Teamsters "raiding" TWU?

[ThirdSeatHero]

SWA has grown significantly in fleet size since turning over to amfa. Their mechanic size has not grown by those same standards. Other than the addition of Air Tran, their growth has been minimal at best.

I wasn't addressing SWAs growth, I was pointing out how you and the other ibt supporters can't keep your stories straight.

If you want to say something bad about SWA....you say its an AMFA agreement.

If someone cites SWA pay and benefits then its no longer and AMFA agreement its just an extended ibt agreement.

Flip-flop!

 

[Anomaly]

Understand this, you cant dump the 20% arbitration loss on AMFA no matter how much you'd like to. The ibt was our representatives, they took over from AMFA that is a point of FACT. You lied in your original post on the matter and now you're caught in yet another feeble attempt to back track.

You claimed the ibt put an AMFA rep on the panel, they didn't. He was already there. (...and if you're going to repeat your excuse of...they let him stay...then guess what, its still an ibt decision, and thereby the ibts responsibility)

You're now claiming Jim was the AMFA ACAC, and that the teamsters thereby financed AMFA....ANOTHER LIE.

While it is true Jim Seitz was indeed once the UAL ACAC, he was the subject of a successful recall, and at the time of the ibt transition at UAL he was no longer the ACAC, he became a teamster member along with the rest of UAL on April 1, 2008.

The fact that you would attempt to label AMFA negligent in this is laughable at best.

AMFA negotiated the FIRST contractually binding language to audit the companys maintenance outsourcing. They performed that audit. They took the issue to arbitration.

You want an example of negligence .... up until the current CBA was ratified in late 2011, the language to perform a yearly audit of maintenance outourcing was still in our contract. The ibt was certified in April of 2008. Between 2008 and the end of 2011 how many of these audits did the ibt perform?

ZERO!

I did not blame the IAM nor amfa, for the loss. The Arbitrator did.

http://teamsterssfo.com/items/Opinion_and_Award_OSV_Audit.pdf

From PG 26 of this decision;
Regulinski and Koehler (UAL Mgt) discussed the change to the numerator with IAM officers before making the change. Later, when AMFA became the representative of the mechanics and related employees, Henry (UAL) provided AMFA’s financial people with detailed data concerning the manner in which the 20% ratio was calculated. Henry held extensive briefings with Seitz and McCormick, who seemed satisfied with the calculation. The fact that neither Seitz nor McCormick was called as a witness speaks volumes about AMFA’s knowledge. The Board should draw an adverse inference from the failure of Seitz and McCormick to take the witness stand.

During the 2003 restructuring negotiations, the IAM and the Company agreed that the OSV ratio would continue “as currently measured.” If the IAM had been concerned that the numerator of the OSV ratio excluded material costs, the IAM should have raised its concerns at the bargaining table instead of affirming how it was being applied.

It is true that the Company agreed to the Moss Adams audit which led to the 30.28% calculation. However, Moss Adams also found 16.07% outsourcing, which is almost precisely what the Company computed. Matthews and AMFA trumpeted the 30.28% ratio as if it was some newly discovered computation when, in fact, the Company had been open about how it applied the OSV calculation since 1998. At the exit meeting, Matthews waved the 1996 OSV report as if the Company had kept the document a secret. Matthews’ conduct was analogous to the feigned indignation of the police captain who was “shocked, shocked” that there was gambling in Casablanca. Moss Adams’ preoccupation with the 30.28% figure was part of the firm’s strategy to satisfy AMFA so that Moss Adams could generate additional work (which it already has) from AMFA. However, Moss Adams’ entanglement with AMFA impaired its independence in conducting the audit of 2005 outsourcing. Also, a close perusal of the Agreed-Upon Procedures demonstrates that Moss Adams did not have any authority to reach the 30.28% calculation. All of the Agreed-Upon Procedures refer solely to direct labor costs in the numerator. The Moss Adams engagement letter was amended to make it clear that the Company, not Moss Adams, determines the rate. Without authority, Moss Adams determined a 30.28% rate.

http://www.aero-news.net/getmorefromann.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=6a0d3b96-9229-4909-a503-54511dba9b2f

In other words, the best amfa could do was hire a firm to "cook" the books to create the number they needed. It's all here. amfa failed to uphold the 20% outsourcing limitation at UAL, likewise, they failed to upho;d the 38% outsourcing limit at NWA.

http://www.teamster.org/sites/teamster.org/files/10112WhyAMFAFailedatNorthwestAirlines%282008%29.pdf

You claim that the Teamsters are to blame because they have not held at audit? Yet you ignore the fact that because of amfa's negligence, any future audit will have the same outcome because of the companies ability to rearrange the method used to calculate what creates 20% farm out. This ability was won from amfa.

 

[Anomaly]

I wasn't addressing SWAs growth, I was pointing out how you and the other ibt supporters can't keep your stories straight.

If you want to say something bad about SWA....you say its an AMFA agreement.

If someone cites SWA pay and benefits then its no longer and AMFA agreement its just an extended ibt agreement.

Flip-flop!

Now this post is full of BS. SWA has been hiring since the 2000's. Can any other airline say the same? SWA hires at a very minimal rate. They don't over hire then lay-off. They hire the right amount and then call ot when needed. I still love it when non-SWA folks try to tell it how it is at SWA. LOL Keep posting Anomaly.

I could easily make the same argument towards the both of you. You both claim that amfa at SWA is responsible for the lucrative agreement, yet the history of the company clearly tells the truth to this statement.

http://managers.emeraldinsight.com/quality/articles/pdf/southwest.pdf
http://blogs.hrhero.com/oswaldletters/2009/11/29/corporate-culture-done-right-southwest-airlines/

and from the US Department of Labor

http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/history/herman/reports/futurework/conference/contract/southwest.htm#.UHu33GOtxFk

Nearly 90 percent of Southwest’s workforce is organized into nine unions. Four—the pilots and three small technician unions—are independent organizations. The flight attendants and ramp workers are represented by the Transportation Workers Unions (TWU), the customer service and the reservation agents are represented by the International Association of Machinists (IAM), and the mechanics and cleaners are represented by the Teamsters (IBT). The company has enjoyed highly cooperative and peaceful labor relations since its founding. Its founders were not opposed to unions and essentially invited them into the organization. However, management has also worked hard to ensure that the unions maintain the same objectives as the company, avoiding highly adversarial relations.

One does not need to be an employee to look up cultural differences between airline management, or to look at 8K and 10K reports. The very truthful point is amfa agreed to limit growth in order to generate higher pay for the few. amfa gave UA the ability to outsource to foreign countries. It would appear they did the same at SWA.

http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2011/04/southwest-airlines-outsourcing-maintenance-and-inspections-el-salvador
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/06/concerns-raised-overseas-airplane-repair-work/

On the other hand, it is no secret that SWA management has always held the flexibility model to be worth paying for.

http://www.theclci.com/resources/TheSouthwestAirlinesWay.PDF

You will love item number 8.

Southwest is legendary for having pilots who are willing to help load luggage if that’s what it takes to get away on time. This is
indicative of the flexible job boundaries which exist throughout the entire company where anyone is willing to pitch in wherever
required.

Over all, there are very distinctive differences between Southwest and just about every other US carrier except maybe Alaska. To claim a "success" at WN and rest this on the hopes of American mechanics is deceitful. amfa will not address the issues and problems at American just like they did not correct things at United or Northwest.

 

[Anomaly]

Bankruptcy? Do you know what you're talking about? Name one union that has represented through a bankruptcy and NOT taken concessions in wages/benefits ... YOU CAN'T! By equity AMFA lost no more or less than any other union on the property .....in case you didn't know, thats the law.

Pensions? AMFA lost it? Funny thing, in all the records I can find on the subject, it says the Government seized the pensions from UAL.

http://articles.lati...ess/fi-united12

Even after the seizure by the PBGC AMFA was still fighting in court for members against the phase in...

http://law.justia.co...2011-03-14.html

Yes. You are correct. Unfortunately amfa attorneys foolishly continued to present ridicules arguments to the courts which lead to the following court of appeals decision provided by you.

http://law.justia.co...2011-03-14.html

We will briefly address the remaining arguments here. AMFA’s arguments concerning In re Pan Am., 777 F. Supp. 1179, are unavailing. Nevertheless, even if the district court misapprehended that decision, and we do not think that it did, a decision by a New York district court presents us with persuasive, not controlling authority.

Second, to the extent that AMFA contends that the propriety of the termination date is affected by UAL’s failure to provide the plan participants with adequate notice of the plan’s termination date, we reject that argument. Simply stated, PBGC is charged with protecting the interests of the pension insurance system, 29 U.S.C. 1302(a), and cannot be required to rely on the actions of third parties, some of whose interests may be adverse to those of PBGC, in fulfilling its duty.
IV.
For the foregoing reasons, we hold that, under the applicable standard, PBGC’s publication of notice of termination of the Ground Plan on the termination date constituted “reasonable notice” to the plan participants.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

In the end, this helped pave the way by providing case law against employees by making it that much easier to loose our retirements and hand them over to the PBGC. But to the amfa attorneys, it is all about billable hours.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJvvB7_0Q2I

As far as your comments on the the 20% outsourcing limit in our contract goes, you are a liar.

The ibt took the case over from AMFA at certification, AMFA reps WERE NOT funded to continue to argue the case, teamster lawyers handled it from then on.

Here is a teamster summary on the arbitration....funny thing it paints quite a different picture on the matter, than yours.

http://teamsterssfo....ng_decision.pdf

interesting bit here...

...AMFA filed the underlying grievance in 2007 and aggressively pursued it. The IBT
assumed the grievance arbitration mid-stream when it replaced AMFA, and continued to aggressively litigate it. Indeed, one of the remarkable features about this grievance is that all of the members and all of the labor unions affected by and involved in this grievance arbitration worked cooperatively and in unison to enforce the 20% limitation...

There you have it, teamsters admitting not only did AMFA fight but that they did so aggressively.

Additionally, they state quite clearly, that the ibt took over the case after being certified

How much more were you planning to lie about?




Promises & pipe dreams? Like opening the contract early? or negotiating a pension outside section 6? Or a double vesting pension? United mechanics are still waiting.

Pie in the sky? I'm sure 30+% of the Horizon mechanics can tell you about that.

Indeed, one of the remarkable features about this grievance is that all of the members and all of the labor unions affected by and involved in this grievance arbitration worked cooperatively and in unison to enforce the 20% limitation...

What is your point? Both the amfa and IBT were aggressive? At the end of the day, amfa still failed early on to identify or recognize the importance with the companies change in formulating the 20% outsourcing. I put equal blame with the IAM, but amfa promised their attorneys would be able to resolve and secure the outsourcing dilemma. Not so much. FAIL

 

[iluvaa]

Again why should i replace the TWU with the IBT. Without mentioning AMFA please return to the topic at hand. Im willing to bet this question can't be answered without telling me how bad amfa is

 

[DNTULSA]

Yes. You are correct. Unfortunately amfa attorneys foolishly continued to present ridicules arguments to the courts which lead to the following court of appeals decision provided by you.

http://law.justia.co...2011-03-14.html

We will briefly address the remaining arguments here. AMFA’s arguments concerning In re Pan Am., 777 F. Supp. 1179, are unavailing. Nevertheless, even if the district court misapprehended that decision, and we do not think that it did, a decision by a New York district court presents us with persuasive, not controlling authority.

Second, to the extent that AMFA contends that the propriety of the termination date is affected by UAL’s failure to provide the plan participants with adequate notice of the plan’s termination date, we reject that argument. Simply stated, PBGC is charged with protecting the interests of the pension insurance system, 29 U.S.C. 1302(a), and cannot be required to rely on the actions of third parties, some of whose interests may be adverse to those of PBGC, in fulfilling its duty.
IV.
For the foregoing reasons, we hold that, under the applicable standard, PBGC’s publication of notice of termination of the Ground Plan on the termination date constituted “reasonable notice” to the plan participants.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

In the end, this helped pave the way by providing case law against employees by making it that much easier to loose our retirements and hand them over to the PBGC. But to the amfa attorneys, it is all about billable hours.






Indeed, one of the remarkable features about this grievance is that all of the members and all of the labor unions affected by and involved in this grievance arbitration worked cooperatively and in unison to enforce the 20% limitation...

What is your point? Both the amfa and IBT were aggressive? At the end of the day, amfa still failed early on to identify or recognize the importance with the companies change in formulating the 20% outsourcing. I put equal blame with the IAM, but amfa promised their attorneys would be able to resolve and secure the outsourcing dilemma. Not so much. FAIL

amalamadingdong,

I see that you are back!

You've still got the diarrhea fingers, and the teamsters/twu mantra.

To quote Bob Dylan, "there ought to be a law against you comin' around!"

 

[swamt]

amalamadingdong,

I see that you are back!

You've still got the diarrhea fingers, and the teamsters/twu mantra.

To quote Bob Dylan, "there ought to be a law against you comin' around!"

When he post, everyone takes it with a grain of salt. His cred. has been gone for some time now. He's been proven wrong so many times and still is. Matter fact he's digging deep into the archieves to "try" and discredit AMFA. Digging up a pilots video of how an attorney handled a case for them well over 20 years ago is grasping hard for info. Who cares why the pilots union moved on with another legal firm. If he wants to compare attorneys then compare attorney to attorney as in the case of the ibt attorney and the AMFA attorney going head to head. The AMFA/ibt/SWA scenoirity integration nego. Seham embarrassed Josh to the point of Josh giving up. It was pathetic for the ibt side of the table. The more hard nosed Josh tried to get, the more he got removed from the AirTran guys. Now that's how to compare attorneys. We will take Seham firm any day over ibt's attorneys any day my friend...

 

[swamt]

Here you go Anomaly, a great way for current comparos in legal representations:

TWU Local 514 Guilty of business interference $221,351.00 in damages twice for a tot of more than $442,000.00.

This is the type of representation I would prefer, you betcha...Gotta love this stuff...

 

[TWU informer]

Here you go Anomaly, a great way for current comparos in legal representations:

TWU Local 514 Guilty of business interference $221,351.00 in damages twice for a tot of more than $442,000.00.

This is the type of representation I would prefer, you betcha...Gotta love this stuff...

Interesting that this issue is front and center and neither anomoly or any other paid IBT stooge uses it to gain support.
Talk about an alliance to attempt to stop AMFA....really

 

[Anomaly]

When he post, everyone takes it with a grain of salt. His cred. has been gone for some time now. He's been proven wrong so many times and still is. Matter fact he's digging deep into the archieves to "try" and discredit AMFA. Digging up a pilots video of how an attorney handled a case for them well over 20 years ago is grasping hard for info. Who cares why the pilots union moved on with another legal firm. If he wants to compare attorneys then compare attorney to attorney as in the case of the ibt attorney and the AMFA attorney going head to head. The AMFA/ibt/SWA scenoirity integration nego. Seham embarrassed Josh to the point of Josh giving up. It was pathetic for the ibt side of the table. The more hard nosed Josh tried to get, the more he got removed from the AirTran guys. Now that's how to compare attorneys. We will take Seham firm any day over ibt's attorneys any day my friend...

You jump on the credibility argument because you dodge facts. The best way to side step an issue is an attempt to discredit and hope everyone will forget the topic.

This was a headline story in 2008 on the issue of the mechanics agreement.

http://www.blogsouthwest.com/news/southwest-airlines-and-amfa-mechanics-reach-tentative-agreement

DALLAS, Dec. 4 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Southwest Airlines and the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association (AMFA) are proud to announce that the parties have reached a tentative agreement with a four-year term. The Company is pleased with this cost neutral contract which delivers raises in exchange for work rule improvements and contract flexibility. The current collective bargaining agreement became amendable on August 16, 2008.

SWA is a profitable airline, yet your association is satisfied with a cost neutral contract? It is not cost neutral for the employee if they are to provide "greater flexibility" and loose out on future securities.

In your attempt to dodge, you blew off my previous point so I will try again.

One does not need to be an employee to look up cultural differences between airline management, or to look at 8K and 10K reports. The very truthful point is amfa agreed to limit growth in order to generate higher pay for the few. amfa gave UA the ability to outsource to foreign countries. It would appear they did the same at SWA.

http://www.thomhartm...ons-el-salvador
http://www.foxnews.c...ne-repair-work/

On the other hand, it is no secret that SWA management has always held the flexibility model to be worth paying for.

http://www.theclci.c...AirlinesWay.PDF

You will love item number 8.

Southwest is legendary for having pilots who are willing to help load luggage if that’s what it takes to get away on time. This is
indicative of the flexible job boundaries which exist throughout the entire company where anyone is willing to pitch in wherever
required.

Over all, there are very distinctive differences between Southwest and just about every other US carrier except maybe Alaska. To claim a "success" at WN and rest this on the hopes of American mechanics is deceitful. amfa will not address the issues and problems at American just like they did not correct things at United or Northwest.

amfa will take care of the few, at the expense of the many. They do this without shame or remorse. A few of you will be quite happy with amfa, just like swamt.

 

[DNTULSA]

You jump on the credibility argument because you dodge facts. The best way to side step an issue is an attempt to discredit and hope everyone will forget the topic.

This was a headline story in 2008 on the issue of the mechanics agreement.

http://www.blogsouth...ative-agreement

DALLAS, Dec. 4 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Southwest Airlines and the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association (AMFA) are proud to announce that the parties have reached a tentative agreement with a four-year term. The Company is pleased with this cost neutral contract which delivers raises in exchange for work rule improvements and contract flexibility. The current collective bargaining agreement became amendable on August 16, 2008.

SWA is a profitable airline, yet your association is satisfied with a cost neutral contract? It is not cost neutral for the employee if they are to provide "greater flexibility" and loose out on future securities.

In your attempt to dodge, you blew off my previous point so I will try again.

One does not need to be an employee to look up cultural differences between airline management, or to look at 8K and 10K reports. The very truthful point is amfa agreed to limit growth in order to generate higher pay for the few. amfa gave UA the ability to outsource to foreign countries. It would appear they did the same at SWA.

http://www.thomhartm...ons-el-salvador
http://www.foxnews.c...ne-repair-work/

On the other hand, it is no secret that SWA management has always held the flexibility model to be worth paying for.

http://www.theclci.c...AirlinesWay.PDF

You will love item number 8.

Southwest is legendary for having pilots who are willing to help load luggage if that’s what it takes to get away on time. This is
indicative of the flexible job boundaries which exist throughout the entire company where anyone is willing to pitch in wherever
required.

Over all, there are very distinctive differences between Southwest and just about every other US carrier except maybe Alaska. To claim a "success" at WN and rest this on the hopes of American mechanics is deceitful. amfa will not address the issues and problems at American just like they did not correct things at United or Northwest.

amfa will take care of the few, at the expense of the many. They do this without shame or remorse. A few of you will be quite happy with amfa, just like swamt.

ramalamadingdong,

Tell us how the mighty teamsters have taken care of things at United!

I would like to hear some lies...

I'm sure you will provide them!

 

[TWU informer]

[font="Tahoma""]Subject:[/font][font="Tahoma""] Teamster Lazy Log Jam[/font]
[font="Tahoma""]It would seem obvious to all of us that a union's first responsibility to its members is contract enforcement. The way to enforce the contract is outlined in the grievance procedure. We were told during 2007 that the Teamsters know how to handle a grievance backlog. First, you try to resolve them before a grievance occurs. Then you have the grievance procedure in the contract. Seems simple enough. If that doesn't work the quote from the Airline Division talking head was "United will find itself in federal court." It is ironic in a sad way that the very person who asked this question of the Teamsters during organizing was a member named Mike Albertin. Of course United hasn’t been taken to court by the Teamsters and the backlog is growing. [/font]
[font="Tahoma""] [/font]
[font="Tahoma""]Mike is a good union man and cares about his fellow mechanic. He is currently a Chief Steward in SFO Components. The problem is Mike was sold a line of BS just like the rest of us by the IBT. There is an even larger grievance backlog in SFO than there was when the Teamsters took over from AMFA. Now shop stewards in many stations are voicing their displeasure on the lack of action on grievances. It seems the anointed Business Agents Molenberg and Petrovsky are too busy trying to organize Alaska and Horizon Airlines to deal with the United mechanics. Our research has shown that there have been zero arbitration cases across the system since the IBT was certified as the bargaining agent at United. ZERO. There are members that have suffered job and finiancal loss only to be shunned in favor of organizing campaigns. AMFA did as many as 18 arbitrations per year. Membership dues were used to support members and enforce the agreement. The dues paid to the IBT support three figure salaries for no show business agents and local officers. The only arbitration was the 20% and we all know that AMFA did 95% of that grievance. Was there an audit for 2007? It should have been done by September of 2008 but yet it seems the Teamsters are just too busy on organizing trips to deal with such trivial matters. Maybe San Fran Mayor Newsome needed his car washed that day or the big Teamster tractor trailer was out of gas. [/font]
[font="Tahoma""] [/font]
[font="Tahoma""]Some of the other ways that our grievances are being handled is the famous horse trading. How else did a chief steward that should have been laid off in Chicago manage to keep his job and gain a promotion to a management position and yet still remains as a union rep? Only by Teamster logic does this make any sense. One of the favorite phrases that the membership hears from the Teamster hierarchy is "no merit" when a grievance is filed by a shop steward.. That is of course if you are lucky enough to find someone to talk with. The Teamsters are buddy buddy with United and would hate to spoil their relationship with our petty grievances. Further evidence of this relationship is the fact the IBT is going to sit down with United and help them outsource ground equipment and building maintenance functions at several stations. Nothing wrong working towards good union/company relations but not to the detriment of your members. Didn't UAL just have the largest layoff since the September 11, 2001 layoffs? If they are doing grievances they would not have time to be all over the map on organizing trips. That begs another question: How can safety reps and chief stewards that are paid by United be off on organizing campaigns?[/font]
[font="Tahoma""] [/font]
[font="Tahoma""]Let's face it, we were lied to by the Teamster organizers, many of them our coworkers, and we are now stuck paying a hefty price. We are figuring out that this is not what we signed up for when the Teamsters were knocking on our doors. More dues and less representation.[/font][font="Garamond""] [/font]

 

[iluvaa]

Can someone plz answer why I would vote out the TWU and vote in the IBT without mentioning AMFA I have asked three times now but no answer all I read is AMFA bad. A non response answers plenty though

 

[furp]

You can only be raided or raped if you are unwilling. The TWU pulled down its pants, showed the teamsters the goods and said I would rather give it to you than have the mighty AMFA take it!
By that I mean the cowardly TWU gave the teamsters their membership info to help them beat the AMFA professionals drive. If you do not believe me go to YouTube , type in all the presidents YES men and watch video of Woodward handing the Reamsters all the info.

 

[xUT]

[font=Tahoma"]Subject:[/font][font=Tahoma"] Teamster Lazy Log Jam[/font]
[font=Tahoma"]It would seem obvious to all of us that a union's first responsibility to its members is contract enforcement. The way to enforce the contract is outlined in the grievance procedure. We were told during 2007 that the Teamsters know how to handle a grievance backlog. First, you try to resolve them before a grievance occurs. Then you have the grievance procedure in the contract. Seems simple enough. If that doesn't work the quote from the Airline Division talking head was "United will find itself in federal court." It is ironic in a sad way that the very person who asked this question of the Teamsters during organizing was a member named Mike Albertin. Of course United hasn’t been taken to court by the Teamsters and the backlog is growing. [/font]

[font=Tahoma"]Mike is a good union man and cares about his fellow mechanic. He is currently a Chief Steward in SFO Components. The problem is Mike was sold a line of BS just like the rest of us by the IBT. There is an even larger grievance backlog in SFO than there was when the Teamsters took over from AMFA. Now shop stewards in many stations are voicing their displeasure on the lack of action on grievances. It seems the anointed Business Agents Molenberg and Petrovsky are too busy trying to organize Alaska and Horizon Airlines to deal with the United mechanics. Our research has shown that there have been zero arbitration cases across the system since the IBT was certified as the bargaining agent at United. ZERO. There are members that have suffered job and finiancal loss only to be shunned in favor of organizing campaigns. AMFA did as many as 18 arbitrations per year. Membership dues were used to support members and enforce the agreement. The dues paid to the IBT support three figure salaries for no show business agents and local officers. The only arbitration was the 20% and we all know that AMFA did 95% of that grievance. Was there an audit for 2007? It should have been done by September of 2008 but yet it seems the Teamsters are just too busy on organizing trips to deal with such trivial matters. Maybe San Fran Mayor Newsome needed his car washed that day or the big Teamster tractor trailer was out of gas. [/font]

[font=Tahoma"]Some of the other ways that our grievances are being handled is the famous horse trading. How else did a chief steward that should have been laid off in Chicago manage to keep his job and gain a promotion to a management position and yet still remains as a union rep? Only by Teamster logic does this make any sense. One of the favorite phrases that the membership hears from the Teamster hierarchy is "no merit" when a grievance is filed by a shop steward.. That is of course if you are lucky enough to find someone to talk with. The Teamsters are buddy buddy with United and would hate to spoil their relationship with our petty grievances. Further evidence of this relationship is the fact the IBT is going to sit down with United and help them outsource ground equipment and building maintenance functions at several stations. Nothing wrong working towards good union/company relations but not to the detriment of your members. Didn't UAL just have the largest layoff since the September 11, 2001 layoffs? If they are doing grievances they would not have time to be all over the map on organizing trips. That begs another question: How can safety reps and chief stewards that are paid by United be off on organizing campaigns?[/font]

[font=Tahoma"]Let's face it, we were lied to by the Teamster organizers, many of them our coworkers, and we are now stuck paying a hefty price. We are figuring out that this is not what we signed up for when the Teamsters were knocking on our doors. More dues and less representation.[/font][font=Garamond"] [/font]

I know Mike and he is a good union man. He supported the IAM, AMFA and now IBT.
Do you have a link to this or is it super secret?
B) xUT