Recent Negotiations

You are wrong. Not every Teamster freight barn has full MOB. Even in Master Freight, you don't truly have full MOB, as defined in the same way as the OHFL agreement.

Even as I typed that I was thinking someone would bring this up, OK I don't pay for my medical or pension out of my hourly wage, correct? I have benefits that I do not pay for, who is maintaining my full benefits? I don't really care how any contract that has disloyalty as a reason for termination defines anything. I have my pension statements from OHFL and from my MF job the contributions are almost double!

Of course the reference was the best wage increase since OHFL left the NMFA in the mid-Eighties.

I read "best increase ever" I thought I was pretty clear on that.


Under federal labor law, the employer is not required to even begin bargaining with the union until after the contract expires.

That does not mean the can't, I don't see UPS and YRCW waiting till the contracts expired hanging guys out for months past the expiration. But,Hey if you like it that way more power to ya.

Also, the IBT is not going to authorize strike action until certain steps have been taken, and that's just the way it is.

I am assume you just learned that after Portland tried to strike OHFL and got denied.

If you have complaints about the process, I suggest you address them to the NLRB and General President Hoffa.

Maybe you don't understand what I am trying to say, the VP's willfully enter into an agreement with the union, that agreement stipulates that they WILL enter into negotiations, and complete them, prior to the expiration of the contract. Its your contract you can put what you want into it.


I don't disagree. I kind of feel that way about your vaunted NMFA agreement sometimes, especially the tentative deal currently being voted upon. Let me point out a few concessionary issues comparing OHFL to the NMFA:

1.) Hours needed to get benefits: Under the OHFL agreement, a CDL driver only needs 40 hours a month. Under the current NMFA it is 60 hours, and under the proposed NMFA, it goes up to 100 hours. Wow.
2.) Progression rate: Under the OHFL agreemet, an experienced CDL driver usually starts at 90%, with a one-year progression. Under the current NMFA, it is a two-year progression, starting at 75%. Under the proposed NMFA, it goes up to three years, starting at 80%. THREE YEARS!
3.) Work week: Monday through Friday at OHFL. Under the NMFA? Bye-bye personal life and family time...

OHFL contract is garbage, for a company that makes as much money as they do, for a company that will not show the union their finances, all they get is concessions, what work rules? Whatever they are doing works and it saves them big money, year after year they are rewarded for clowning us. The NMFA even as f@#$ed as it now, is is still a world away from what you work under.

1.) I did vote no on this proposal, and that is one of many reasons. Strickland was up there selling us on this sellout deal passing around union generated company propaganda. So don't blame me, or the NMFA members, blame the delegates except local 206 the only local with the spinal fortitude to tell the INTL what we are all really thinking. THEY COULD HAVE MADE CHANGES THERE!!

2.) Usually? you mean, if they feel like it, I recall the wage progression to be a long and hard one, with them mostly doing whatever they want. What about a senior man with no experience? He just gets hosed while a junior man makes more than him? Thats great, the only reason they hire drivers at 90% is they know they wouldn't be able to get anyone otherwise.

3.) I don't know about the OHFL you work at but for me it was forced 12 hour days every day, I can remember going home to dream about work, before I got up to go back. I get to spend time with my friends and family, my first year I had a m-f day bid with no forced ot. While you may work M-F you still work swing and grave.


Who is downplaying them? The IBT has stepped up to the plate, and the rank-and-file is showing more resolve than they have ever shown before, and I for one AM PROUD OF THEM! We will win this fight, and we will prevail, and all of the doom-and-gloom you and other naysayers try and cast over this process means diddly-squat to those of us who are fighting this fight!

Then why bother replying?
 
I'm replying bcause it bothers me when negative doom-and-gloomers like you crap all over what hard-working Teamters are trying accomplish. Sorry we can't wave a magic wand and make it all better all at once, but then, we obviously don't have the massive experience at contract negotiating you do.

Perhaps you ought to run for S/T next time around, since you clearly think Strickland isn't cutting the mustard. I seem to recall hearing from very credible sources that he presented the NMFA in fairly neutral terms, in much the way it was presented to him in D.C., and told all of the NMFA guys present it was up to them to decide on how to vote.

In other words, it was up to the NMFA members to take a little accountability for themselves. 206 could vote any way they wanted to, since they are all political outcasts anyways. Nothing much on the line for them if they voted no. IBT officials have long memories about who voted how, and you can take that to the bank.

You want Strickland to vote for you? Want him to wipe your nose while he's at it? Whatever happened to Teamsters being Teamsters?

Much the way he was forced to present the first OHFL contract offer last time around when Harum signed off on what was arguably a far worse deal than what we ultimately ended up with. He was accused by Harum and others of "tanking" the agreement, because we voted it down in Portland 162-2. He didn't tank it... we simply aren't stupid enough to vote for the piece of crap they were forcing dow our throats.

But if you want to express ignorant opinions based upon your hatred of Oak Harbor and everything not NMFA, then go ahead. It's a free country. But don't expect anyone to take your vitriolic postings very seriously.

Like I said, show your brothers a little support. We are all fighting to gain something here, and just because it's not good enough by your standards doesn't mean it's not a good and worthy fight by our standards...
 
I'm replying bcause it bothers me when negative doom-and-gloomers like you crap all over what hard-working Teamters are trying accomplish. Sorry we can't wave a magic wand and make it all better all at once, but then, we obviously don't have the massive experience at contract negotiating you do.
I thought you said it didn't mean "diddly-squat".

Perhaps you ought to run for S/T next time around, since you clearly think Strickland isn't cutting the mustard.


I would hope to have the opportunity to elect a long time member whose heart is in the right place.

I am pretty sure I didn't claim to have any kind of negotiating skills or abilities, I dislike politics, and I have no political aspirations, I do have interests in organizing, and I hope to someday be able to make a difference and better my union. You call it doom and gloom I just call it how I see it, maybe I am a little extreme, I don't believe everyone feels the way I do, nor do I want them to. To me it is important to point out the ugliness that surrounds these negotiations, and the whole company for that matter. Why should we keep accepting less and less, while the employers keep demanding more?


You seem to feel that my experience is limited; I have worked for UPS, I have worked for two Teamster freight barns, and been a member of four different locals, I have read every piece of Oak Harbor literature I can get my hands on, I talk to ever driver I see, I have read your contract cover to cover. I listen to every Presentation that YRCW or ABF or UPS releases, I dedicate a great deal of my time so I can feel comfortable discussing these issues without tripping over my own words. I don't take it lightly.


I seem to recall hearing from very credible sources that he presented the NMFA in fairly neutral terms, in much the way it was presented to him in D.C., and told all of the NMFA guys present it was up to them to decide on how to vote.
I don't feel that is the case, I believe it was presented in the way he heard it in DC but that does not mean neutral by any stretch of the imagination. Of course it is up to the members, implying anything less would probably be almost a crime.

In other words, it was up to the NMFA members to take a little accountability for themselves. 206 could vote any way they wanted to, since they are all political outcasts anyways. Nothing much on the line for them if they voted no. IBT officials have long memories about who voted how, and you can take that to the bank.

You want Strickland to vote for you? Want him to wipe your nose while he's at it? Whatever happened to Teamsters being Teamsters?

What was on the line for us if we were to vote no? Why would I expect him to do any less than represent the will of the constituency. He was elected because we thought he would do the right thing. IBT officials memories are more important then the people who will feel the tremendous consequences of this losing deal?

Your basic implication is; "yeah he felt like it was a bad deal but he voted for it because of pressure from the Intl." Thats poor representation if you ask me, hearing it from you makes it even more nerve racking. You think while we are getting screwed by this raw deal we are going to be thinking; "well, at least the international doesn't think poorly of local 81 and Strickland."? Local 206 is blacklisted, but at least they honestly represented their members, I think thats something to be proud of.

Yes, I wanted him to vote for the members, and no,I have plenty of contract left to wipe stuff with. At least the members of 81 can be proud they voted no, I hope that doesn't negatively reflect on Tom with the International.



Much the way he was forced to present the first OHFL contract offer last time around when Harum signed off on what was arguably a far worse deal than what we ultimately ended up with. He was accused by Harum and others of "tanking" the agreement, because we voted it down in Portland 162-2. He didn't tank it... we simply aren't stupid enough to vote for the piece of crap they were forcing dow our throats.

But if you want to express ignorant opinions based upon your hatred of Oak Harbor and everything not NMFA, then go ahead. It's a free country. But don't expect anyone to take your vitriolic postings very seriously.

Like I said, show your brothers a little support. We are all fighting to gain something here, and just because it's not good enough by your standards doesn't mean it's not a good and worthy fight by our standards...

I heard he was accused of "Tanking" the agreement by members who attended the meeting.
I don't hate everything not NMFA, my anger is directed at this company's owners and lawyers, I appreciate strong work rules ILWU's port agreements make Teamster master contracts joke worthy. We need to be strong ,we have to be willing to take it to the next level, I honestly see OHFL just doing this to you guys over and over again unless you do what you apparently don't think needs to be done.

It seems to me your tone has changed over the years I have been reading your posts, and even over the course of these negotiations. I can't disagree with you without being called "ignorant" how so?, look around your barn or any barn I am one of the few guys who does pay attention, and does care, I am not your enemy, I am not on anyones side. The owners that log on here need to see it for what it is the employees also deserve to know how nasty it really is it, is not just rumors it is real honest to god riding the edge of the law union-busting by OHFL management, shedding a positive light on that seems impossible to me.
 
Like I said, show your brothers a little support. We are all fighting to gain something here, and just because it's not good enough by your standards doesn't mean it's not a good and worthy fight by our standards...

I don't know if its good enough or not, I don't have a copy of a proposal, I didn't even know one existed yet, but I do know there is no reason it should be concessionary, it should have work rules and language that are equivalent to the USF master contract that has been used in California. If you try to sell members on anything less, it better be because OHFL opened their books to the union, and they are in a dire financial situation. We organize and gain members by dragging people up, OHFL has a slew of unorganized terminals to get them on board it is critical that this contract has a positive resolution. You think striking accomplishes nothing? Its a unions ONLY bargaining chip, everything else is secondary, if the Co. believes a strike is impossible you have nothing at the table but givebacks.
 
silvertooth has been around the block

OHFL has to fight to maintain their health and pension. The minute you make any kind of concession you make on those 2 areas you might as well work for a nonunion carrier. One of us work for NMFC and my spouse works for OHFL between us we will have $5000 to $7000 a month for retirement, without the pension where would we be? Enron?
 
it should have work rules and language that are equivalent to the USF master contract that has been used in California.
Please don't ever refer to that piece of crap California Contract that Reddaway has as any type of Master Contract. If we all started taking that thing as something we should be building off of, we are all in a world of hurt. Look at the Reddaway NW agreement as something to build off of , but not that "thing" called the California contract.
 
"...I would hope to have the opportunity to elect a long time member whose heart is in the right place..."

Tom's been in this local for what? Thirty-six years or something? Been a BA since what... '98? Who exactly do you have in mind who would have more experience? And as for having their hearts in the right place... let me explain why Tom has such support at Oak Harbor. It's because he has fought for us harder than anyone before, and you can take that to the bank.

"...I am pretty sure I didn't claim to have any kind of negotiating skills or abilities, I dislike politics, and I have no political aspirations, I do have interests in organizing, and I hope to someday be able to make a difference and better my union..."

Do you think anyone does like the politics? Christ, it's politics that have made the OHFL negotiations so bad in the past. But the thing you need to understand is that the politics exist whether any of us like it or not. We all have to exist in a political world, inside the union and out. The one thing anyone in a leadership position like Tom has to do is to walk a fine line, and I would say in my judgement he has done a better job than most would or could.

Having been a member of several locals myself, I have a little perspective on such matters. But when you crap all over the very people who are trying to make a difference, you hurt us all. That's my only point.

"...You call it doom and gloom I just call it how I see it, maybe I am a little extreme, I don't believe everyone feels the way I do, nor do I want them to. To me it is important to point out the ugliness that surrounds these negotiations, and the whole company for that matter. Why should we keep accepting less and less, while the employers keep demanding more? ..."

What ugliness? Do you think we are just accepting the company's tactics without a fight? Do you think we haven't responded? Here's a little education lesson for you... employers play games, and we fight them by playing our own games. It's the way it has been done, is being done, and will always be done. Shaking your fists at the gods because the VP's are acting like jerks is a meaningless gesture. You just gotta stand up and fight and that's what we are doing. We are. OHFL Teamsters are. With or without your help and support, we continue to fight.


"...You seem to feel that my experience is limited; I have worked for UPS, I have worked for two Teamster freight barns, and been a member of four different locals, I have read every piece of Oak Harbor literature I can get my hands on, I talk to ever driver I see, I have read your contract cover to cover. I listen to every Presentation that YRCW or ABF or UPS releases, I dedicate a great deal of my time so I can feel comfortable discussing these issues without tripping over my own words. I don't take it lightly..."

I appreciate you think you know what you are talking about, but you don't near as much as you think you do. Try doing a little bit more listening, and a little less posting, and you might learn something.

Mark Twain had a saying; "It's better to keep your mouth shut and have people think you are a fool than to open it and remove any lingering doubt."

You may very well think I'm a jerk for phrasing it that way, but I'm actually trying to give you some very good advice here. Listen, and learn from somebody who has had to learn those lessons himself.

"...I don't feel that is the case, I believe it was presented in the way he heard it in DC but that does not mean neutral by any stretch of the imagination. Of course it is up to the members, implying anything less would probably be almost a crime... What was on the line for us if we were to vote no? Why would I expect him to do any less than represent the will of the constituency. He was elected because we thought he would do the right thing. IBT officials memories are more important then the people who will feel the tremendous consequences of this losing deal... Your basic implication is; "yeah he felt like it was a bad deal but he voted for it because of pressure from the Intl." That's poor representation if you ask me, hearing it from you makes it even more nerve racking. You think while we are getting screwed by this raw deal we are going to be thinking; "well, at least the international doesn't think poorly of local 81 and Strickland."? Local 206 is blacklisted, but at least they honestly represented their members, I think that's something to be proud of... Yes, I wanted him to vote for the members, and no,I have plenty of contract left to wipe stuff with. At least the members of 81 can be proud they voted no, I hope that doesn't negatively reflect on Tom with the International..."

Well, believe what you will. It's not that the vote will reflect poorly on Tom, it will reflect poorly on us all, with repercussions to follow. But, that was the will of the majority, and I certainly respect it, and so does Tom, I am willing to bet. One more yes vote at the two-man committee would have made no difference at all in the final outcome, as has the fact that our local voted it down. And it's real easy for a local like 206 to make an empty gesture, since they have nothing at stake anyhow. But don't even try and act like somehow this is Tom's fault. That's just stupid reasoning, and lazy thinking.

If there are repercussions, it will likely be felt by the OHFL guys first, since the IBT has taken over our negotiations and they are still open. But I stand by the vote you guys made. Hell, I would have voted that way myself, just because I haven't voted 'yes' on a contract yet in my career.

"...I heard he was accused of "Tanking" the agreement by members who attended the meeting..."

Well, you heard wrong. In fact, it was Harum who accused him of tanking the OHFL contract at the following JWAC, at the round table dinner they do. I have that from at least two eyewitnesses sitting in the same room. I can guarantee you it wasn't Tom who tanked it. It was every shop steward who attended the negotiations who made sure that piece of crap went down, and went down hard.

"...I don't hate everything not NMFA, my anger is directed at this company's owners and lawyers, I appreciate strong work rules ILWU's port agreements make Teamster master contracts joke worthy. We need to be strong ,we have to be willing to take it to the next level, I honestly see OHFL just doing this to you guys over and over again unless you do what you apparently don't think needs to be done..."

Yes, it will happen over and over again... because that is the nature of the beast. What exactly do you think we can do to stop it? This ain't 1968, man! Wish that it were, but we no longer have the leverage in this industry we once did, and to pretend otherwise is just deluding yourself. You don't even know what is and is not allowed under labor law and past and current Board rulings, to judge by many of your recent posts. But you sure are quick to fire shots across the bow at those who do know how the game is played in this day and age.

Listen, the battle ain't never one in day, or one battle, or one contract. We are making gains, and we will persevere to get a good contract that we- meaning OHFL Teamsters- can be proud of.

"...It seems to me your tone has changed over the years I have been reading your posts, and even over the course of these negotiations. I can't disagree with you without being called "ignorant" how so?, look around your barn or any barn I am one of the few guys who does pay attention, and does care, I am not your enemy, I am not on anyone's side. The owners that log on here need to see it for what it is the employees also deserve to know how nasty it really is it, is not just rumors it is real honest to god riding the edge of the law union-busting by OHFL management, shedding a positive light on that seems impossible to me..."

If my views or postings have changed, it's because I see a real sesne of unity building at OHFL, and I get REALLY offended when an outsider like yourself (past experience at OHFL notwithstanding) wants to sit there and undermine what we are trying to do here. Tom was key in in getting us a very good contract last time, and he is certainly working hard on our behalf on the current one, as are the guys on our committee who are helping him.

Criticism comes with being the principal officer, but how about you cut him a little slack until we have something to look at? The IBT has taken the thing over, and we are hoping that leads to good things, but we won't know until we have something to actually vote on.

Trust me, the employees have given the owners a good sense of just how fed up we are with their propaganda and misinformation. I think if we can hold a little unity and solidarity together, we may pull a decent contract out. And I hope we have your support and those of your fellow NMFA workers, but quite franlky, I don't care if we do, because regardless, we will fight on...
 
"...Please don't ever refer to that piece of crap California Contract that Reddaway has as any type of Master Contract. If we all started taking that thing as something we should be building off of, we are all in a world of hurt. Look at the Reddaway NW agreement as something to build off of , but not that "thing" called the California contract..."

You can say that again!
 
Tom's been in this local for what? Thirty-six years or something? Been a BA since what... '98? Who exactly do you have in mind who would have more experience? And as for having their hearts in the right place... let me explain why Tom has such support at Oak Harbor. It's because he has fought for us harder than anyone before, and you can take that to the bank.

I honestly hope people do not vote by slate this time, I probably will not vote for Tom while I do recognize he is probably the best negotiator in all of local 81, if your hearts not in the right place, that doesn't matter. Currently full time officers do not work together, or communicate effectively, when I ask the BA what is going on at OHFL, I should not know more about it than he does. When Tom put Craig in the hot seat, I was told the truth would come out, that he had done something horrible but the E-board and Tom's accusations were thrown out by the JC, and the only charge that was found to have any merit was shaky at best.
This incident offended allot of members, as it should. The reason (Tom) he has allot of support at OHFL is also the reason he has waning support at the master barns, because our fights aren't worth his time apparently.


Well, believe what you will. It's not that the vote will reflect poorly on Tom, it will reflect poorly on us all, with repercussions to follow. But, that was the will of the majority, and I certainly respect it, and so does Tom, I am willing to bet. One more yes vote at the two-man committee would have made no difference at all in the final outcome, as has the fact that our local voted it down. And it's real easy for a local like 206 to make an empty gesture, since they have nothing at stake anyhow. But don't even try and act like somehow this is Tom's fault. That's just stupid reasoning, and lazy thinking.

If there are repercussions, it will likely be felt by the OHFL guys first, since the IBT has taken over our negotiations and they are still open. But I stand by the vote you guys made. Hell, I would have voted that way myself, just because I haven't voted 'yes' on a contract yet in my career.

To me one vote would have made a world of difference, the confirmation that Tom and the other delegates made at the two man meeting was what set the stage for the internationals vote yes campaign. I believe one vote can make a difference, specifically in a situation like that, at the two man meeting there were company representatives present so the delegates could make last minute changes if necessary, they declined, to me that means every one that voted yes, approves of the contract, and thinks it is the best deal we can get. Tom misrepresented us there, and his vote meant more than any of our no votes. Who knows maybe if he had stated to other delegates his intention was to vote no, more people may have done the right thing, but we will never know, because he fell into line with the rest for fear of repercussions from the Intl. Evey time someone has a issue with this new contract, Tom can't blame the contract, or the Intl. he gave it his and our full support.




Yes, it will happen over and over again... because that is the nature of the beast. What exactly do you think we can do to stop it? This ain't 1968, man! Wish that it were, but we no longer have the leverage in this industry we once did, and to pretend otherwise is just deluding yourself. You don't even know what is and is not allowed under labor law and past and current Board rulings, to judge by many of your recent posts. But you sure are quick to fire shots across the bow at those who do know how the game is played in this day and age.
Listen, the battle ain't never one in day, or one battle, or one contract. We are making gains, and we will persevere to get a good contract that we- meaning OHFL Teamsters- can be proud of.

With the memory of a strike fresh in their minds I think you will find it much easier to deal with the VP's. Sometimes the simple answer is the best one. While you think I should shut up, and my knowledge of labor law may not be up to speed. I am looking at this from the outside, a strike is the only solution, this will never stop, crippled and beat down with a 1/4 of your customers gone, big ones like Gap. The company will not try this again, while they may need concessions, and you may lose several guys to layoff, it would be a victory.

I really want to know what you mean by repercussions from the Intl., could you expand on that for me? What are they gonna do? Take away our by-laws!
 
Please don't ever refer to that piece of crap California Contract that Reddaway has as any type of Master Contract. If we all started taking that thing as something we should be building off of, we are all in a world of hurt. Look at the Reddaway NW agreement as something to build off of , but not that "thing" called the California contract.

Have you read the OHFL agreement? I know this (USF California) contract has card check language. Does it have "disloyalty" as cause for termination? If no then it cannot be any worse.
 
Have you read the OHFL agreement? I know this (USF California) contract has card check language. Does it have "disloyalty" as cause for termination? If no then it cannot be any worse.
I was not comparing it to the Oak Harbor agreement. I was only stating that anyone who thinks that P.O.S. contract should be used as any type of master agreement should either learn to read or read it again, and again, and again.
 
Not to mention that USF management was not respecting the card-check language anyhow, which almost derailed the NMFA talks back in October. They finally worked out an agreement, but the point is that card-check language is not the silver bullet you might it is...
 
what is all of the talk about whether Tom S stood up for the NMFA or not. The truth of the matter is that OHFL will never have NMFA wording and the company is trying to treat you all like nonunion employees. Not only are they trying to take away you health and retirement benefits but they are trying to cancel the retieree's benefits. The company is offering a wage increase and you decide where the money goes right? So how are they going to compensate for all of the past raises that you designated to be paid hourly into your pension. Does the company just absorb that back ito their fund? OAKH employees need to start asking where their money is going and who PROFITS
 
No, you're right. We are getting off the subject here, and the point you raise is valid.

The VP's want to present their new pay/benefits package as "choices" but it's really no choice at all. The choice is that they want you in a shell game of their design, wherein they pretend they are really doing us all a favor by giving us money up front in wages, but then we have to go buy our benefits with almost all of the raise, so it's really not a raise at all.

This is so some twenty-year old who doesn't realize just how important a pension or healthcare benefits are can feel like he really got something out of the whole deal.

Here's our choice: we choose to stay in the Teamster's pension, and we choose Teamster H&W. Got it? That's our choice.

Oh, but I forgot, that choice isn't included in your little plan, is it? So it's choices, but the choices the VP's decide to offer.

Which is no choice at all...
 
Sad scenario

It is a shame that such low IQ people communicate as supposedly representing 500 union people. LEAVE & LEAVE if you don't like where you are employed. You few people spread many false accusations and obviously are so biased you can't represent the truth if you knew it. The hate you are trying to spread is interpreted as malicious behavior for an adult in todays world. Play the game fair and above board not below the belt.
 
Hmmm. So... standing up for yourself and your fellow employees in indicative of low IQ?

So... electing to utilize your rights under federal labor law to collectively bargain to improve everyone's livelihood, that's indicative of low IQ?

So... not letting greedy corporations continue to take, take, take from their employees, who just give, give, and give some more is indicative of low IQ?

Showing a little spine is indicative of low IQ?

I'd say that corporations who spend huge sums trying to keep unions out are the ones not playing fair. I'd say corporations who undervalue their employee's labor are the one's not playing fair. i'd say corporations who try and push the costs of retirment and healthcare solely onto their employees or even the government are the one's not playing fair. Let others pay for it, while we pocket the profits or enhance shareholder value, no matter the social cost.

I'd say people who espouse beliefs like yours, sir, are the one's who have low IQs and soft spines. The union employees of the world are fighting for their lives to keep the bar high for everyone, but you would tear it all down, and in doing so, bring down everyone else including yourself.

Thank goodness for you there are plenty of employers who value soft-headed fools like yourself, so I guess you will never have to worry about a job. Better you start worrying about retirement and how you're going to afford your healthcare, especially in your old age.

With attitudes like yours, I really worry for the future of this country...
 
Silvertooth, I moved the posts that were getting off-subject to another thread in the Union Forum. Moderator's perogative. Let's keep on-topic in here, and if you want to rant and rave about Local 81, do it in the new thread...
 
Amen to shifterknob. if the employees at OAKH roll over on this contract the emploees have no future. Talk to some of the retiree's and see what your current pension is worth. Not to mention a health plan that allows you to fix what is broken without worrying whether you can afford it or not. That by it's self is worth a hugh raise that you will spent and when the s--- hits the fan you have nothing to backyou up.
 
LEAVE & LEAVE if you don't like where you are employed.

You few people spread many false accusations and obviously are so biased you can't represent the truth if you knew it.


Play the game fair and above board not below the belt.

First of all they don't have to leave they have a legal right to organize and make the company bargain in good faith.

Don't even bring up false accusations and talk about who is representing the truth unless your going to be specific. Have a meaningful discussion with facts or myths ( in your case) but don't just call someone a liar without saying what it is you believe they are saying is untrue.

So playing the game fair means don't communicate, have discussions and voice your opinion? If so the Oak Harbor owners haven't been playing fair from the beginning. Maybe they should look in the mirror since it seems that is another thing they planted into your head.
 
that was dumb...I had to fill out more profile information to just look at this thread. hope you guys won't stalk me now.
 
Top