twitter for twu please

[enough already]

@APFAunity: Tweeting from BK court at 10 EDT. Quick shout out to the crew flight 10. You are the best, but you really should get a new snack bar mgr.

 

[rifbound]

@APFAunity: Tweeting from BK court at 10 EDT. Quick shout out to the crew flight 10. You are the best, but you really should get a new snack bar mgr.

Outstanding job APFA for helping lookout for the mechanics/stores by helping us stay up to date. Unlike our International is.

 

[CMH_GSE]

Rif bound , epic rant.
I will just say, I didn't need the AMFA generals to read the text of the contract to me, I read it for myself and there were clearly differences that affected my family between the two and I voted what was best for me.
The No Presidents obviously have a better plan, I would like see it.

 

[rifbound]

Rif bound , epic rant.
I will just say, I didn't need the AMFA generals to read the text of the contract to me, I read it for myself and there were clearly differences that affected my family between the two and I voted what was best for me.
The No Presidents obviously have a better plan, I would like see it.

I can knock you for wanting to look out for the family, I'm the sameway but it's critical that we also look out for our profession and not let AA take advantage of us like they are trying to. I talked about it with my wife and she read everything, watch the videos, and agreed with me about my no vote. It's not like I was asking for permission but I wanted her to understand how this might affect us and for her to be involved and make sure she understood what all was at steak. I'm pissed that we could not stand together on this, It seems to me that they like to divide us for their purposes. They've always wanted that. Look at the previous T/A. What kind of raise was the line looking at. They stood to get almost $5 a hour or so raise and what did O/H get? Like .80 cents a hour and yet it still got voted down in line stations. They stood to benifit more and could've voted it in if they thought it was fair but even then there was a bunch of bs in that one to. Through out the years we always took the money and gave up something to get it that we will probably never get back. Do we really want to go through that again? I think not.

 

[TWU informer]

Rif bound , epic rant.
I will just say, I didn't need the AMFA generals to read the text of the contract to me, I read it for myself and there were clearly differences that affected my family between the two and I voted what was best for me.
The No Presidents obviously have a better plan, I would like see it.

The more you post the more it becomes clear that you are not simply a victim working a small station about to get laid-off. Instead you are a liar and your credibility ranks right up there with James C Little and the his 2003 claim that "The only way to have a credible Labor Agreement is to conduct a complete re-vote", just before he signed the current "without furter ratification" TWU 9 years and counting concession for jobs program.

If you have proof the TWU Local Presidents from the line are "AMFA Generals" then enforce your Constitution and do something about it. Otherwise, you are still nothing more than a snibbler, and a comfirmed liar.

 

[Mr Red]

Rif bound , epic rant.
I will just say, I didn't need the AMFA generals to read the text of the contract to me, I read it for myself and there were clearly differences that affected my family between the two and I voted what was best for me.
The No Presidents obviously have a better plan, I would like see it.

AA and TWU stuck a gun to to your head and told you to
pull the trigger!The NO voters said F NO we are not going to help you turn this into a
deadend no future job!!

 

[rifbound]

AA and TWU stuck a gun to to your head and told you to
pull the trigger!The NO voters said F NO we are not going to help you turn this into a
deadend no future job!!

That's what I'm talking about. Why would anyone vote yes to this? Unless you're just looking to get out and don't care if you screw the rest of us as long as you get yours. The TWScrew way. Oh by the way, if anyone is intersted in what's going on in court APFA is tweeting about it.
Here's the link: https://twitter.com/#!/APFAUnity
IDK, how we got stuck with moron lawyer we have. Stupid

 

[Chuck Schalk]

I am not surprised by the judges stand on previous concessions based on history. With that said, I will not, nor should anyone of us forget what we have given up for this company over the last several contracts and how it has and will affect us in the future for us and our families.

the judge may not think previous concessions don't matter, but to us they do !!!!

why do you think it was voted down twice?

if they shuffle the deck and try to put out another vote then
first of all, it should not be brought back at all !

If for some reason it gets to a vote, it will be voted down again!!!!

we do have a say in this process

court is court but reality is we have to accept it !!!!!!!!!!

 

[Hopeful]

I am not surprised by the judges stand on previous concessions based on history. With that said, I will not, nor should anyone of us forget what we have given up for this company over the last several contracts and how it has and will affect us in the future for us and our families.

the judge may not think previous concessions don't matter, but to us they do !!!!

why do you think it was voted down twice?

if they shuffle the deck and try to put out another vote then
first of all, it should not be brought back at all !

If for some reason it gets to a vote, it will be voted down again!!!!

we do have a say in this process

court is court but reality is we have to accept it !!!!!!!!!!

The problem is the judge dosen't care about what we gave up. He said it clearly in the courtroom.
Let's hope should he decide to abrogate our contracts, that he does NOT impose the 6 year term that the company seeks.
There is still no absolute answer to the question of duration...

What will the local presidents' postion THEN be should the judge impose a 6 year term on us?

What damage control will be put out?

You think people are outraged now? Wait to see IF the judge imposes duration as well?

 

[700UW]

The judge doesnt cherry pick, he will either abrogate and impose the new terms or he wont abrogate.

He doesnt have the luxury of changing the term sheet.

 

[Hopeful]

The judge doesnt cherry pick, he will either abrogate and impose the new terms or he wont abrogate.

He doesnt have the luxury of changing the term sheet.

That's not what I asked.. The union contends that should he abrogate, negotiations continue ANEW..WITH NO DURATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The company would most likely impose a 6 year duration on the TERM SHEETS that will be imposed.

Should the judge agree to a 6 year duration on the term sheets, then the M&R and Stores units will have gotten the worse end of the deal with respect to the paltry raises, profit sharing and 401k match...ALL OF WHICH WILL BE EXCLUDED FROM THE TERM SHEETS!

Again, there is no absolute answer on whether or not the judge will impose the DURATION on the term sheets should he rule to abrogate.

 

[700UW]

Let me explain this one more time, since AA in its motion has the six year duration, that is what will be imposed.

The Judge doesnt pick what parts of the term sheet that gets imposed, its either all or nothing. He doesnt have the authority to pick and choose.

I dont think you understand this concept.

 

[Hopeful]

Let me explain this one more time, since AA in its motion has the six year duration, that is what will be imposed.

The Judge doesnt pick what parts of the term sheet that gets imposed, its either all or nothing. He doesnt have the authority to pick and choose.

I dont think you understand this concept.

I understand it well. Here's what YOU need to understand...
We NO voters were under the impression that when we voted NO, negotiations would start anew...therefore we would not be locked into a six year deal.

No if YOU are saying that he will also impose the 6 years, then we NO voters were mislead.

This is the reason we voted NO.....

I understand the concept and what you are saying.

 

[700UW]

There is no where in the RLA nor Section 1113C that new negotiations start upon and abrogation and imposition, why do you think AA is wanting to impose a six year deal?

The POR per the UCC will have to have a business plan in effect so the judge will approve the POR, they wont approve a POR with open labor contracts.

 

[Hopeful]

There is no where in the RLA nor Section 1113C that new negotiations start upon and abrogation and imposition, why do you think AA is wanting to impose a six year deal?

The POR per the UCC will have to have a business plan in effect so the judge will approve the POR, they wont approve a POR with open labor contracts.

I don't know to explain this any clearer to you, 700...
The gist of my post is that WE WERE LIED TO BY THOSE PUSHING US TO VOTE NO....

Do you understand now? I am not arguing with you..
My point is about being mislead, not what people THINK may or may not happen.