Why is the IAM not telling fleet what was offered

[pjirish317]

OK Irish! Since you know so much, what is the point in talking???????

We know what was offered, we also know that the IAM and the workers said No Way!!!!! Until something changes there is no point. If you like exercises in futility then pound your head on the ramp. You will get the same results as what you will get in negotiations. The chance was offered, you said no, now you need to sit back, work under the old rules, and wait your turn.

Really all I said was thank you. Thank you for your honesty as a spokesperson for the company/I'll Ask Management. But by your response you sound mad that the members voted "NO" emphatically for the last offer. And the I'll Ask Management is giving Fleet Service a time-out for that. Did you take that personally? Why are you so bitter towards Fleet Service?

 

[b737200]

You've been skipped over. At this point management will talk with MX and see what can get hammered out, they will come back later, but based on what they offered, and what the Ramp was asking for there is really no point in talking since the two side are so far apart.

Give it a break, PF
Thought you dried up and blew away, course the report i received from the negotiations was that your head was not seen only your body and that's when cheap suites would turn sideways.
Get it straight, we controll the negotiations at this point. Who cares if Al doesn't give us a call.
We have the COC, and the Transition in our pocket until 12-31 -09. and guess who wants
them both back? The closer to a merger, the more pressure on Al.

You, "cheap suites", and the belly warmer will all be gone, the merger will take place and fleet will be
reimbursed for the past bk's. By the way, in the remaining few months you have left, how about doing your job, ok.

Remember guy's, we have , they want it and for them to get it ....they must pay.

 

[GoldenRam94]

Really all I said was thank you. Thank you for your honesty as a spokesperson for the company/I'll Ask Management. But by your response you sound mad that the members voted "NO" emphatically for the last offer. Did you take that personally? Why are you so bitter towards Fleet Service?

You read it all wrong Irish!

There is really nothing to talk about. We both know what was offered, we know that it was sub-standard, and was rejected. You could have Jimmy Hoffa negotiating, and the result will be the same. At this point in time, there is no sense of urgency with management to offer up anything of value to fleet.

 

[The Bagfather]

OK Irish! Since you know so much, what is the point in talking???????

We know what was offered, we also know that the IAM and the workers said No Way!!!!! Until something changes there is no point. If you like exercises in futility then pound your head on the ramp. You will get the same results as what you will get in negotiations. The chance was offered, you said no, now you need to sit back, work under the old rules, and wait your turn.

I don't know what was offered. What was offerred and how did it compare with the
Sept TA. Was it lower than the $18.00 that you had recommended? And how did the
other terms compare to the old TA. This would be useful information. If you don't
know that's OK. Also if you don't feel it's in the IAM's interest to let us know please
tell us that. Thanks BF

 

[freedom]

Yes what was it that was offered eh ? We don’t yet know , furthermore to everyone who keeps saying this company needs a TA to merge again , I HIGHLY doubt it , and what’s with bring ing up the COC like it means something ? Do you HONESTLY think we rampers are so stupid that we don’t REMEMBER the YEAR LONG change of control battle that we just had and LOST ???? Duhhh I’m a moron and can’t remember yesterday …

Also why do you insist on saying we can WAIT for a new contract ? HELLO !!!!!!!!! Have you not been listing to a damn thing we in the west are SAYING out here!?!? We’re getting KILLED we NEED a TA … Get your head out of the clouds , the west side of the system and the class two cities NEED and WANT a TA , so please , stop lying to yourself when you keep writing we can wait until 2010 , 2011 … geez what are you smoking , I’d like some of that …

 

[pjirish317]

You read it all wrong Irish!

There is really nothing to talk about. We both know what was offered, we know that it was sub-standard, and was rejected. You could have Jimmy Hoffa negotiating, and the result will be the same. At this point in time, there is no sense of urgency with management to offer up anything of value to fleet.

But there should be a sense of urgency with the I'll Ask Management to take care of it's members. They are doing it with MX, why not Fleet? Like I said, why is Fleet Service being punished for voting "NO" an essentially kicking canoli right in the nutz in the eyes of the company, when he guarenteed that the T/A would go through. Why does the I'll Ask Management continue to treat Fleet Service like the red-headed step-child?

 

[The Bagfather]

Allright, so our transition negotiations have been shelved. What about Section 6 negotiations for the West. They should have been ongoing for the last 2 years. In fact the West, if the I'll Ask Management hadn't dropped the ball, should be able to ask the NMB for the 30 day cooling off period. But since the I'll Ask Management did what dougweiser wanted, that won't happen now. So I guess my question is, are Section 6 negotiations scheduled for the West?

The IAM may sign the west over to the east contract. At least they are making such threats.
Why would they throw away section 6? Because from the begining they took that route.
It would have made thier own agenda more difficult. Canale is not into putting himself
out for such a small part of the IAM. That's understandable. What can we do about it?
Find out this month.
PS. They haven't signed the west over thus far because they wanted to keep the threat
of section 6 open. But after dropping the ball at first the company knew sec 6 was worth
less and less. Thanks BF

 

[pjirish317]

PS. They haven't signed the west over thus far because they wanted to keep the threat
of section 6 open. But after dropping the ball at first the company knew sec 6 was worth
less and less.

It should be the goose that laid the golden egg for the I'll Ask Management. But they killed that goose because dougeiser and canoli agreed to.

 

[Hadenough]

Freedom You ask why bring up the COC again. Its because it is still an issue. We lost the COC decision this time but it is still in our contract. The arbitrators decision did not remove it. The COC is alive and well and it is a big hurdle to get over in order for someone to buy us out. If United came in and aquired US the COC would be instutited and the sandcastle knows this. They would like nothing better than to remove it but cannot do so without a new T/A that takes it out of play. That in itself is one of the reasons they came to the table in the first place.

 

[orioleman]

very good point !!!!!

 

[Hadenough]

Orioleman surely I am not the only one to realize this. That is why I say let someone buy us out at least that way there is no doubt the COC will apply.

 

[orioleman]

Hadenough,
The COC is definitely Golden. and in this environment. It's liking sleeping with a call girl with no protection.

 

[orioleman]

speaking of which . haven't seen one of our newest posters in a day or so . where's she been hiding .

under Canales desk ????

 

[freedom]

Freedom You ask why bring up the COC again. Its because it is still an issue. We lost the COC decision this time but it is still in our contract. The arbitrators decision did not remove it. The COC is alive and well and it is a big hurdle to get over in order for someone to buy us out. If United came in and aquired US the COC would be instutited and the sandcastle knows this. They would like nothing better than to remove it but cannot do so without a new T/A that takes it out of play. That in itself is one of the reasons they came to the table in the first place.

Here i think your wrong again , i can't imagine any legal clause in any contract that would prohibit one company from buying another in a hostile manner , think about it ,would it make sense ? if companies never wanted to be bought by other companies they would just insert legal clauses into their workers contract saying in XYZ case of transfer of ownership the new company is to pay the old workers 300 billion dollars ... sorry guys but your reasoning doesnt seem sound

 

[pjirish317]

Here i think your wrong again , i can't imagine any legal clause in any contract that would prohibit one company from buying another in a hostile manner , think about it ,would it make sense ? if companies never wanted to be bought by other companies they would just insert legal clauses into their workers contract saying in XYZ case of transfer of ownership the new company is to pay the old workers 300 billion dollars ... sorry guys but your reasoning doesnt seem sound

Freedom,
I realize that the west's CBA does not have the COC language in it, bur ours does. If we are bought by friendly or hostile means, it would trigger the COC language and BOOM instant raise for the EAST. To $21 and change for everyboby. Not just Class I citys. That is a big obstical to overcome when shopping around for potential buyers.