If anyone is interested, all of the proposals both from the Co's and the union are on the Local 705 website.
If everything is not there just look in another couple of days and it will be there.
Just type local 705 I.B.T. into your browser and it will take you to it.
The first nine, yes, 9 meetings all they said was, "What does the third word on the seventeenth page in the fifth paragraph mean"
"On page five why do you want to remove the word "regular form in front of the word "employee" in the eight sentence first paragraph" So on and so on for 9, yes nine meetings. It wasn't until the tenth meeting that they actually said something, " We reject your proposals" one by one for a total rejection of approx a handful, of only the proposals that they even would, here I'll say "talk about", but that would be a miss-characterization.
Not only that, but most, and I mean the majority of meetings they came in at 0930 hrs and were asking for a caucus or recess by sometimes 1030 hrs or by 1130 hrs latest, until 1330 hrs lunch included.
Their sincerity was most evident.
Do not get fooled by their conversation about "we ta'd 64 pieces of stuff"
What they ta'd was language that stayed the same, minor language clean up of words like "regular" in front of the word "employee".
Regular employee?
This wording has been in for a long time and none of us could figure out what its relevance was as nowhere is there an reference to its opposite " irregular employees". You are either an employee or you are not.
These people are clumsy masters (small m) of subterfuge. Whenever they are pissed they write us letters reversing the conversation of what has actually happened to try to show on paper (as if that alone is the definitive source of true information as to what has transpired) that it is the union that is the unwilling party, when in absolute fact it is they who are the guilty party.
They accuse the union of the exact behavior they themselves are guilty of, and the union is not.
Their numbers are 6 to 7 mgrs at the table most of the time, while present for the union there are 22 to 24 stewards and business agents including last Thurs the principle officer (Sec Treasurer), and every other time, obviously the head negotiator, Mike Lass, the president and vice president, a trustee, several business agents and the rest all seasoned stewards with many years not only in the union but also as stewards. ALL taking notes
How they think they will get anyone to think that their dialog will override the notes of the multiple members of the union is ludicrous.
We are working on our proposal #6, ( which is a complete copy of the actual current contract) they are working off their original 2 proposals, there are 2 because in their first proposal they did not include the wages, otherwise it would be only one original proposal which has not been changed since its submission.
Each time the union changes anything they issue a new completely redone copy of the original proposal (complete contract) to all of the members present as well as the employers.
Here I should say that the union held 2 proposal meetings prior to the start of negotiations. One to ask the membership what they wanted to either remove from the contract or what they wanted to include, I believe that meeting was approx 3 hours long. Then the union called a special meeting to issue everyone present a complete copy of what had been gathered and what would be put forth as the unions proposals. Even at that meeting other ideas surfaced and were incorporated into the proposals to be submitted to the employers.
So as you read don't buy in to any of their subterfuge. It is all self-serving not to mention false.
Hope I have been able in some way given you a clear picture of their behavior, appalling as it is.
They are not the beneficent uncle they purport themselves to be.
If everything is not there just look in another couple of days and it will be there.
Just type local 705 I.B.T. into your browser and it will take you to it.
The first nine, yes, 9 meetings all they said was, "What does the third word on the seventeenth page in the fifth paragraph mean"
"On page five why do you want to remove the word "regular form in front of the word "employee" in the eight sentence first paragraph" So on and so on for 9, yes nine meetings. It wasn't until the tenth meeting that they actually said something, " We reject your proposals" one by one for a total rejection of approx a handful, of only the proposals that they even would, here I'll say "talk about", but that would be a miss-characterization.
Not only that, but most, and I mean the majority of meetings they came in at 0930 hrs and were asking for a caucus or recess by sometimes 1030 hrs or by 1130 hrs latest, until 1330 hrs lunch included.
Their sincerity was most evident.
Do not get fooled by their conversation about "we ta'd 64 pieces of stuff"
What they ta'd was language that stayed the same, minor language clean up of words like "regular" in front of the word "employee".
Regular employee?
This wording has been in for a long time and none of us could figure out what its relevance was as nowhere is there an reference to its opposite " irregular employees". You are either an employee or you are not.
These people are clumsy masters (small m) of subterfuge. Whenever they are pissed they write us letters reversing the conversation of what has actually happened to try to show on paper (as if that alone is the definitive source of true information as to what has transpired) that it is the union that is the unwilling party, when in absolute fact it is they who are the guilty party.
They accuse the union of the exact behavior they themselves are guilty of, and the union is not.
Their numbers are 6 to 7 mgrs at the table most of the time, while present for the union there are 22 to 24 stewards and business agents including last Thurs the principle officer (Sec Treasurer), and every other time, obviously the head negotiator, Mike Lass, the president and vice president, a trustee, several business agents and the rest all seasoned stewards with many years not only in the union but also as stewards. ALL taking notes
How they think they will get anyone to think that their dialog will override the notes of the multiple members of the union is ludicrous.
We are working on our proposal #6, ( which is a complete copy of the actual current contract) they are working off their original 2 proposals, there are 2 because in their first proposal they did not include the wages, otherwise it would be only one original proposal which has not been changed since its submission.
Each time the union changes anything they issue a new completely redone copy of the original proposal (complete contract) to all of the members present as well as the employers.
Here I should say that the union held 2 proposal meetings prior to the start of negotiations. One to ask the membership what they wanted to either remove from the contract or what they wanted to include, I believe that meeting was approx 3 hours long. Then the union called a special meeting to issue everyone present a complete copy of what had been gathered and what would be put forth as the unions proposals. Even at that meeting other ideas surfaced and were incorporated into the proposals to be submitted to the employers.
So as you read don't buy in to any of their subterfuge. It is all self-serving not to mention false.
Hope I have been able in some way given you a clear picture of their behavior, appalling as it is.
They are not the beneficent uncle they purport themselves to be.
