"Working Together"

[Frank Szabo]

Sadly, I was unable to make the 22 November Joint Meeting at 514's Hall and vote re: continuation of "Working Together"?

What was the outcome?

Any thoughts?

Added 1343 Tuesday 23 November: New "Informer" newsletter emailed from 514 HQ and no mention of any vote on the farce. Am I to assume WT was voted out and the darlings don't care to talk about it?

 

[CIO]

THe motion was tabled at the morning meeting.

In Solidarity
CIO

 

[TWU informer]

THe motion was tabled at the morning meeting.

In Solidarity
CIO

Please Read Roberts Rules of Order and tell us how the morning meeting was allowed to "Table the Motion" and not return to the motion before meeting was adjourned? Motion to Table does not Kill the vote,it only delays the vote to take care of a more urgent matter.

In addition, the motion cannot be tabled by one meeting, the entire assembly would have to have the right to vote on the table motion. All shifts were not given a vote on the table motion.

Lay on the Table: Temporarily suspends further consideration/action on pending question; may be made after motion to close debate has carried or is pending

Take from the Table: Resumes consideration of item previously "laid on the table" - state the motion to take from the table

Was a motion made to close the debate? Were all members allowed to vote for or against the tabling of the motion. NO

Just more BS trickery from the "working together" suck ass crowd.

If one single meeting of the day can table the motion then a single meeting of the day can vote to take from the table and re-open debate and voting.

Purpose:
The Object of this motion is to enable the assembly, in order to attend to more urgent business, to lay aside the pending question in such a way that its consideration may be resumed at the will of the assembly as easily as if it were a new question, and in preference to new questions competing with it for consideration. It is to the interest of the assembly that this object should be attained instantly by a majority vote, and therefore this motion must either apply to, or take precedence of, every debatable motion whatever its rank.

The motion to Lay on the Table is undebatable, and requires only a majority vote, notwithstanding the fact that if not taken from the table the question is suppressed.

How can one shift vote to table a motion without the vote of all shifts involved?

Lay on the Table –

Misused 99.999999% of the time. This motion is only used to set aside the pending motion to take up something more urgent, with the full expectation of returning to the motion. It is NOT intended to kill a motion and cannot be used for that purpose due to its high rank.


SO tell us CIO, do the TWU Local 514 monthly membership meetings use Roberts Rules of Order to conduct meetings per the TWU Constitution and By-Laws?

Or was this accomplished using Sam Cirri's Rules of Order?

 

[High Speed Steel]

I don't understand why the motion to table was made in the first place. The original WTG motion as I understood it was only to suspend the WTG process so it could be re-evaluated to see if it had enough teeth to keep....

 

[TWU informer]

I don't understand why the motion to table was made in the first place. The original WTG motion as I understood it was only to suspend the WTG process so it could be re-evaluated to see if it had enough teeth to keep....

The fools are too stupid to understand out of fear that the membership and I mean 95% of the base is more than eager to work with the company day in and day out. It is the Union Busting scam put in place by the Pajama Party and the Overland resource group that needs to be emliminated. Out of fear,they continue to allow management to weaken the union. Management has to be laughing at us all behind closed doors as this ignorance continues.

I suspect those that get out of work going to management meetings and licking the boot are behind this mis-use of Roberts Rules of Order. On a daily basis I strive to help management better organize our work flow and production. But going to a PLT, ALT, JLT, or any other meeting that is part of the union busting scam will not be on my agenda.

Shameful that the Chair of the meeting allowed this to happen and he or she should be brought up on charges of conduct unbecoming an officer sworn by oath to uphold the By-Laws and the Constitution of the TWU. What's even worse is the membership sheep at large accept their dirty deeds without out objection.

The uneducated membership lead by the ignorant leader equals weak union that will never lead the industry in anything other that laughter and dismay.

Where is the Parliamentarian of the Union Meetings when you need him? If they feel the need to make more places for non-producers to hide, create an offical Parliamentarian and make this position part of the Executive Board. But stop sending the unelected boot lickers behind closed doors with management.

 

[High Speed Steel]

The fools are too stupid to understand out of fear that the membership and I mean 95% of the base is more than eager to work with the company day in and day out. It is the Union Busting scam put in place by the Pajama Party and the Overland resource group that needs to be emliminated. Out of fear,they continue to allow management to weaken the union. Management has to be laughing at us all behind closed doors as this ignorance continues.

I suspect those that get out of work going to management meetings and licking the boot are behind this mis-use of Roberts Rules of Order.

Shameful that the Chair of the meeting allowed this to happen and he or she should be brought up on charges of conduct unbecoming an officer sworn by oath to uphold the By-Laws and the Constitution of the TWU. What's even worse is the membership sheep at large accept their dirty deeds without out objection.

Informer, Don't go blowing this out of proportion. You have no proof that the chair intentionally denied the rights of any member...

 

[TWU informer]

Informer, Don't go blowing this out of proportion. You have no proof that the chair intentionally denied the rights of any member...

Intentional?
I never claimed ignorance was intentional did I?

The Chair denied the rights of not just one member that made the motion, but every single member that crowded the union hall wanting to vote. Can you believe it? An issue arises that finally gets the members involved, and the chair lets the issue get tabled and once again fails to take advantage of a chance to turn this union in the right direction by membership lead. The leaders are either too damn stupid to take advantage of such opportunities, or they are all management plants, there to insure membership never takes over Local 514. No wonder card drives happen on a regular basis to get another union.

What is proper punishment for violating the Oath of Office and member democracy within the confines of the TWU Constitution according to our Local Ad-Hoc Labor Attorney/Machinist?

This violation of Roberts Rules of Order violates the very small sliver of democracy the members of the TWU have left.

I guess now you are willing to let that fall by the way side too? Imagine that. Once again you are defending that which cannot be defended. At least you’re consistent.

 

[High Speed Steel]

Intentional? I never claimed ignorance was intential did I?

But a violation of Roberts Rules of Order violates the very small sliver of democracy the members of the TWU have left.

I guess now you are willing to let that fall by the way side now too? Imagine that. Once again you are defending that which cannot be defended.

Two part question Informer. Were you in attendance at any of the 4 meetings to vote on the previously posted motion, or are you only acting upon hearsay and stirring up crap?

 

[TWU informer]

Two part question Informer. Were you in attendance at any of the 4 meetings to vote on the previously posted motion, or are you only acting upon hearsay and stirring up crap?

Was not in attendance. I quit wasting my time after we voted 3 times not to build the new union hall and they did it anyway. Or maybe is after reading the fourth continuous set of Constitutional Convention Minutes that exposed the anti-democratic nature of the TWU, or hell, it could have been when James C. Little signed the Labor Agreement Without Further Ratification shorlty after claiming that a complete re-vote was required to have a legitimate contract. I am not sure which. But somewhere along the line I learned not to put much faith in attending a Local Union Meeting conducted by the TWU.

I actually talked about going with some guys in the work area, was a little excited, but ended up telling my co-workers that I would be wasting my time, and would just leave frustrated as hell like the times before. TWU Membership Meeting Frustration, Okie Drivers, and HWY 169 don't mix real well. LOL

Turns out that was right. Reading and posting about this crap is frustrating enough for me, I really cannot stand anymore of the live action so to speak. I am too old and burned out trying to fix that which cannot be fixed.

I was simply acting upon CIO's post earlier that the morning meeting tabled the motion.

Is CIO an unreliable source of hearsay as far as you are concerned?

You can attempt to demonize me instead of remaining focused on the motion to table and the working together issue. But most readers will see right through that old and tired trick of covering up the crap in the litter box.

One day you will take your resentments towards certain personalities that blind you to the truth and will actually see the problem with clear vision.

I happen to notice that you have not once commented on your opinion of Robert Rules of Order and a Motion to Table....why?

How can one shift vote to table a motion without the vote of all shifts involved?

Lay on the Table –

Misused 99.999999% of the time. This motion is only used to set aside the pending motion to take up something more urgent, with the full expectation of returning to the motion. It is NOT intended to kill a motion and cannot be used for that purpose due to its high rank.

SO tell us CIO, do the TWU Local 514 monthly membership meetings use Roberts Rules of Order to conduct meetings per the TWU Constitution and By-Laws?

Or was this accomplished using Sam Cirri's Rules of Order?

 

[Frank Szabo]

I suspected something like this might happen - gotta protect those "helping" the company and make sure they keep going to meetings.

 

[Frank Szabo]

THe motion was tabled at the morning meeting.

In Solidarity
CIO

I wasn't aware a motion could be tabled at one of three meetiings. So much for the rules of order.

Solidarity, indeed - perhaps amongst the ruling "class".

 

[Interested]

Working together must be working. After all Amtrack came to TUL to see how it works. Wonder if they were told we were thinking of suspending it.

 

[Frank Szabo]

Working together must be working. After all Amtrack came to TUL to see how it works. Wonder if they were told we were thinking of suspending it.

Just because a group comes to Tulsa to look at the "system" doesn't mean it's working - it could be they're trying to find out what NOT to do.

"Working Together" is a scam keeping many employed while going to meetings that have no function (except dues collection for the TWU). Why else would we have had a one-shift tabling of the vote when the action should have required all three meetings to vote?

Were these meeting-goers tossed back into the system to the positions held previously, aside from a major oversupply of mekanix (probably resulting in a RIF), the company might find most of these people really weren't worth a flip at their respective jobs anyway.

The present call-backs would have to stop and that would deny the TWU further increases in dues collection. We couldn't allow that, could we?

Moderators - this thread has run its course - can it.

 

[Bob Owens]

Working together must be working. After all Amtrack came to TUL to see how it works. Wonder if they were told we were thinking of suspending it.

Who came Amtrack management or the unions that represent the workers there?

Our opinion (Local 562) is that Working Together is a way for the company to make productivity gains without ANY quid pro quo. To me it seems that the only quid quo pro is it provides an avenue for a bunch of people who dont want to do their jobs to play manager.

When the company was asked for a "value" for all the gains made through these programs their response was "Zero, you still have a job". With WT you are giving away chips that are usually used to increase wages and benifits. The company doesnt give "credits". They take the gains and then at the table they go after more, they arent there to play fair, they are their to get as much out of us as possible for as little as possible. If we are willing to give them productivity gains for free why wouldnt they expect us to be dumb enough to give away even more at the table?
Giving away bargaining chips between contracts with no quid pro quo, dumb, just plain dumb.

I hope you guys vote it down, as far as the tabling, if someone made a reasonable request for more information it doesnt seem to be an unreasonable action, I would probably do the same, I have. Whats the harm? You guys have been in this for seven years, Sam has been in office three months, at this point will another month to satisfy a request for more info be that detrimental?

 

[olderguyAMT]

But wait, there is more to be said about this:

The WTP has run its course, and now its not necessary to continue with the concessions. Yes, they are concessions. It has been said that if you go beyond what is required by labor contract to help the Co., and get no extra pay for that action, then its a concession. Now the Co. is persuing a strategy of zero cost to them type contract. Why would any one of us in this union, want to help the opposition in our struggle to get a fair and decent contract? So during these times of negotiation, we should all be on the same page, right? ...... and if some or a lot of members are helping the opposition, that is not in our collective best interest.

The Co. does not respect or value our efforts in the WTP, and the big overwelming NO vote on the TA is proof of that lack of respect, most of us know what is happening with the big push for MRO wages. And since most of us know the truth, why could a few nitwits stall the NO vote at the hall? Sam should just say NO to the whole thing, as we did not vote it in anyway. But it is said that he wants the members to decide. How can a few over-rule the wishes of most? I see lots of new AMP cards coming in as a result of this fiasco. Arpey must be enjoying this along with a second helping of pie on Thanksgiving. Man, I hope he is able to control the histerical laughter coming from his office. We are foolish for helping them persue their strategy of one-sided rewards.

OK I can understand if one wants to increase productivity and efficiency, and all that, but while we are in negotiations if we continue to participate in WTP we are fools that will be victimized. Please tell me the value of all WTP efforts from our union since the Pajama Party with Carmine and Burchette. Has the Co. recognized anything we have done to save them millions? Oh, ok, the bonus money to upper mgmt, with our help in saving them money. They spend it on the bone-us plan.

Not all Locals in the TWU do the WTP dance with the Co. So now is the time for other Locals to apply some pressure by sending emails to the 514, and yes it can easily be done if you go to the 514 website... Look what is at stake here, hey, no biggie, just our future that some are messing with. and while you are at the 514 Local website, you can view the David L. Boren video. I was there that day and heard him in person. But ok, he is still a politician, and maybe has flipp-flopped in a strategy of pandering.