a former amfa leader and very vocally did not trust the Teamsters during the first round of negotiations. He still does not, and for that reason as well as his experiance and professionalism, was appointed to the negotiation team.

Elected or not, most of us on the line look to him as a leader and for a reasonable view of how the negotiations are going. I have not heard him complain.

I think the IBT realized that they needed the credibility that Joe brings with him. The guys probably trust that Joe will do as he has always done, what is best for the profession, regardless of whose name is on the Union Office door.

You never answered about SFO being split. Do you not know or do you just not want to answer it?

Also who leads the team? Is he appointed or elected? Is he even a mechanic?

 

[swamt]

I think the IBT realized that they needed the credibility that Joe brings with him. The guys probably trust that Joe will do as he has always done, what is best for the profession, regardless of whose name is on the Union Office door.

You never answered about SFO being split. Do you not know or do you just not want to answer it?

Also who leads the team? Is he appointed or elected? Is he even a mechanic?

He's either doing some heavy research for links, or is avoiding the questions yet again. He's normally already posting by now...

 

[Anomaly]

Why exactly do you hate to respond to my posts?? What you wrote doesn't make sense. What would one thing have to do with the other?

It's just you...

You work for and represent one union and actively campaign for another. I simply have very little respect for people like you if any at all. At least those I disagree with most, SWAMT, TSH, WNMECH, have remained consistent in their support for AMFA. I appreciate and respect each of them for their views and candor because they obviously care about the membership more than themselves.

You on the other hand..... my crystal ball has an image of you sitting as a Teamster representative if the election turns out that way. I have no problem with anyone being active in what ever union ultimately represents, but reading your MANY MANY MANY past posts, it is obvious you are hedging your bets to line yourself up with who ever you think might win. In other very simple words, You are a politician. I think that word says it all.

 

[Bob Owens]

It's just you...

You work for and represent one union and actively campaign for another. I simply have very little respect for people like you if any at all. At least those I disagree with most, SWAMT, TSH, WNMECH, have remained consistent in their support for AMFA. I appreciate and respect each of them for their views and candor because they obviously care about the membership more than themselves.

You on the other hand..... my crystal ball has an image of you sitting as a Teamster representative if the election turns out that way. I have no problem with anyone being active in what ever union ultimately represents, but reading your MANY MANY MANY past posts, it is obvious you are hedging your bets to line yourself up with who ever you think might win. In other very simple words, You are a politician. I think that word says it all.

Well I guess thats the difference between you and I. I think I work for the members, my peers, you think I work for the Union which sold them down the river and I should support the decisions of people we don't elect, cant remove and don't have to live under the crappy deals they get put in place.


Should the IBT get in, that is if they really have any intentions on getting in, more than likely I would sign on as a member of TDU on day one, and should my peers come to me and suggest I represent them to the IBT and the company then yes I would run. Aren't many TDU members also elected officials in the IBT? Don't they criticize what the leadership of the IBT does to the members?

You claim I actively campaign for another union, based on what? Sure I criticize the TWU, I've done that ever since I started posting on the Internet back on "The Mechanic.com, continued to voice my opinions after elected Treasurer in 1999, and did so right through my removal and trial in 2003 when they removed me from office and kept me out of office for five years, and have continued to do since being reelected in 2009, 2012 and 2013 and unlike you I did it with my name front and center. Unlike you you I don't throw out lies, sure I've made some statements that weren't correct but I own up to them. I criticize anybody or any organization that throws our misleading information to get their dues money or get crappy deals through. People like you who have the nerve to sit in judgement over people like me. We want change, and my peers have made it clear that they want me to continue to put pressure on the TWU to change their ways. Are we Hedging bets, sure, why shouldn't we?

 

[Anomaly]

@ Bob,

Spoken like a true Politician.

 

[Bob Owens]

@ Bob,

Spoken like a true Politician.

Thats the best response you could come up with?

I'd rather be accused of being a politician than acting like a coward, like you.

 

[Anomaly]

Well I guess thats the difference between you and I. I think I work for the members, my peers, you think I work for the Union which sold them down the river and I should support the decisions of people we don't elect, cant remove and don't have to live under the crappy deals they get put in place.

OK, if you need a follow up, you say you work for the members? Is this just the members who happen to align with your personal choices? What about those who do not agree with your line of thought yet still pay dues? What of those who are under your watch and still support the TWU? Are they abandoned because they are too few? Or is it just because you have decided your opinions matter above all others? Don't those who disagree with you also have the right to be heard and have their opinions protected and voiced loudly by the person who accepts their dues money? I find it hard to believe you were elected by a unanimous vote of your constituents and that they too unanimously want to move to another union.

Democracy is a wonderful thing, but the will of the many was never intended to trample the rights of the few.

You accepted a position to defend the members of the TWU, not agree with the leadership. I can appreciate that and openly support the right to speak out. Our country and those unions who represent us after all were built on this very fabric. Speak out against those opinions you oppose. I absolutely agree. But resign one position before taking up another.

Your suggestion to join the TDU is at least public and open, but did you really think it through? While signed with this organization, will you still accept IBT dues dollars to actively campaign for another union? Even this group who openly speaks against the majority might have a problem with your way of thinking and your way of doing business. The TDU's ultimate goal is to strengthen the Teamsters, not see people like you tearing it down from within. General Benedict Arnold also learned this lesson the hard way and is still viewed by most in this country with discontent. Also like you, he tried to support his decision to betray his soldiers while a General in the American Army through politics and writings in order to appease his conscience. It did not work for him. How is this working out for you?

 

[TWU informer]

Blah, Blah, Blah

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

@ Bob,

Spoken like a true Politician.

Ah, the person too afraid to state his name when posting is the true politician.

 

[Bob Owens]

OK, if you need a follow up, you say you work for the members? Is this just the members who happen to align with your personal choices? What about those who do not agree with your line of thought yet still pay dues? What of those who are under your watch and still support the TWU? Are they abandoned because they are too few? Or is it just because you have decided your opinions matter above all others? Don't those who disagree with you also have the right to be heard and have their opinions protected and voiced loudly by the person who accepts their dues money? I find it hard to believe you were elected by a unanimous vote of your constituents and that they too unanimously want to move to another union.

Democracy is a wonderful thing, but the will of the many was never intended to trample the rights of the few.

You accepted a position to defend the members of the TWU, not agree with the leadership. I can appreciate that and openly support the right to speak out. Our country and those unions who represent us after all were built on this very fabric. Speak out against those opinions you oppose. I absolutely agree. But resign one position before taking up another.

96% of the members of local 562 voted against the TA and around 76% of the membership of what is now 591 voted against it as well. We were outvoted primarily by Tulsa and the Title II guys that remain outside of 591, so I guess you can say I am one of the voices of the minority. Are you saying that I should resign because I voice what the majority of the people I represent feel just because they are a minority in the union? I agree that the will of the many should not trample the rights of the few and that is exactly what I've been attempting to ensure.

BTW I pushed to have recall language added to our Bylaws so that any time if the majority felt I wasn't doing that they could remove me. Are you saying that the TWU members who disagree with the direction the leadership of this Union should resign as well? The fact is they have to pay dues as a condition of employment but they do not have to support the decisions of those appointed officials who don't have to live under the terms the advocate for us.

 

[Anomaly]

Bob,

You know exactly what I am saying. You are holding office in one union and accepting dues money from those members and at the same time actively campaigning to have this union thrown out. To me, that is wrong. Voice your right to change unions all you want, but resigning your current position first would be the respectable thing to do. .

Justify it any way you want but you are a traitor in the eyes of many. http://www.airlinefo...s/page__st__240

 

[comatose]

Bob,

You know exactly what I am saying. You are holding office in one union and accepting dues money from those members and at the same time actively campaigning to have this union thrown out. To me, that is wrong. Voice your right to change unions all you want, but resigning your current position first would be the respectable thing to do. .

Justify it any way you want but you are a traitor in the eyes of many. http://www.airlinefo...s/page__st__240

Exactly what is your definition of many?
A teamster calling someone a traitor, now thats priceless.

The only ones who think that are worthless TWU pukes, worthless IBT pukes
worthless company pukes.....see the pattern worthless?

 

[Jager]

Democracy is a wonderful thing, but the will of the many was never intended to trample the rights of the few.

Now if this isn't a classic statement generated by the untouchable hierarchy of the TWU... What precisely does democracy have to do with electing international representatives?... This rates right up there with Nick's Hitler quotes...