What's new

Holland | "smoke filled back room deals"

Northern Flash

Northern Flash

Today's Democrats are similar to Commies.
Credits
415
I'm guessing that most of us have complained from time to time about disliking all of these smoke filled back room deals between the company and the union. My thinking is that we signed a contract, period. The majority (67% of us) agreed to the language. Wouldn't changing the contract language now, be considered a "smoke filled back room deal?" We are the union! The BA's and higher ups work for US! Not the other way around. When do we stop supporting these "deals?" Do we think that these "deals" are OK, as long as it is helping ME? I consider that the "meester" attitude. I personally have always said that I will use the contract when it is in my favor and that I will take my lumps when it is not in my favor. I don't try to change the contract. We are the union! We should have a voice in any changes to the contract. I know that it would be costly for the union to have us vote on these changes, but once again, WE ARE THE UNION! The cost cannot be a big issue to the union because they don't hesitate to spend OUR dues money on all of this "high gloss toilet paper" supporting OBAMA! But, that is another topic. Maybe they should include our voice in the decision to change this contract also. We (not me) voted in favor of this contract. If they want changes in the contract, they should have to go though US. Put the changes to a vote. I just feel that WE also should be involved in any changes. Never forget WE ARE THE UNION.
 
100% right. The only thing is they (IBT) forget that they WORK for us and not the reverse. I like how NOBODY wants to say what SUPPLIMENT OR HOFFA DEAL we are to be dispatched on. Both sides don't have the 00"s to show up and settle this.
 
Northern Flash said:
I'm guessing that most of us have complained from time to time about disliking all of these smoke filled back room deals between the company and the union. My thinking is that we signed a contract, period. The majority (67% of us) agreed to the language. Wouldn't changing the contract language now, be considered a "smoke filled back room deal?" We are the union! The BA's and higher ups work for US! Not the other way around. When do we stop supporting these "deals?" Do we think that these "deals" are OK, as long as it is helping ME? I consider that the "meester" attitude. I personally have always said that I will use the contract when it is in my favor and that I will take my lumps when it is not in my favor. I don't try to change the contract. We are the union! We should have a voice in any changes to the contract. I know that it would be costly for the union to have us vote on these changes, but once again, WE ARE THE UNION! The cost cannot be a big issue to the union because they don't hesitate to spend OUR dues money on all of this "high gloss toilet paper" supporting OBAMA! But, that is another topic. Maybe they should include our voice in the decision to change this contract also. We (not me) voted in favor of this contract. If they want changes in the contract, they should have to go though US. Put the changes to a vote. I just feel that WE also should be involved in any changes. Never forget WE ARE THE UNION.
Click to expand...



Right ON!! Bro.:notworthy:


GBA:USA:
 
Demand action NOW!!

e z moni said:
Our ba tells us all the time he does not work for us he works for the local union not us.
Click to expand...

ez moni,:USA: If a BA told me that I would write a letter of complaint to the Local and the IBT explaining to them what that goofy BA said and demand action, and have the whole barn sign it.


GBA:USA:
 
We were told that the Branson, MO. meeting lasted about an hour, with T.J. telling the BAs and the company to "go back to your locals and work this out." Now.....since WE (the union) spent all of this money to send everyone to Branson, MO., couldn't that have been a little more productive? Couldn't this have been on a conference call? Here is my point linking this to this thread, If the locals and the company "go back to our locals and work this out," as T.J. instructed. Will ALL locals end up with the same DEAL? Heck NO! HERE COME SOME MORE "SMOKEFILLED BACK ROOM DEALS!:chairshot:
 
Don't remember being told to work out a deal. Was told company would tell us who and where work was going along with what bids were to be canceled or added and work out details on members affected and who would be a gaining term or loseing one. This information would be needed to make sure members would be able to follow their work as the contract calls for.Not much else was discussed since the meeting was so short.
 
suf-indy said:
Don't remember being told to work out a deal. Was told company would tell us who and where work was going along with what bids were to be canceled or added and work out details on members affected and who would be a gaining term or losing one. This information would be needed to make sure members would be able to follow their work as the contract calls for.Not much else was discussed since the meeting was so short.
Click to expand...
My point was that they were told to go "work this out", Not as you put it "work out a deal." But, if you have the effected locals in one room, it seems that the best thing to do would be to explain to ALL of them the same plan of attack. That way ALL effected locals would have the same plan, and not go back to their local and allow the company to steam roll them in any other "deal". This lack of organization from the union big boys, is exactly why every terminal has different sets of rules on every article. This IS how all of these different rules get started! Just my opinion.:hide:
 
Northern Flash said:
My point was that they were told to go "work this out", Not as you put it "work out a deal." But, if you have the effected locals in one room, it seems that the best thing to do would be to explain to ALL of them the same plan of attack. That way ALL effected locals would have the same plan, and not go back to their local and allow the company to steam roll them in any other "deal". This lack of organization from the union big boys, is exactly why every terminal has different sets of rules on every article. This IS how all of these different rules get started! Just my opinion.:hide:
Click to expand...

You`re last three sentences just about say it all!!!
 
lumpersam said:
ez moni,:USA: If a BA told me that I would write a letter of complaint to the Local and the IBT explaining to them what that goofy BA said and demand action, and have the whole barn sign it.


GBA:USA:
Click to expand...
Oh, really? I'll be looking for the letter of complaint on Monday then. This based on what I have seen at JO since day one. Our BA's have NEVER worked for US! I'm wondering if they get more money from the Teamsters, or under the table from the company! Actions speak louder than words, and YOU TELL ME, what have their (B.A.'s) actions said to you?
 
Have you "brother"?

teamster02 said:
Oh, really? I'll be looking for the letter of complaint on Monday then. This based on what I have seen at JO since day one. Our BA's have NEVER worked for US! I'm wondering if they get more money from the Teamsters, or under the table from the company! Actions speak louder than words, and YOU TELL ME, what have their (B.A.'s) actions said to you?
Click to expand...


Well, T02, what would you have to complain about any way, if I am not mistaken you are one of those in the high seniority, yes? and by your own admission you and the rest that are in the big time have it made, ever
stop to think about the lower seniority bros,? have you "brother".


GBA:USA:
 
lumpersam said:
Well, T02, what would you have to complain about any way, if I am not mistaken you are one of those in the high seniority, yes? and by your own admission you and the rest that are in the big time have it made, ever
stop to think about the lower seniority bros,? have you "brother".


GBA:USA:
Click to expand...
Well actually, lumpersam, you are mistaken. I'm in the bottom half. And what I was getting at, was that I found it ironic that you would write a letter to the IBT if the BA said he doesn't work for you, when it is plainly (and painfully) obvious that he actually doesnt work for us, yet no letter to the IBT for that? We're on the same side lumpersam, please don't let your misconceptions about me distract you from that.:beerchug:
 
I'll have one on you

teamster02 said:
Well actually, lumpersam, you are mistaken. I'm in the bottom half. And what I was getting at, was that I found it ironic that you would write a letter to the IBT if the BA said he doesn't work for you, when it is plainly (and painfully) obvious that he actually doesnt work for us, yet no letter to the IBT for that? We're on the same side lumpersam, please don't let your misconceptions about me distract you from that.:beerchug:
Click to expand...


:beerchug: Agree to disagree, I love it!!


GBA:USA:
 
it's time

maybe now some of those guy's that talk the talk will finally walk the walk..it's time to get the N.L.R.B. involved..it's a breech of contract plan and simple......:chairshot:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top