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
Supplement status
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="Superteeth2478" data-source="post: 3878022" data-attributes="member: 73024"><p>I can't really tell if you're joking right now. The only relevant language here was what you underlined, about whether or not the master agreement was ratified. The point I'm making is that Article 12 DOES NOT differentiate between the agreement being imposed or ratified by a majority of the membership. Hence why it doesn't make sense to be wishy-washy in whether or not the National Negotiating Committee either puts the supplementals to the vote again or imposes them.</p><p></p><p>It's up to their discretion, but the discretion they used this time around is in complete contradiction to what they did last time, and Taylor cited the 50% and 2/3rds rule as if it was relevant when this language is also apparently giving them the power to choose how they want things to go. By the way, the capitalization was for emphasis. If I was yelling at you the whole post would have been capitalized. I'm sure you knew that, though.</p><p></p><p>Let me dumb it down step-by-step for you so that you don't go around in circles with me:</p><p></p><p>-In 2013, the master agreement was ratified by the membership by a majority vote.</p><p>-In 2013, supplementals were rejected by the membership with less than a 50% turnout.</p><p>-In 2013, those supplementals were still re-negotiated.</p><p></p><p>-In 2018, the master agreement was rejected by a majority of the membership.</p><p>-In 2018, supplementals were rejected by the membership with less than a 50% turnout.</p><p>-In 2018, those supplementals were NOT re-negotiated.</p><p></p><p>Really, in the end it doesn't matter whether or not the master agreement was ratified, the point Bubblehead was making was that the NNC was inconsistent with the way rejected supplementals were handled. They never even met again in 2018 to "identify the issues which resulted in the rejection of the special rider or supplement". They just imposed them. They apparently didn't even have to re-negotiate the supplementals last time around, but they did. Why is that? Was the payout to sell out the membership bigger this time?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Superteeth2478, post: 3878022, member: 73024"] I can't really tell if you're joking right now. The only relevant language here was what you underlined, about whether or not the master agreement was ratified. The point I'm making is that Article 12 DOES NOT differentiate between the agreement being imposed or ratified by a majority of the membership. Hence why it doesn't make sense to be wishy-washy in whether or not the National Negotiating Committee either puts the supplementals to the vote again or imposes them. It's up to their discretion, but the discretion they used this time around is in complete contradiction to what they did last time, and Taylor cited the 50% and 2/3rds rule as if it was relevant when this language is also apparently giving them the power to choose how they want things to go. By the way, the capitalization was for emphasis. If I was yelling at you the whole post would have been capitalized. I'm sure you knew that, though. Let me dumb it down step-by-step for you so that you don't go around in circles with me: -In 2013, the master agreement was ratified by the membership by a majority vote. -In 2013, supplementals were rejected by the membership with less than a 50% turnout. -In 2013, those supplementals were still re-negotiated. -In 2018, the master agreement was rejected by a majority of the membership. -In 2018, supplementals were rejected by the membership with less than a 50% turnout. -In 2018, those supplementals were NOT re-negotiated. Really, in the end it doesn't matter whether or not the master agreement was ratified, the point Bubblehead was making was that the NNC was inconsistent with the way rejected supplementals were handled. They never even met again in 2018 to "identify the issues which resulted in the rejection of the special rider or supplement". They just imposed them. They apparently didn't even have to re-negotiate the supplementals last time around, but they did. Why is that? Was the payout to sell out the membership bigger this time? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Supplement status
Top