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="Mugarolla" data-source="post: 3889562" data-attributes="member: 8481"><p>Sort of, possibly, maybe, probably, hell, I don't know.</p><p></p><p>In 2013, the Master was ratified (by the membership), so the failed Supplements get renegotiated.</p><p></p><p><em>"In the event such a special rider or supplement is not approved by the affected members, and the master agreement is ratified, the supplemental negotiating committee shall meet with the master negotiating committee to identify the issues which resulted in the rejection of the special rider or supplement. The master negotiating committee shall assist the supplemental negotiating committee when bargaining resumes with the employer in an effort to resolve the issues."</em></p><p></p><p>The Constitution does not specify what happens if the Master is not ratified by the affected members and the Supplements are also not ratified.</p><p></p><p>The power of the President.</p><p></p><p>Interesting though, that nobody in power, SOB, FZ, TDU, all the other VP's, are not pushing this angle.</p><p></p><p>So, apparently, they also believe the Constitution is not specific if the membership does not ratify the contract, and that the General President has the final say.</p><p></p><p>But you are correct. I have not heard him say specifically that this argument is why he interpreted this year's voting differently.</p><p></p><p>Maybe the Constitution needs amending to this specific this scenario. The Master not ratified by the affected members and the Supplements also not ratified by the affected members.</p><p></p><p>There would then be no controversy.......although ambiguity in language is also a good thing....</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mugarolla, post: 3889562, member: 8481"] Sort of, possibly, maybe, probably, hell, I don't know. In 2013, the Master was ratified (by the membership), so the failed Supplements get renegotiated. [I]"In the event such a special rider or supplement is not approved by the affected members, and the master agreement is ratified, the supplemental negotiating committee shall meet with the master negotiating committee to identify the issues which resulted in the rejection of the special rider or supplement. The master negotiating committee shall assist the supplemental negotiating committee when bargaining resumes with the employer in an effort to resolve the issues."[/I] [I][/I] The Constitution does not specify what happens if the Master is not ratified by the affected members and the Supplements are also not ratified. The power of the President. Interesting though, that nobody in power, SOB, FZ, TDU, all the other VP's, are not pushing this angle. So, apparently, they also believe the Constitution is not specific if the membership does not ratify the contract, and that the General President has the final say. But you are correct. I have not heard him say specifically that this argument is why he interpreted this year's voting differently. Maybe the Constitution needs amending to this specific this scenario. The Master not ratified by the affected members and the Supplements also not ratified by the affected members. There would then be no controversy.......although ambiguity in language is also a good thing.... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Supplement status
Top