Discussion in 'UPS Union Issues' started by Time for change, Oct 9, 2018.
Gave you a beer. This needed its own thread and not buried six pages into the other one I saw it in.
I like this guy Respect.
Tyler Binder? Lol he tries
If only our leadership tried half as hard....
He very well might have a shot. The union plays the word of mouth card alot against management as long as it is documented with time and date. As for management asking if/how people voted it COULD be percieved as vote tampering. Will be interesting to see how this turns out.
Poor little Tyler Binder, should read the IBT constitution.
He keeps trying to blame Denis T, who is just doing as he was told.
"The General President shall have authority to interpret the Constitution and laws of the International Union, including the authority to interpret theBylaws of subordinate bodies, and to decide all questions of law thereunder between meetings of the General Executive Board."
All of these 7 IBT Vice President's who have written letters asking for an
emergency Executive Board meeting, are doing it for show.
Don't think Hoffa hasn't consulted with the IBT's legal team.
Of course he does. He is on a forum like you! HA
It's starting to look like that's all the union is "...for show.".
Sure, the General President has the authority to make interpretations and decisions. The question everybody has right now is: Why make such interpretations and decisions that are clearly in favor of the Company and not the majority of voting members when he doesn't have to?
If people remember, the first thing the IBT did before contract negotiations
started was send UPS a copy of the IBT constitution. And they can read.
What were the other options ?
Call a strike.... when you have the potential for 120,000 non-voters cross
the picket line ? No one is to blame but the members.
Blame Ron Carey and TDU, for putting the 50% 2/3 language in the constitution.
Why call a strike? The Company never said it was a last/best offer. National leadership should put on their big boy pants and deal with the issues members have with the Contract.
The majority of the UPS members (non-voters) didn't have a problem with it.
How much easier could the IBT make it to vote ?
Before the change, it was a super majority to vote down a contract,regardless of participation
This Tyler B guy is a clown.
That being the case, the contract still would have passed.
Not voting on something only means you didn’t vote on something. Not that you endorse the issue at hand.
And the ease of the voting process doesn’t really have anything to do with what leadership should do now anyway.
So, the Union should capitulate to the demands of the minority ?
You can't assume the non-voters "...didn't have a problem with it.".
Maybe the non-voters:
-saw their efforts as fruitless or;
-were misled by other influences.
Separate names with a comma.