grimreaper
caddy
- Credits
- 372
It said if the UE position was abolished then people would go back to where they came from. I don't think they have a choice here, but I may be wrong. The major issue here to me is that this is exactly what the company wanted in the first place, its been stated to many of us by several different local leaders in different states. Did we just get mislead during the contract, by our own leaders, to get this put through now? They knew we wouldn't vote this current proposal in with any contract. I bet the same guys that were so upset about the road loosing work because of the UE position, that was voted in by the membership, will think now that the so called leaders are changing the contract around to take work away from the city, its all fair now. I for one will NEVER vote for any of the current leaders we have, they can't be trusted, thats a fact. It wasn't fair before and its not fair now, if this goes through. The big difference between each one is that one was voted in by the full membership and the other one will be put in the full memberships back. I'm a city guy that won't be effected either way but this whole thing hasn't been handled correctly from the start and we all know it. Thats the way I see it, please convince me I'm wrong.
it says would allow retreat rights back to the road ... not forced but we dont have to worry about it now ..... ????