Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Sean’s Second Letter
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mugarolla" data-source="post: 3796543" data-attributes="member: 8481"><p>So now he is not mentioning anything about not being a final offer?</p><p></p><p>Didn't he bring that argument up earlier?</p><p></p><p>Now he just says an over-literal reading of a vague, obscure and ambiguous provision?</p><p></p><p>He's been an elected Teamster officer for how long, appointed originally as UPS lead negotiator, and doesn't know what's been in the Constitution for 30 some years?</p><p></p><p>I do agree with him though that the Supplements should not have been subject to the 2/3 rule</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mugarolla, post: 3796543, member: 8481"] So now he is not mentioning anything about not being a final offer? Didn't he bring that argument up earlier? Now he just says an over-literal reading of a vague, obscure and ambiguous provision? He's been an elected Teamster officer for how long, appointed originally as UPS lead negotiator, and doesn't know what's been in the Constitution for 30 some years? I do agree with him though that the Supplements should not have been subject to the 2/3 rule [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Sean’s Second Letter
Top