New tdu article on halt to ratification

Delivery!!!

Well-Known Member
Just saw an article on tdu, states that 7 of the 10 vps have requested an emergency executive board meeting. Sorry, I don't know how to properly post the link.
 

Superteeth2478

Well-Known Member
Do they have the power to stop ratification? I doubt it.
Actually, I think they do. Article XII, Section 6 was used to pack supplemental agreements into the asses of 3 supplemental/local regions in 2014, so there's also no reason it can't be used to changed the Article XII language to allow for a simple majority to reject the contract. That power is in the General Executive Board's hands. Hopefully it happens.
 

rebel87

Well-Known Member
Actually, I think they do. Article XII, Section 6 was used to pack supplemental agreements into the asses of 3 supplemental/local regions in 2014, so there's also no reason it can't be used to changed the Article XII language to allow for a simple majority to reject the contract. That power is in the General Executive Board's hands. Hopefully it happens.
Damn, i hope so.
 

Box Ox

Well-Known Member
Do they have the power to stop ratification? I doubt it.
Even if they don't, their visible movement to stop it is a sign to members that there is still Union leadership in high places that has not completely bailed on them.
 

Mugarolla

Light 'em up!
Actually, I think they do. Article XII, Section 6 was used to pack supplemental agreements into the asses of 3 supplemental/local regions in 2014, so there's also no reason it can't be used to changed the Article XII language to allow for a simple majority to reject the contract. That power is in the General Executive Board's hands. Hopefully it happens.
This contract is already a done deal per the IBT Constitution. Changing the Constitution now will not affect this contract, but it would affect future contracts.
 

Time for change

Well-Known Member
This contract is already a done deal per the IBT Constitution. Changing the Constitution now will not affect this contract, but it would affect future contracts.
Wrong! Wasn’t a final offer, freight contract proved that. It was a choice and the membership is well aware and will hold them accountable.
 

Mugarolla

Light 'em up!
Wrong! Wasn’t a final offer, freight contract proved that. It was a choice and the membership is well aware and will hold them accountable.
The IBT Constitution says you are wrong.

What did the freight contract prove besides being voted down? Yes, they have to renegotiate per the IBT constitution. They surpassed the 50% voter turnout, again, per the IBT Constitution.

We did not.
 

Mugarolla

Light 'em up!
That is open to interpretation.
Nope.

Even TDU is not fighting the angle of not a final offer. They are fighting Article XII Section 2 saying Hoffa does not have to impose the contract per the Constitution, that he can continue to negotiate a better deal, since UPS was willing to right after the vote count.
 

Time for change

Well-Known Member
The IBT Constitution says you are wrong.

What did the freight contract prove besides being voted down? Yes, they have to renegotiate per the IBT constitution. They surpassed the 50% voter turnout, again, per the IBT Constitution.

We did not.
The freight contract proves it was not a final offer, as there isn’t a strike for them. You are entirely wrong on this, why do you think DT intitially said going back to table, why in 2013 was that theory not used on riders on first offer? You’re wrong!
 

Mugarolla

Light 'em up!
The freight contract proves it was not a final offer, as there isn’t a strike for them.
Where does it say anywhere that a rejected final offer automatically triggers a strike?

why do you think DT intitially said going back to table
Because he wasn't sure if they were going to invoke the IBT Constitution. An hour later, they did.

why in 2013 was that theory not used on riders on first offer?
That is the million dollar question. And I am still waiting for an answer from the Union on that.

Sorry, but the IBT Constitution says it was a final offer, in black and white.
 

wide load

Starting wage is a waste of time.
The IBT Constitution says you are wrong.

What did the freight contract prove besides being voted down? Yes, they have to renegotiate per the IBT constitution. They surpassed the 50% voter turnout, again, per the IBT Constitution.

We did not.
The constitution doesn’t say he’s wrong. He’s dead balls on. That vaginal blood fart Taylor is doing what he wants because he’s a tool. He better retire.
 

Time for change

Well-Known Member
Where does it say anywhere that a rejected final offer automatically triggers a strike?



Because he wasn't sure if they were going to invoke the IBT Constitution. An hour later, they did.



That is the million dollar question. And I am still waiting for an answer from the Union on that.

Sorry, but the IBT Constitution says it was a final offer, in black and white.
When does declining a last, best, and final offer not mean a strike?
 
Top