Maybe getting rid of 2/3 isn't a good idea..

Discussion in 'UPS Union Issues' started by Utahloader, Feb 5, 2019.

  1. burrheadd

    burrheadd KING Of GIFS

    Ding Ding Ding we have a winner
     
  2. zubenelgenubi

    zubenelgenubi Well-Known Member

    To paraphrase Mussolini:

    Everything within the union,
    nothing outside the union,
    nothing against the union.
     
  3. Inthegame

    Inthegame Well-Known Member

    If you're seriously comparing a local union administration with a totalitarian govt I'm wasting my time.
     
  4. zubenelgenubi

    zubenelgenubi Well-Known Member

    What @Bubblehead said.

    I can see the flipside to the argument though. If the system were too accessible, people would be coming out of the woodworks, filing charges left and right, and it could interfere with the day to day operations of the union. People would undoubtedly use the system for political purposes. I think some sort of internal affairs department might be a happy medium.
     
  5. zubenelgenubi

    zubenelgenubi Well-Known Member

    I'm not the only one doing so, except it's the IBT, not just locals. You're only wasting your time when you refuse to acknowledge the validity of an argument simply because you disagree with it.
     
  6. Bubblehead

    Bubblehead My Senior Picture

    Maybe it is an International Union's "totalitarian administration" he is referring to, masked by a false illusion of "local autonomy"???
     
  7. BigUnionGuy

    BigUnionGuy Got the T-Shirt


    I'm confused.

    Why were you asking how to file charges and quoting the IBT Constitution ?



    Again.... what type of charges ? Or, are you looking to go on a witch hunt ?



    What type of access to the Union do you feel you need, and for what ?



    -Bug-
     
  8. UnconTROLLed

    UnconTROLLed perfection

    The IBT is very far from "grassroots" and is spiraling farther away if that's possible
    the Wal-mart of unions
     
  9. BigUnionGuy

    BigUnionGuy Got the T-Shirt


    What does that even mean ?
     
  10. Inthegame

    Inthegame Well-Known Member

    OK but he has included local unions with this...
    Then he also tries to justify an untenable position by inclusion...
    As if more than one off base opinion adds validity, which is augmented by a paraphrased Mussolini quote. But wait...he wakes up with this...
    He has once again answered his own question. Unfortunately after leaving a trail of insulting comments.

    You know as well as I, there are plenty locals doing things the right way.

    I get there are angry members, but thoughtless comments will not make any union members life better.

    The only way anything gets changed (better or worse) is through involvement.
     
  11. UnconTROLLed

    UnconTROLLed perfection

    grassroots[gras-roots, -roo ts, grahs-]
    WORD ORIGIN
    SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR grassroots ON THESAURUS.COM
    noun (used with a singular or plural verb) Also grass roots.
    the common or ordinary people, especially as contrasted with the leadership or elite of a political party, social organization, etc.; the rank and file.
     
  12. zubenelgenubi

    zubenelgenubi Well-Known Member

    I answered that already. Read back starting at page 2 of the thread, see if you can follow along.


    What type of charges? Ummm... constitutional violations? Those are the only kind of charges that the Union has the authority to address, unless I'm mistaken. Just having a philisophical discussion on the manner in which the union is run, and specifically about the ability that a member might have to hold an elected representative accountable for any constititional violations.

    Hypothetically speaking? Access to systems that would enable a member to gather the required evidence to file charges against an elected official. There would have to be probable cause, of course. But I can't seem to find any information about how to accomplish that. It seems necessary, since, as you pointed out, there is no investigative team.

    Nope, I didn't bring up locals. I did answer your questions regarding them. I wasn't quite sure why you thought local bylaws would have information about accountability for IBT officials, but since I haven't been able to get hold of mine, I couldn't verify one way or another. Article XIX of the IBT constitution does cover pretty much all levels.


    Untenable? No. I've made decent case to support @Bubblehead's assertion that the IBT is run like a dictatorship or a monarchy. You tried to counter with personal incredulity fallacy, to which I simply responded that my case is not so unreasonable that I am the only one who thinks that way. It was not meant to augment my case, simply to defend against your fallacious remark.

    I felt the quote aptly captured the spirit that seems to embody those who unquestioningly support the IBT. Or any hierarchical structure, for that matter.

    Woke up from what? Does that mean you agree that an internal affairs department is a good idea?

    I had to. No one else was even approaching an apt defense of the opposite position. I opened it up to any takers to defend the position that the IBT is not a dictatorship by asking questions about the internal accountability processes. The assertion being that in totalitarian governments the leaders are not accountable to the citizens. All I got was unrelated comments about local union bylaws, and questions about why I needed to press charges against someone. No one even came close to answering my questions until after I had to answer them myself, almost as if no one else knew the answers until I gave them.

    Are you still upset about being called silly? I already apologized for that. I was actually giving you the benefit of the doubt by suggesting you weren't being serious with your comment. Hey, if the shoe fits... I will, however, continue to strive to be more considerate of your (apparently quite fragile) feelings. Otherwise, I am unclear on this baseless accusation that I left a "trail of insulting comments"


    The conversation was not about locals, until you brought them into it.

    Seeing as though you are seemingly unaware of what the conversation is about, perhaps you could practice what you preach and put some thought into your comments.

    This is literally what the conversation is about, and you apparently admit to not being aware of that fact.

    Discussing views and thoughts about the union itself is one of many ways of getting involved. The better we can define problems, the more likely we will be able to come up with solutions. The better we understand the system, the better equipped we will be to identify problems. I am actually seeking, and welcome any information that can aid in the cause of making things better.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2019
  13. Integrity

    Integrity Binge Poster

     
  14. BigUnionGuy

    BigUnionGuy Got the T-Shirt


    Now I get it.

    A philosophical witch hunt.... no real evidence of wrong doing, but a "what if"

    type of situation. Life is too short for this nonsense.
     
  15. Inthegame

    Inthegame Well-Known Member

    Locals have been mentioned by others throughout this thread and you didn't specify your query was strictly about charges against IBT officials early on. You also suggested locals were included with the "not just locals" retort.
    Anyway, bylaws have the charging mechanism spelled out.
    Lets review facts, not opinions. I have no idea about your "case", as you haven't expounded on it. But I believe your position is unreasonable.

    While I respect Bubble I believe the connection he's going for is strained and incongruous. There is no "tenable" position in defense of comparing a dictatorship or monarchy to our representational form of union governance.

    However disappointed any member may be in any contract issue or in your theory of misbehavior, the members always have the final voice through their vote, both on contracts or on the officials who negotiated same.

    Members also vote on delegates that form the Constitutional "rules", including voting procedures (2/3's, 50%) and internal accountability mechanisms.

    So yes, we as members have the accountability we've allowed through our vote.

    Name me one monarchy or totalitarian dictatorship that has that?
    Agreed, and as long as the discussion includes getting actively involved I'm good. In my experience, the best way to learn about the system (and leaders) is attending local union meetings.
     
  16. zubenelgenubi

    zubenelgenubi Well-Known Member

    Nobody forced you to add nothing to the conversation.
     
  17. zubenelgenubi

    zubenelgenubi Well-Known Member

    Do you think "misbehavior" on the part of elected officials is only a theory? Are you saying it's never happened? If not, do you think it has never gone undetected?

    Most dictatorships hold elections to avoid backlash and civil unrest.
    How autocrats rig elections to stay in power – and get away with it

    Current Dictators - List of Dictators In 2019

    Why do dictators hold fake elections?
     
  18. zubenelgenubi

    zubenelgenubi Well-Known Member

    Which is facilitated through conversation and education.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
    • List
  19. Inthegame

    Inthegame Well-Known Member

    Clank...looks like you hit the goal post...again.
    Unfortunately, you've proven you have never been involved in any of your local's elections.
    A shame as you're missing perhaps the most genuine, continual displays of real democracy.
     
  20. zubenelgenubi

    zubenelgenubi Well-Known Member

    I satisfactorily met your challenge to name a dictatorship that holds elections. If I hit the goal post it's because you moved it. It's funny, almost all of your arguments are fallacious, up to the point where you actually incorporate the name of a common logical fallacy into your argument.

    The fact that you continue to bring up local elections helps to bolster my position that the internal mechanism for holding IBT officials accountable exists in name only, or, at very least is inaccessible to regular members. If elections are truly the only way an official can be held accountable, then an average member must be willing to become one. That means an average member has no real recourse against an elected official. That reality supports the assertion of the dictatorial nature of the union.