IBT on the cameras

Whither

Scofflaw
IMG_2308.jpg
 
During the frequent reboots of the Diad6 have you noticed the "PRISM" logo that pops up? Want to know what that may entail?

"The name PRISM may remind readers of the National Security Agency (NSA) program of the same name that became well known throughout the United States following the Edward Snowden revelations. Given this association, it is worth noting that the NSA, as well as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), are now officially part of Operation Warp Speed and appear to be playing a role in the development of Warp Speed’s “pharmacovigilance surveillance system.”

Here's the whole article-- this goes beyond mere audio and video recording Brothers and Sisters:


There may be more sensors including IR based in these Diads than we think...and why build in a sensor system for monitoring health if certain jabs aren't mandatory-- unless you're planning on making them so?? And who's tracking all this biometric data? Most likely it's being SOLD --and apparently without consent! HIPAA laws anyone?
 

Coldworld

Well-Known Member
Anything. I had a solid aluminum bulkhead door, no vent. It was like an inferno in back.
Your own sauna…remember thinking it’s so hot outside how could you sweat any more….then you open that bulkhead and go in the back for a minute just to find out it is possible
 
Last edited:

Whither

Scofflaw
Was just getting on to post this. I wonder what the "rally" will entail.
It'll surely be a symbolic action, of course, e.g., a protest, since the 804 also has a "no strike clause". I was just reading through their supplement yesterday.

I have had some success at firing up some coworkers by pointing out: over 2 years ago our brothers and sisters in Local 988 alleged that the company had made a serious violation of the contract by installing the damn cameras without bargaining. In the meantime, as that grievance got deadlocked at every step of the procedure, the company was allowed to continue installing the damn cameras across the country. However, if the company alleges that any of us have seriously violated policy and/or the contract, they will take our badges, walk us to the gate, and we will not be allowed to work until we win (or get reinstated) at a grievance hearing. In what world is that the result of a fair agreement?

I say, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Either the company must remove all cameras, and cease and desist from installing more, until it is proven innocent at a hearing, or the company must grant us the same lenience, e.g., all terminations must be "working terminations" all the way up to arbitration, until a decision is reached.
 

zubenelgenubi

I'm a star
It'll surely be a symbolic action, of course, e.g., a protest, since the 804 also has a "no strike clause". I was just reading through their supplement yesterday.

I have had some success at firing up some coworkers by pointing out: over 2 years ago our brothers and sisters in Local 988 alleged that the company had made a serious violation of the contract by installing the damn cameras without bargaining. In the meantime, as that grievance got deadlocked at every step of the procedure, the company was allowed to continue installing the damn cameras across the country. However, if the company alleges that any of us have seriously violated policy and/or the contract, they will take our badges, walk us to the gate, and we will not be allowed to work until we win (or get reinstated) at a grievance hearing. In what world is that the result of a fair agreement?

I say, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Either the company must remove all cameras, and cease and desist from installing more, until it is proven innocent at a hearing, or the company must grant us the same lenience, e.g., all terminations must be "working terminations" all the way up to arbitration, until a decision is reached.

I don't know if I'd want to keep working under those conditions. I'd go for guaranteed back pay.
 

Coldworld

Well-Known Member
It'll surely be a symbolic action, of course, e.g., a protest, since the 804 also has a "no strike clause". I was just reading through their supplement yesterday.

I have had some success at firing up some coworkers by pointing out: over 2 years ago our brothers and sisters in Local 988 alleged that the company had made a serious violation of the contract by installing the damn cameras without bargaining. In the meantime, as that grievance got deadlocked at every step of the procedure, the company was allowed to continue installing the damn cameras across the country. However, if the company alleges that any of us have seriously violated policy and/or the contract, they will take our badges, walk us to the gate, and we will not be allowed to work until we win (or get reinstated) at a grievance hearing. In what world is that the result of a fair agreement?

I say, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Either the company must remove all cameras, and cease and desist from installing more, until it is proven innocent at a hearing, or the company must grant us the same lenience, e.g., all terminations must be "working terminations" all the way up to arbitration, until a decision is reached.
DHL was able to fight these cameras…fwiw
 

UnionStrong

Sorry, but I don’t care anymore.
It'll surely be a symbolic action, of course, e.g., a protest, since the 804 also has a "no strike clause". I was just reading through their supplement yesterday.

I have had some success at firing up some coworkers by pointing out: over 2 years ago our brothers and sisters in Local 988 alleged that the company had made a serious violation of the contract by installing the damn cameras without bargaining. In the meantime, as that grievance got deadlocked at every step of the procedure, the company was allowed to continue installing the damn cameras across the country. However, if the company alleges that any of us have seriously violated policy and/or the contract, they will take our badges, walk us to the gate, and we will not be allowed to work until we win (or get reinstated) at a grievance hearing. In what world is that the result of a fair agreement?

I say, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Either the company must remove all cameras, and cease and desist from installing more, until it is proven innocent at a hearing, or the company must grant us the same lenience, e.g., all terminations must be "working terminations" all the way up to arbitration, until a decision is reached.
There should be some injunction against using them until it’s arbitrated.
 

UnionStrong

Sorry, but I don’t care anymore.
That was my first thought originally, but does not sound like O’Brien wants to arbitrate it. He wants to negotiate it. He must feel the threat of Labor strife would be more reliable than an arbitrator.
An injunction until it’s decided one way or another. It’s galling that they would just install them.
 
Top