IAM Stepping Up campaign

[700UW]

I wonder what an audit of Ford and Harrison will show.

 

[WorldTraveler]

go for it.

You should be more worried about the track record of the IAM at US airlines.

that is all DL employees care about. that is why they have consistently said "not interested" to further attempts at unionization.

 

[737823]

You and Kev can keep saying the UA agreement is of no consequence to US, DL or other carrier but that couldn't be further from the truth. The IAM has shown that's the best they can do and DL employees will judge accordingly.

Josh

 

[737823]

I wonder what an audit of Ford and Harrison will show.

What would an audit of the IAM show? Despite what you claim not all disbursements are indicated in complete detail on the LM-2s, if it is not a large disbursement it is not included.

Josh

 

[700UW]

How stupid are you?
 
The IAM gets audited every year.
 
Every penny they spend has to be filed on the LM-2, can you say the same about a corporation?
 
Nope you cant.
 
And the UA agreement has nothing to do with US, UA is bleeding cash, the new AA has almost $11 billion in cash in the bank, had a record first quarter, beat every other airline in profits and is on pace to have a record setting year, better than any other airline.
 
Your horse is dead, call Gerry or Tim and ask for something new.

 

[737823]

You said the UA agreement is bad, but you support it because you want the IAM to get dues from the former unorganized sCO passenger service. Ramp the IAM got paid from day one thanks to the IBT, they only administered the IBT agreement. Do you work for the IAM?

Josh

 

[WorldTraveler]

How stupid are you?
 
The IAM gets audited every year.
 
Every penny they spend has to be filed on the LM-2, can you say the same about a corporation?

and yes corporations are subjected to audits as well. as are non-profits and other public organizations.

For you to somehow claim that a labor union is subjected to something that any other public entity doesn't face is simply inaccurate.

 

[700UW]

You said the UA agreement is bad, but you support it because you want the IAM to get dues from the former unorganized sCO passenger service. Ramp the IAM got paid from day one thanks to the IBT, they only administered the IBT agreement. Do you work for the IAM?

Josh

I never supported the UA agreement, I wouldnt have voted for it.
 
And the dues money is nothing compared to what the IAM was collecting from PMUA Ramp, Stores, PCE and Res.
 
So come up with something new.
 
Who do you work for?

 

[700UW]

and yes corporations are subjected to audits as well. as are non-profits and other public organizations.

For you to somehow claim that a labor union is subjected to something that any other public entity doesn't face is simply inaccurate.

Companies are not held to the same accounting standards as labor unions.
 
That is a fact, corporations are not covered under the LMRDA.
 
Companies do not have to put line by line of what they spend their money on in their 10k or any other SEC filings.
 
Prime example search every single US 10K and find out how much they had to pay Boeing for canceling a plane order and Boeing took US to court and settled, yet US never reported the money on the 10K and no one knows how much was paid to Boeing.
 
Keep up with the misinformation and lies, no corporation is covered under the LMRDA, and Sarbanes-Oxley and any other laws dont require the company to be held to the same standard as a corporation.
 
Dont let the facts get in your way.

 

[737823]

I never supported the UA agreement, I wouldnt have voted for it.
 
And the dues money is nothing compared to what the IAM was collecting from PMUA Ramp, Stores, PCE and Res.
 
So come up with something new.
 
Who do you work for?

You and others keep posting about my employer, why do you keep asking questions you know the answer to?

The IAM wanted and needed the dues from sCO passenger service. The NOL/NTA F/As I know are glad to be gone from the IAM, and are now dues objectors at AFA.

Josh

 

[WorldTraveler]

yes they are 700. Plain and simple.

companies have their own laws and disclosure requirements that are specific to what they do.

It is completely inaccurate to argue that other entities, including religious organizations are subject to ANY LESS scrutiny.

Different but certainly not less.

 

[700UW]

I know the answer too?
 
Maybe I do, maybe I dont, if you ask me I will ask you.
 
You have been asked numerous times and you deny to answer.
 
You and many others have asked me the same question and I have answered numerous times.
 
The IAM didnt need the dues from PMCO PCE at all.
 
Try something new, whats wrong Timmy or Gerry cant give you anything else to post?

 

[737823]

They why did they organize them? Most of them would be happier without representation. And if the rules hadn't changed PCE would be unorganized, the IAM barely won as it is. Not exactly resounding support.

Josh

 

[700UW]

Under the RLA and the NMB rules, they had to have a vote because of the merger.
 
As UA was more than the 35% of showing of interest in the numbers, as UA PCE were already unionized.
 
Go educate yourself once again.
 
Why did the IBT try to organize them?
 
PCE at UA were in the IAM, nothing new.
 
And the rules were changed to make the threshold 50% not 35%.
 
And show me any other union or political election that people who didnt vote are or were counted as a "NO" vote.
 
And you are wrong once again, the IAM got over 8,200 votes, which was more than the 50%+1 needed to be unionized under the old rules if they were in effect they still gathered the 50%+1.
 
http://www.nmb.gov/documents/representation/deter2012/39n030.pdf
 
Why are you lying and spreading misinformation once again?

 

[737823]

PCE joined the IAM in 1999.

And Im talking about the change in the rules of how the votes are tabulated, where it is based on the people that actually vote, not the total size of the craft/class. If it was conducted under the pre-2010 the union would have lost.

Josh