ABF | Harrisburg June 20, 2017, 1 P.M.: Right-To-Work Is Wrong Rally

[SAC75]

Are you actually showing me your statistics and trying to ask me how to show my point with your statistics?

Yes

This is how you reply to what I posted here

How about the 2006 Sikorsky Aircraft strike where 180 scabs crossed the picket which ended in a poor contract being passed without being endorsed by the union leaders. Over 1400 of the 3500 Teamsters voted against the proposal. That means over 1400 of Teamsters got stuck with a deal they wouldnt accept. They lost so they just had to accept the fact and work under the new contract. Thats over 1400 potential Teamsters that could blame the leaders and become angry enough to quit paying dues by getting a contract rammed down their throats even though it wasnt endorsed by union leaders and the scabs weakened the negotiations. Teamsters Local 1150 still has those 180 names of those scabs listed on the wall of shame on their website today.

RTW destroys solidarity as you have just proved yourself by saying that you are done with me. A quitter will always be a quitter which RTW provides the means to do so. It also weakens the bargaining power of the negotiators by not having the full support of the membership behind them. You want to use RTW as a means to get the union leaders to do their job. The union leaders tried doing their job with Sikorsky but they didn't succeed because they didn't have the full membership standing behind them so RTW sure won't make that job any better, just worse by having more dissent among the ranks. Elections are the means of getting leaders to do their job and keep out corruption but as you can see that doesn't work seeing how Hoffa got re elected so what makes you think that RTW will be any better? It will end up by having more and more members dropping out until the union will no longer be able to sustain itself. You say and believe that RTW helps the worker by not having to pay the unions mandatory dues if you feel your representatives arent doing their jobs. If RTW was really trying to help the worker they would also be campaigning for not having to pay mandatory taxes if they felt their political representatives werent doing their jobs too but you will never see that happen.

Thats my point. Now tell me how your statistics have any relevance to what I posted? Let alone asking me how your statistics prove my point. Now thats funny. Your video made more sense than this reply.

I do get your point but you forgot about the 2100 that voted for the contract. ABF got stuck with our contract with a 51 to 49 vote also. You did make your point and it is a excellent one at that. I will not deny that one! Well played! Sorry for the disrespect. I didn't see the whole picture. I'll try to look a little harder at others points. With that you maybe should look at how you put things out yourself. It made it just as combative as me. Again sorry.

 

[Michigan Bill]

RTW gets the help from the government. What help are the unions getting from the government? Do you see the unions campaigning to get the government to pass laws saying that all companies and workers will have to unionize even if the majority disapproves? RTW is hypocrisy at best.

The only reason why some locals have good white paper contracts is the strength of the local membership.

Unions get help from the laws in states where it's not right to work. The teamsters have been around much longer than the nlra, so if they have effective representation, why do the dues need to be compulsory?

 

[Michigan Bill]

RTW gets the help from the government. What help are the unions getting from the government? Do you see the unions campaigning to get the government to pass laws saying that all companies and workers will have to unionize even if the majority disapproves? RTW is hypocrisy at best.

The only reason why some locals have good white paper contracts is the strength of the local membership.

And on the flip side, if the local membership has strength, it doesnt need compulsory dues, does it?

 

[retired&proud]

Yes

I do get your point but you forgot about the 2100 that voted for the contract. ABF got stuck with our contract with a 51 to 49 vote also. You did make your point and it is a excellent one at that. I will not deny that one! Well played! Sorry for the disrespect. I didn't see the whole picture. I'll try to look a little harder at others points. With that you maybe should look at how you put things out yourself. It made it just as combative as me. Again sorry.

It wasnt 2100, the vote was 1488 to1416. The rest never even bothered to vote.Thanks for the acknowledgement of my point because that is something many people would ever admit let alone open minded enough to see. No need to apologize for the disrespect because it was mutual like you said and something I have come to expect over the years as coming with the territory. I will consider the point you made as well and try being more attentive upon my delivery in the future.

 

[canaryinthemine]

Just back from the Union meeting. Local #30 will be sending a bus to Harrisburg, Pa. on June 20th. As I will be retired on that date, I can't ask Local #30 to pay for my bus ride, so I guess I'll just have to ride out myself. We hope to get about 50 - 60 guys out there...........and a few gimpy old retirees like me.........

 

[retired&proud]

And on the flip side, if the local membership has strength, it doesnt need compulsory dues, does it?

Thats right, it doesnt need compulsory dues where the locals are strong and have good strong white paper contracts. Now tell just how many locals have good strong white paper contracts these days? The members in the locals that have strength arent the ones campaining for RTW either.

 

[Michigan Bill]

Thats right, it doesnt need compulsory dues where the locals are strong and have good strong white paper contracts. Now tell just how many locals have good strong white paper contracts these days? The members in the locals that have strength arent the ones campaining for RTW either.

And my point being, if the contract is that weak, with poor, noncaring membership, wtf is fighting RTW going to solve. Propping up a weak union contract doesn't help anything.

 

[retired&proud]

Unions get help from the laws in states where it's not right to work. The teamsters have been around much longer than the nlra, so if they have effective representation, why do the dues need to be compulsory?

Tell me how the unions get help from the laws in states where it's not right to work? Unless you consider not passing laws that hinder mandatory fees as being part of a union. The mandatory fees were in place and accepted when the unions were voted in so thats why. Where does it end, how about passing laws where members dont have to work for less if they didnt vote for a concessionary contract. I don't agree with it so I shouldnt have to abide by it, right?

 

[retired&proud]

And my point being, if the contract is that weak, with poor, noncaring membership, wtf is fighting RTW going to solve. Propping up a weak union contract doesn't help anything.

Youre point was strong locals dont need compulsory dues not weak ones. You never did answer my question of how many locals have good white paper contracts these days because its very few. Thats probably why you didnt answer it. RTW just enables the weak ones to spread. Just what kind of members will the RTW be attracting in the future? The weak ones who want good wages and benefits who wouldnt be willing to pay for them which means that they sure wont fight for them either.

Just how do you think all these crappy contracts got passed. The leaders didnt vote for them, the members are the ones who voted them in. The problem also lies with the members getting weaker over the years and RTW sure wont help that change.

 

[Michigan Bill]

Tell me how the unions get help from the laws in states where it's not right to work? Unless you consider not passing laws that hinder mandatory fees as being part of a union. The mandatory fees were in place and accepted when the unions were voted in so thats why. Where does it end, how about passing laws where members dont have to work for less if they didnt vote for a concessionary contract. I don't agree with it so I shouldnt have to abide by it, right?

That's already in effect, you can go find a place that isn't on concessions! What don't you get about rtw, if a union does their job, what's the worries? Maybe yrc would have been handled better if the members said no to dues after the last round of concessions?

 

[Michigan Bill]

Youre point was strong locals dont need compulsory dues not weak ones. You never did answer my question of how many locals have good white paper contracts these days because its very few. Thats probably why you didnt answer it. RTW just enables the weak ones to spread. Just what kind of members will the RTW be attracting in the future? The weak ones who want good wages and benefits who would neither be willing to pay for them which also means that they sure wont fight for them either.

Just how do you think all these crappy contracts got passed. The leaders didnt vote for them, the members are the ones who voted them in. The problem also lies with the members getting weaker over the years and RTW sure wont help that change.

Nothing is going to help, manditory dues or not, and wtf didn't I answer, I've seen good white paper contracts and crappy ones, so far, the manditory dues haven't helped, have they?

 

[retired&proud]

That's already in effect, you can go find a place that isn't on concessions! What don't you get about rtw, if a union does their job, what's the worries? Maybe yrc would have been handled better if the members said no to dues after the last round of concessions?

What dont you get? I dont care how well the union leaders do their job, there will be many that still will be unhappy along with the ones looking for a free ride.

You said that maybe yrc would have been handled better if the members said no to dues after the last round of concessions. Who, the very members who voted for it? How about the members jumping all over the locals and IBT for even having the nerve to present the membership with such trash, let alone vote for it? What part of the weak members being the majority these days dont you understand?

 

[retired&proud]

Nothing is going to help, manditory dues or not, and wtf didn't I answer, I've seen good white paper contracts and crappy ones, so far, the manditory dues haven't helped, have they?

Is that all you know wtf? Do you think that gets your point across better? I will say it again for you, mandatory fees were accepted as part of being in the union when it was voted in. You also didn't answer where does it end, how about passing laws where members dont have to work for less if they didnt vote for a concessionary contract. I don't agree with it so I shouldnt have to abide by it, right? Do you agree with that too?

While youre at it how about answering another question you failed to answer too. How are the unions getting help from the laws in states where it's not right to work?

 

[retired&proud]

Just back from the Union meeting. Local #30 will be sending a bus to Harrisburg, Pa. on June 20th. As I will be retired on that date, I can't ask Local #30 to pay for my bus ride, so I guess I'll just have to ride out myself. We hope to get about 50 - 60 guys out there...........and a few gimpy old retirees like me.........

I bet you that you dont see anyone whos campaigning for RTW on here protesting those who will attending the rally.

 

[Michigan Bill]

What dont you get? I dont care how well the union leaders do their job, there will be many that still will be unhappy along with the ones looking for a free ride.

You said that maybe yrc would have been handled better if the members said no to dues after the last round of concessions. Who, the very members who voted for it? How about the members jumping all over the locals and IBT for even having the nerve to present the membership with such trash, let alone vote for it? What part of the weak members being the majority these days dont you understand?

So we agree then, that the weak membership is a majority? Then how will RTW hurt? You ALREADY have guys that don't care, how is RTW going to work against you any more than the complacent and apathetic membership?

And please tell me how new Penn voted for concessions, they were told to get it right or else.

 

[Michigan Bill]

Is that all you know wtf? Do you think that gets your point across better? I will say it again for you, mandatory fees were accepted as part of being in the union when it was voted in. You also didn't answer where does it end, how about passing laws where members dont have to work for less if they didnt vote for a concessionary contract. I don't agree with it so I shouldnt have to abide by it, right? Do you agree with that too?

While youre at it how about answering another question you failed to answer too. How are the unions getting help from the laws in states where it's not right to work?

Manditory fees might not even be part of some cba''s anymore, I've seen contracts without them, and that's in a union state.

I would absolutely support any law that states you don't have to work for concessions if you didn't vote for them.

In a union state, the union gets help in the form of manditory dues. Even under a weak contract. So you pay dues whether you get meaningful representation or not.

Riddle me this, if unions are on the ropes so bad, why do most RTW states still have plenty of white paper contracts. Don't you think if the guys were not satisfied, the union would be gone?

 

[Michigan Bill]

I bet you that you dont see anyone whos campaigning for RTW on here protesting those who will attending the rally.

No one is campaigning, I just don't get the big deal. Las Vegas has very effective unions in a rtw state.

 

[retired&proud]

So we agree then, that the weak membership is a majority? Then how will RTW hurt? You ALREADY have guys that don't care, how is RTW going to work against you any more than the complacent and apathetic membership?

And please tell me how new Penn voted for concessions, they were told to get it right or else.

Who do you think wants RTW? It sure isnt the strong members, they fight for what they think is right and quitting isnt in their blood. Its the weak who be the ones not paying dues so just where does that leave the unions. If allowed, the weak will end up destroying the unions just as sure as they passed those crappy contracts. We have to work on changing the apathetic and compliant as well as fighting RTW.

New Penn failed to remain strong against the leadership and gave in to fear and ended up voting it in. Someone telling me to get it right or else would only make me angry and more determined than ever.

 

[retired&proud]

No one is campaigning, I just don't get the big deal. Las Vegas has very effective unions in a rtw state.

Who do you expect to believe that because you wouldnt be making such a big deal out of something that meant very little to you. Are you even in a union?

 

[retired&proud]

I would absolutely support any law that states you don't have to work for concessions if you didn't vote for them.

Now I know that you are non union. How about passing a law that makes all companies unionize so we can get you started in paying mandatory dues? Would you also go for that?