If this contract passes, are you willing to vote out your officers as a consequence?

[Inthegame]

Re: If this contract passes, are you willing to vote out your officers as a consequen

The "union" reps were the "first" to bring "MISINFORMATION" to the members the day the T.A. was announced. Since then, getting good information has been tough and our LOCAL OFFICERS have avoided answering the tough questions.

In local 396, our own Principle officer has FAILED to address the membership and recommend the contract for approval. Instead, In his first general membership meeting, he kept telling the membership that "he" didnt have all the information and "he" was waiting for it. He couldnt answer questions, because he made it clear that he didnt know the answers. In the second general membership meeting, once again, he tough questions by telling the membership that "details" were still forthcoming.

In the "contract" meeting, they gave less than a weeks notice to the membership (less than 5 days) and when the meeting came, our principle officer "passed" on addressing the membership and instead , brought in Andy M to answer questions on health care. It was clear Ron H had NO CLUE what was going to happen to our healthcare, and in an attempt to Dodge responsibility, he brought in Andy M to take the heat for him.

The members, then have to rely on other sources of information, and for this reason , could vote YES, because they dont fully understand the ramifications of this contract.

Our business agents came to the yards in the first week of the T.A. announcement and told "US" face to face that our insurance WASNT going to change. When asked ( and I asked TWICE) the business agent said "YES, there will be no changes to your health care"..."you are keeping what you got"...

NOW, given the facts, would you call that a LIE and/or MISREPRESENTATION?

He did NOT tell us that we were losing our company health care plan and moving to the C6 plan.

We did not find out until two weeks later that this was untrue.

Do we hold the local responsible for these lies and if so, shouldnt we hold the principle officer responsible for allowing it in the first place, since when pressured, our agent said this "LISTEN, I'm ONLY HERE TO TELL YOU WHAT I WAS TOLD TO TELL YOU".

Think about it.

Peace

TOS

And your campaign for office begins...

 

[MangoMango]

Re: If this contract passes, are you willing to vote out your officers as a consequen

Good points. I am southwest also, and majority of hub is no, with a few boneheads saying they voted yes, but didn't read TA. lol

 

[sigreq]

The "union" reps were the "first" to bring "MISINFORMATION" to the members the day the T.A. was announced. Since then, getting good information has been tough and our LOCAL OFFICERS have avoided answering the tough questions.

In local 396, our own Principle officer has FAILED to address the membership and recommend the contract for approval. Instead, In his first general membership meeting, he kept telling the membership that "he" didnt have all the information and "he" was waiting for it. He couldnt answer questions, because he made it clear that he didnt know the answers. In the second general membership meeting, once again, he tough questions by telling the membership that "details" were still forthcoming.

In the "contract" meeting, they gave less than a weeks notice to the membership (less than 5 days) and when the meeting came, our principle officer "passed" on addressing the membership and instead , brought in Andy M to answer questions on health care. It was clear Ron H had NO CLUE what was going to happen to our healthcare, and in an attempt to Dodge responsibility, he brought in Andy M to take the heat for him.

The members, then have to rely on other sources of information, and for this reason , could vote YES, because they dont fully understand the ramifications of this contract.

Our business agents came to the yards in the first week of the T.A. announcement and told "US" face to face that our insurance WASNT going to change. When asked ( and I asked TWICE) the business agent said "YES, there will be no changes to your health care"..."you are keeping what you got"...

NOW, given the facts, would you call that a LIE and/or MISREPRESENTATION?

He did NOT tell us that we were losing our company health care plan and moving to the C6 plan.

We did not find out until two weeks later that this was untrue.

Do we hold the local responsible for these lies and if so, shouldnt we hold the principle officer responsible for allowing it in the first place, since when pressured, our agent said this "LISTEN, I'm ONLY HERE TO TELL YOU WHAT I WAS TOLD TO TELL YOU".

Think about it.

Peace

TOS

And your campaign for office begins...

Kissin' hands and shakin' babies!!

 

[104Feeder]

Re: If this contract passes, are you willing to vote out your officers as a consequen

I blame our lack of solidarity, not the Union officers. I think Andy M did the best he could with a bad situation. We have no one even close to being able to replace him so I wouldn't work for his ouster (the TDU Slate that pops up every now and again is a complete joke. We would be better off digging our own lime pit & shooting each other in the head hoping we fell into it.

I'd only consider running myself if Hoax agreed to be my secretary & wear a french maids outfit.