"BROTHERHOOD" in International Brotherhood of Teamsters has been Broken-RIP 2013

Stonefish

Stonefish

Well-Known Member
twoweeled said:
You are exactly right. It was supposed to have been the best we can get for all. Now, it's the least best proposal, we can get to pass. First vote a bit under acceptance, the second vote, a bit over for acceptance. The strategy or where are the most votes to swing the vote is a strategy we expect from the company. They unfortunate truth, is that our own union is using this same strategy on us.
Overwhelming acceptance will never happen again, with this administration. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

I guess it's all a matter of opinion. We disagree with each other which is ok.
This administration is here for a while. Deal with it.
 
Stonefish

Stonefish

Well-Known Member
twoweeled said:
Undoubtedly a big divide now. Many of the brothers who voted yes, were not happy with this. But the plan to drag this out pass peak was successful. many or us seen it and knew it was happening. What? Are we really going to threaten a strike in January? What, the Union didn't think, 'gee, we have to get this done with enough time to threaten a strike in late October, or early November at the latest! Were battling two teams. the company, and our international. Wouldn't it be ironic, if the great works of James Hoffa SR, were totally destroyed by his son? They say the apple doesn't fall far from the tree? Well this apple must have caught a good roll!
Click to expand...

The cold reality is the vast majority of our coworkers wouldn't strike. In 97 when we were on strike people were close to crossing and both sides knew it. You do also if you were on the line. If people don't stand together it puts all of us in a bad situation. People now have the problem of living paycheck to paycheck and we all know it. The I can't afford to strike attitude is crap. That is the real problem you can't blame that on the Union.
 
Stonefish

Stonefish

Well-Known Member
twoweeled said:
I agree with everything you said. It's so true that people don't care until it happens to them. By then, it's too late. Sad, but true. But I guess i'm of the belief there is a point, where someone has to do the right thing. Taking care of retirees I believe falls in there. We can't rely on the company to care one iota for an active employee, or even less a retiree. My feeling is, the Union is our ONLY HOPE, for caring for our active and retirees. If the Union doesn't step up for them, THEN NO ONE WILL. just my opinion.
Click to expand...
And I respect your opinion.
 
Stonefish

Stonefish

Well-Known Member
twoweeled said:
You are 100% correct on everything. However, the reality is, it is becoming impossible to get a group to stand up and stay up. In my local, everybody's retreating into their shells. Our grievances often are met with a promise of not to do it again. "They said they don't wanna pay it". "It's their company, they can do pretty much what they want to do". Sounds like your local might be more aggressive in grievances.
Click to expand...

Again that is the problem if no one stands up for themselves people walk over everybody. When we stand together we are a union. There is no way in hell I would accept it's their company, they can pretty much do what they want. They can only do that if the members let it happen and let both sides walk on them. You are the a teamster act like it.
 
Stonefish

Stonefish

Well-Known Member
Ouch said:
Our local is pretty strong. Our local is also willing to push a grievance up the ladder if thats what it takes. It should be up to you if the company pays a grievance or not. You should tell your ba that you want paid on your grievances and to do what it takes. The company doesnt have the authority to decide whether or not they pay a grievance. Push the issue then if you dont get results that opens up more avenues for you to pursue. Good luck and stay with it. You can make a change. Don't give up.
Click to expand...

Hell yea
 
twoweeled

twoweeled

Well-Known Member
[ifquote="Stonefish, post: 1242406, member: 50401"]The cold reality is the vast majority of our coworkers wouldn't strike. In 97 when we were on strike people were close to crossing and both sides knew it. You do also if you were on the line. If people don't stand together it puts all of us in a bad situation. People now have the problem of living paycheck to paycheck and we all know it. The I can't afford to strike attitude is crap. That is the real problem you can't blame that on the Union.[/quote]
if people don't wish to strike, your right, I can't blame that on the union. but if the union cannot see fast enough ahead, to make sure if we do strike, it will be at a prime strategic point in time - this I can blame on the union.
 
Catatonic

Catatonic

Nine Lives
twoweeled said:
[ifquote="Stonefish, post: 1242406, member: 50401"]The cold reality is the vast majority of our coworkers wouldn't strike. In 97 when we were on strike people were close to crossing and both sides knew it. You do also if you were on the line. If people don't stand together it puts all of us in a bad situation. People now have the problem of living paycheck to paycheck and we all know it. The I can't afford to strike attitude is crap. That is the real problem you can't blame that on the Union.
if people don't wish to strike, your right, I can't blame that on the union. but if the union cannot see fast enough ahead, to make sure if we do strike, it will be at a prime strategic point in time - this I can blame on the union.
Click to expand...

You are the Union!

PS - Work on your "quoting" skills.
 
twoweeled

twoweeled

Well-Known Member
Stonefish said:
That's a good excuse people use for sitting on their hands. Blame it on someone else.
Click to expand...

One of the main reasons of the Union is to provide organization along with leadership. If the Union is not providing these things, then what exactly do we need the Union for? if it's as simple as "lets all stand together and fight them", then what exactly is the union needed for. The Union has been, and continues to be very well organized at collecting dues. Anyone notice what a good and effective job, the Union is doing at collecting dues?
No, it takes a lot more than the Union sitting on their hands, waiting for us to stand together, singing kumbaya, organizing ourselves.
 
twoweeled

twoweeled

Well-Known Member
twoweeled said:
[ifquote="Stonefish, post: 1242406, member: 50401"]The cold reality is the vast majority of our coworkers wouldn't strike. In 97 when we were on strike people were close to crossing and both sides knew it. You do also if you were on the line. If people don't stand together it puts all of us in a bad situation. People now have the problem of living paycheck to paycheck and we all know it. The I can't afford to strike attitude is crap. That is the real problem you can't blame that on the Union.
Click to expand...
[/quote]

(My last post was on a phone and came out wrong)
I'm not sure about what you consider the cold reality (ie The cold reality is the vast majority of our coworkers wouldn't strike). I'll just say maybe it's accurate, but maybe not. It was not up to the International to decide in advance if we probably wouldn't strike or not. It should have been the RESPONSIBILITY of the international to allow the members to decide if we chose to strike or not. In addition, the International should have had the sense to think ahead and provide it's members with the best possible climate to strike. Striking in January is the WORSE possible time to strike, and that is very much what was presented to us. Anyone who has been with this company more than a couple of years knows, To strike in January is about as stupid a move as could ever be made - and it was totally irresponsible of the international to put us in that situation.
I for example would be willing to strike, BUT NOT IN JANUARY!! Personally, I believe this was planned to detour us from striking. Nobody willing to strike? I'm not as sure as you are about that, but I am positive, the company and the Union didn't want to see a strike and did everything in their power to see that didn't happen.

As for your second opinion. "In 97 when we were on strike people were close to crossing and both sides knew it". I don't know what you consider close. a couple of days? If that's the case, I think the company would have held out if it were just a couple of days more. I don't know, how long till enough people would have started crossing, and I doubt you do either. I believe, if it would have been close, the company would have held out. The main damage had already been done. Difficult for me to opine on the second part.
 
twoweeled

twoweeled

Well-Known Member
twoweeled said:
[ifquote="Stonefish, post: 1242406, member: 50401"]The cold reality is the vast majority of our coworkers wouldn't strike. In 97 when we were on strike people were close to crossing and both sides knew it. You do also if you were on the line. If people don't stand together it puts all of us in a bad situation. People now have the problem of living paycheck to paycheck and we all know it. The I can't afford to strike attitude is crap. That is the real problem you can't blame that on the Union.
Click to expand...


(My last post was on a phone and came out wrong)
I'm not sure about what you consider the cold reality (ie The cold reality is the vast majority of our coworkers wouldn't strike). I'll just say maybe it's accurate, but maybe not. It was not up to the International to decide in advance if we probably wouldn't strike or not. It should have been the RESPONSIBILITY of the international to allow the members to decide if we chose to strike or not. In addition, the International should have had the sense to think ahead and provide it's members with the best possible climate to strike. Striking in January is the WORSE possible time to strike, and that is very much what was presented to us. Anyone who has been with this company more than a couple of years knows, To strike in January is about as stupid a move as could ever be made - and it was totally irresponsible of the international to put us in that situation.
I for example would be willing to strike, BUT NOT IN JANUARY!! Personally, I believe this was planned to detour us from striking. Nobody willing to strike? I'm not as sure as you are about that, but I am positive, the company and the Union didn't want to see a strike and did everything in their power to see that didn't happen. This I can blame on the Union

As for your second opinion. "In 97 when we were on strike people were close to crossing and both sides knew it". I don't know what you consider close. a couple of days? If that's the case, I think the company would have held out if it were just a couple of days more. I don't know, how long till enough people would have started crossing, and I doubt you do either. I believe, if it would have been close, the company would have held out. The main damage had already been done. Difficult for me to opine on the second part.


Read more: http://www.browncafe.com/community/...n-broken-rip-2013.350924/page-7#ixzz2pRnuHph6
 

Similar threads

T
Please Consider
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
6K
Thebrownblob
Thebrownblob
Whither
Make the Teamsters dangerous again
17 18 19
Replies
369
Views
32K
TheDudeAbides92
T
ROBO MOD
UPS And International Brotherhood Of Teamsters Reach Tentative New National Master UPS...
Replies
0
Views
3K
ROBO MOD
ROBO MOD
ROBO MOD
UPS And The International Brotherhood Of Teamsters Begin Contract Negotiations
Replies
3
Views
6K
Jkloc420
Jkloc420
Oceanview
Teamster brothers and sisters?? Or me’sters
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
Wally
Wally
Top