Clearly you are grasping at straws. I think its pretty obvious that the language is referring to an unwillingness of the company or the membership as a whole to accept the deal. Yes people would be forced into the IAMNPF as written in this deal if the membership as a whole were duped into accepting it. --You're wrong, but you're usually the last one to recognize that.
On your second point. So are you admitting now, in direct contradiction to earlier claims, that if the TWU were voted in or in by acclimation over the IAM that those in the IAMNPF could remain in the plan? Thats pretty much what it says, basically that no matter what happens they can stay. --Where exactly is that said? --Wow. Where did I say that?
I support that, let them stay if they want, if they want to give back around $1/hr to the company after factoring in OT etc in exchange for a promise from the IAMNPF thats should be up to them. What would be the IAMs argument against it? Because they are now TWU members? Well they were willing to accept thousands of TWU members that were never a part of the IAM, why not accept those who are already in the plan to continue if they choose to? --They will have that choice because we'd be under one CBA which would allow for ANYONE interested to choose that option. There may be new hire TWU Members that want to be part of their Plan. If they choose it, then they'll have that option, they won't be forced as you predict. (I guess you have to say that to be consistent that everything TWU/IAM has to stink)
So in the event our rights are defended by the NMB and we have an election (if another party produces a showing of interest) or the IAM simply bows out, as long as the TWU proposes the IAMNPF to the entire membership they have complied with this agreement, the members could reject the IAMNPF but those who are in it could stay in it if they chose. --Those scenarios are not going to happen. The IAM is not going to willingly give up control of their Members of the IAMNPF.
So, that said the IAM could walk away and their members can stay in the IAMNPF. So whats the downside of all staying in one union now? You basically just shot down the only argument they had in favor of the Alliance. --My "argument" about the Association has little to do with the IAMNPF. I simply don't think it is a good idea to have a vote between two unions in which the union I belong to could lose when there is an option available that helps both sides retain what they're familiar with. I value some of the systems we have over the systems the IAM uses.