LOCAL 391 is GARBAGE

[Overpaid Union Thug]

No BA refuses to process grievances that they believe have merit. It has nothing to do with language they believe in. It has everything to do with grievances that they believe they can win. To pursue BS grievances would be a waste of time and real dues payers money.

Ours does and doesn’t deny it. Whether you want to believe it or not.

 

[WannaBeFeeder]

So we were just told that we are now only getting two 8hr request per month. Not that we get them, but we can only request 2 whether we get them or not. Doug Irving threw almost all of the 8hr grievances out? What a ing joke. We went months with no one getting 8hr days and thanks to the teamsters we never will again. So this doug guy is telling us that we don’t GET 2 a month but we only get to request 2 a month. local 391.

Sounds like money !!!!!! All work no play

 

[Bubblehead]

Ours does and doesn’t deny it. Whether you want to believe it or not.

Why do you accept that?

 

[CleanUpHitter]

Ours does and doesn’t deny it. Whether you want to believe it or not.

So what has your Local EB done about this? You have taken this issue to them, right? Is this an elected or appointed BA? Are you planning to campaign against him/her/them at your next LU election?

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Why do you accept that?

I don’t.

So what has your Local EB done about this? You have taken this issue to them, right? Is this an elected or appointed BA? Are you planning to campaign against him/her/them at your next LU election?

Nothing yet. Some of us are gathering evidence. We want as much as possible. They were all elected. I don’t know about anyone else involved but I don’t want to run for any position. I just want those that have been entrusted with those positions to do their duties whether they like them or not. I’ve never been a steward so it wouldn’t make since to run for BA anyway.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

I don’t know about anyone else involved but I don’t want to run for any position.

I'm genuinely sorry to hear that.


I mean.... who wants to put up with all that ?

It's so much easier to sit back, complain, and be a Monday morning quarterback.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

I'm genuinely sorry to hear that.


I mean.... who wants to put up with all that ?

It's so much easier to sit back, complain, and be a Monday morning quarterback.

Do you try out for QB when your favorite football team’s QB is stinking up the field? Do you run for POTUS, Senate, Congress when you are unhappy with yours? Or do you only apply that standard to everyone else in unions because you’ve already ran? How convenient.

This is the standard response from some of the diehards here. First move is to defend those in power. Maybe that’s a benefit of the doubt thing. Which is understandable.

But then it moves onto the standard “Run to replace them or shut up….derp derp derp” nonsense. It’s pathetic but that deflection from the real issue always says allot about the current state and mindset of our union and many of our reps.

And yes, I’ve expressed interest in running for steward, or at least having an election for others interested, in the past. But was told we can’t simply call an “arbitrary” random election just because we’re not happy with a steward. See what we’re dealing with here?

 

[Bubblehead]

Do you try out for QB when your favorite football team’s QB is stinking up the field? Do you run for POTUS, Senate, Congress when you are unhappy with yours? Or do you only apply that standard to everyone else in unions because you’ve already ran? How convenient.

This is the standard response from some of the diehards here. First move is to defend those in power. Maybe that’s a benefit of the doubt thing. Which is understandable. But then it moves onto the standard “Run to replace them or shut up….derp derp derp” nonsense. It’s pathetic but that deflection from the real issue says allot about the current state and mindset of our union and our reps.

And yes, I’ve expressed interest in running for steward, or at least having an election for others interested, in the past. But was told we can’t simply call an “arbitrary” random election just because we’re not happy with a steward. See what we’re dealing with here?

In my local an elected steward holds the position for a minimum of one year.

After that, if a petition signed by 10 members in good standing is produced, it triggers a sign up period for candidates and a ballot box installed subsequently.

Pretty good system in my opinion.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

In my local an elected steward holds the position for a minimum of one year.

After that, if a petition signed by 10 members in good standing is produced, it triggers a sign up period for candidates and a ballot box installed subsequently.

Pretty good system in my opinion.

That sounds reasonable.

 

[CleanUpHitter]

Forget the steward election. Your problem is with your BA and EB. If there is someone out there who can do the job better, let them put their name up to run for office. Don't tell me yatta yatta about running for office. I know of many locals who have had rank and file members (non stewards) run for office and win. If the folks in power aren't doing the job, then it is on the membership to replace them. Sorry but just bitching on the internet is not enough. The folks back in the 80s and 90s didn't have the internet. They did something crazy. They talked to members about their concerns then ran for office to fix those problems. If you don't want to make a change, then shut the @#$%%^ up. With all due respect of course.

 

[542thruNthru]

Forget the steward election. Your problem is with your BA and EB. If there is someone out there who can do the job better, let them put their name up to run for office. Don't tell me yatta yatta about running for office. I know of many locals who have had rank and file members (non stewards) run for office and win. If the folks in power aren't doing the job, then it is on the membership to replace them. Sorry but just bitching on the internet is not enough. The folks back in the 80s and 90s didn't have the internet. They did something crazy. They talked to members about their concerns then ran for office to fix those problems. If you don't want to make a change, then shut the @#$%%^ up. With all due respect of course.

Wait... So is what was said true or not?

You're defending your local and that's fine but you haven't given any information on what went down. So what happen?

 

[CleanUpHitter]

Actually, it's not my Local 542, but I'm familiar with that Local. From what was said here, they appear to be wrong on the interpretation of the language in 37. That doesn't make them evil or malicious or in violation of any law or statute. I'm sure with some counsel from the Art 37 Chair, they will apply the language appropriately from here forward. I hold the position that the complainant here is a scab and anything he/she says is subject to verification. BTW, haven't heard from that scab in a minute or 2.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

This is the standard response from some of the diehards here. First move is to defend those in power. Maybe that’s a benefit of the doubt thing. Which is understandable.

But then it moves onto the standard “Run to replace them or shut up….derp derp derp” nonsense. It’s pathetic but that deflection from the real issue always says allot about the current state and mindset of our union and many of our reps.

Annnnnnnd….here’s another one……

Forget the steward election. Your problem is with your BA and EB. If there is someone out there who can do the job better, let them put their name up to run for office. Don't tell me yatta yatta about running for office. I know of many locals who have had rank and file members (non stewards) run for office and win. If the folks in power aren't doing the job, then it is on the membership to replace them. Sorry but just bitching on the internet is not enough. The folks back in the 80s and 90s didn't have the internet. They did something crazy. They talked to members about their concerns then ran for office to fix those problems. If you don't want to make a change, then shut the @#$%%^ up. With all due respect of course.

With all due respect of course.

 

[wilberforce15]

Local 391 has hourlies sent home on every shift, supervisors working full shifts as hourlies in their place, and the union defending the company on the point. Grievances get traded on this so that they can win some other minor victory, while management takes stewards out for dinners.

391 is useless from top to bottom.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Local 391 has hourlies sent home on every shift, supervisors working full shifts as hourlies in their place, and the union defending the company on the point. Grievances get traded on this so that they can win some other minor victory, while management takes stewards out for dinners.

391 is useless from top to bottom.

Apparently the only solution is for you to run against them and fix it yourself…or shut up. LMFAO.

 

[Just A UPS Guy]

So, it's not your local, so you really can't possibly know the ins and outs of the goings on there, but you defend it like it's your kid sister. I'm not being an ass, but there really is no ambiguity in the language addressing this issue. I don't feel like there's room for interpretation in this matter. It seems fishy to me.

That said, eff that guy if he's a scab. Eff 'em.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

So, it's not your local, so you really can't possibly know the ins and outs of the goings on there, but you defend it like it's your kid sister. I'm not being an ass, but there really is no ambiguity in the language addressing this issue. I don't feel like there's room for interpretation in this matter. It seems fishy to me.

That said, that guy if he's a scab. 'em.

I keep seeing it here but I’m not sure “scab” is correct. “Troll” if anything. Isn’t a scab someone that refuses to go on strike? I’ve seen scab used to describe nonunion members too. But “freeloader” seems more accurate. And they are an everyday nuisance since they always seem to take full advantage of what they freeload for.

 

[wilberforce15]

Apparently the only solution is for you to run against them and fix it yourself…or shut up. LMFAO.

The membership supports the current slate.

That's because the union sells out the sup working grievances to save the jobs of drivers that truly deserve the axe.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

The membership supports the current slate.

Most of ours couldn’t name one person on our slate. Or point any of them out in a crowd except for our BA.

That's because the union sells out the sup working grievances to save the jobs of drivers that truly deserve the axe.

That’s absolutely pathetic. And infuriating when you know your grievances that were 100% legit (with crystal clear language backed by prior rulings in favor of duplicate grievances) were tossed in exchange for reinstating an employee that has been nothing but trouble since they obtained seniority.

 

[wilberforce15]

Most of ours couldn’t name one person on our slate. Or point any of them out in a crowd except for our BA.

That’s absolutely pathetic. And infuriating when you know your grievances that were 100% legit (with crystal clear language backed by prior rulings in favor of duplicate grievances) were tossed in exchange for reinstating an employee that has been nothing but trouble since they obtained seniority.

And yet, more voters sympathize with the FT drivers getting their jobs saved than the PTers getting their hours taken.

This is life.