Breakdown by local

[john chesney]

Well we would at least need a finished supplement to get forced. No? We voted on a single page lol

You hope

 

[wilberforce15]

55% no, with 39% participation.

I'd guess 70% of our employees have less than six months with the company, a class of young, ignorant people entirely abandoned by the union. That's pretty awesome turnout in light of that.

 

[iruhnman630]

% that voted?

56%

 

[scratch]

 

[DELACROIX]

There is no dodge.


Bottom line....

The members had an opportunity to vote.

And the majority decided to sit out.


Watch.... how the company abuses the "low vote" Locals.

In my opinion every local was a a "low vote" grade. We lowered the bar so much that we wildly celebrate a local if it votes over 50% and 60 % would create mass hysteria.

With this contract being forced into ratification it guarantees that the constant turnover of young members who look at this job as temporary..just passing through till a real career comes will continue till 2023 and again their lack of participation will cost the rest of the membership their ability to improve language and benefits. And we scratch our heads and wonder why these subpar contracts are sneaking through.

Another issue with the coming 2023 contract will be the mass exodus of retirees who will decide to leave in 2020. We will be losing a lot of seasoned, educated voters that would affect the final outcome with the next contract. I have talk to a couple who are eligible now and a lot of them are wavering about leaving after seeing this fiasco, worried about what the Company or Union could do to steal or eliminate their future benefits.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

I have talk to a couple who are eligible now and a lot of them are wavering about leaving after seeing this fiasco, worried about what the Company or Union could do to steal or eliminate their future benefits.

They should be worried.
Screw over the young, don't expect them to care about retirees.

 

[Future]

View attachment 216927

NY standing tall!

 

[Future]

NYS governor...also getting his phone blown up .....and he is pro union ....

 

[BigUnionGuy]

In my opinion every local was a a "low vote" grade.

I think the funny part was, the 3 lowest voting Locals....

Is where the "vote no" movement was the most prevalent.

1) Local 623

2) Local 89

3) Local 177 (where the vote no FaceBook page originated from)

Another issue with the coming 2023 contract will be the mass exodus of retirees who will decide to leave in 2020. We will be losing a lot of seasoned, educated voters that would affect the final outcome with the next contract. I have talk to a couple who are eligible now and a lot of them are wavering about leaving after seeing this fiasco, worried about what the Company or Union could do to steal or eliminate their future benefits.

Hey, a $400 a month bump is a motivating factor.

As far as "stealing or eliminating" future benefits is speculation.



-Bug-

 

[BigUnionGuy]

View attachment 216927

The only problem with that picture is.... it includes Illinois.

 

[badpal]

In my opinion every local was a a "low vote" grade. We lowered the bar so much that we wildly celebrate a local if it votes over 50% and 60 % would create mass hysteria.

With this contract being forced into ratification it guarantees that the constant turnover of young members who look at this job as temporary..just passing through till a real career comes will continue till 2023 and again their lack of participation will cost the rest of the membership their ability to improve language and benefits. And we scratch our heads and wonder why these subpar contracts are sneaking through.

Another issue with the coming 2023 contract will be the mass exodus of retirees who will decide to leave in 2020. We will be losing a lot of seasoned, educated voters that would affect the final outcome with the next contract. I have talk to a couple who are eligible now and a lot of them are wavering about leaving after seeing this fiasco, worried about what the Company or Union could do to steal or eliminate their future benefits.

Yes , January of 2020 will be interesting at my center too.

 

[What'dyabringmetoday???]

I think the funny part was, the 3 lowest voting Locals....

Is where the "vote no" movement was the most prevalent.

1) Local 623

2) Local 89

3) Local 177 (where the vote no FaceBook page originated from)





Hey, a $400 a month bump is a motivating factor.

As far as "stealing or eliminating" future benefits is speculation.



-Bug-

I think it is funny that a.... supposed union leader would rather chastise locals for their voter turnout.... rather than help to get more people to vote. Of course.... I have a good idea why.... union "leaders" don't necessarily want more people voting. Lol.

 

[wilberforce15]

In my opinion every local was a a "low vote" grade. We lowered the bar so much that we wildly celebrate a local if it votes over 50% and 60 % would create mass hysteria.

With this contract being forced into ratification it guarantees that the constant turnover of young members who look at this job as temporary..just passing through till a real career comes will continue till 2023 and again their lack of participation will cost the rest of the membership their ability to improve language and benefits. And we scratch our heads and wonder why these subpar contracts are sneaking through.

Another issue with the coming 2023 contract will be the mass exodus of retirees who will decide to leave in 2020. We will be losing a lot of seasoned, educated voters that would affect the final outcome with the next contract. I have talk to a couple who are eligible now and a lot of them are wavering about leaving after seeing this fiasco, worried about what the Company or Union could do to steal or eliminate their future benefits.

This contract does nothing to guarantee constant turnover of young members.

That was guaranteed by 30 years without raises and a year without benefits.

This contract cannot be blamed for turnover of newbies, though I see why some would find that convenient. It has been the case for a while. And you can blame the last half-dozen contracts and all their voters for that, not this one.