I completely agree!The man was fired for trying to be transparent with the membership and for his openness to striking!
So we are supposed to think he doesn't have a right to speak his mind now, again?
I completely agree!The man was fired for trying to be transparent with the membership and for his openness to striking!
So we are supposed to think he doesn't have a right to speak his mind now, again?
Any guesses on how much money was spent by the IBT on convincing us that we should vote yes?
The man was fired
That’s fine that it’s legal but doesn’t make it right, and just another big reason this pos is getting voted down. Plus they shut down all member comments on social media then the vote yes blitz. Anger is rightfully mounting.The IBT General President doesn't need permission to do this.
When a Local or the IBT is running an organizing drive, who do you think pays for
all the literature that is used to sway potential new members into joining ?
If he was fired, he would be looking for a job. He was appointed and summarily removed.
My whole problem with this letter, it is a communication relating to the private business
of the Union and shouldn't be made for public consumption. Now, all the members can see
it as well as the general public.
It's politically motivated.... almost to the point of being a publicity stunt.
-Bug-
"Fired" meant relieved of duty, asked to resign a post or office, and told "your services are no longer needed, you can leave".The IBT General President doesn't need permission to do this.
When a Local or the IBT is running an organizing drive, who do you think pays for
all the literature that is used to sway potential new members into joining ?
If he was fired, he would be looking for a job. He was appointed and summarily removed.
My whole problem with this letter, it is a communication relating to the private business
of the Union and shouldn't be made for public consumption. Now, all the members can see
it as well as the general public.
It's politically motivated.... almost to the point of being a publicity stunt.
-Bug-
The IBT General President doesn't need permission to do this.
When a Local or the IBT is running an organizing drive, who do you think pays for
all the literature that is used to sway potential new members into joining ?
If he was fired, he would be looking for a job. He was appointed and summarily removed.
My whole problem with this letter, it is a communication relating to the private business
of the Union and shouldn't be made for public consumption. Now, all the members can see
it as well as the general public.
It's politically motivated.... almost to the point of being a publicity stunt.
-Bug-
One would think “the greatest contract ever” would sell itself?Is there any dollar amount that would cause you concern regarding selling the greatest contract ever to the members?
I don't have any problem with Sean when he is acting as a pit bull for the Teamsters. I still wish he'd been our lead negotiator. Had that happened I highly doubt any more info regarding the ongoing negotiations would have been released.Maybe Sean knew it was wrong then but needed the straw that broke the camels back? I highly doubt, matter of fact, I know there have been many other issues that lead Sean to break ties. It happens all the time in life, in politics, in the work place. What boggles my mind is having people that want to handcuff others into thinking a certain way. People saying Sean didn’t have a problem with this or that when he was with Hoffa, yet people didn’t have a problem with Sean when he was the pit bull for Hoffa either. 2 way street.
Because he doesn't need to use cheap tricks, as he's better than that.And what's wrong with seizing any opportunity to score political points?
I don't have any problem with Sean when he is acting as a pit bull for the Teamsters. I still wish he'd been our lead negotiator. Had that happened I highly doubt any more info regarding the ongoing negotiations would have been released.
We will disagree on this but I see this letter as a clear political opportunity, more beneficial for his future interests rather than for members.
Because he doesn't need to use cheap tricks, as he's better than that.
During an election cycle I agree. But right now, we're attempting to get a contract, not elect the next GP.
That’s fine that it’s legal but doesn’t make it right
Plus they shut down all member comments on social media
Is there any dollar amount that would cause you concern regarding selling the greatest contract ever to the members?
Not to try and diminish your (or any members) concerns....
It's just not part of the equation.
They would have been wise to listen. Our concerns will be part of the equation on October 6th.