TWU-IAM Finally Getting Ready for JCBA Negotiations

[ThirdSeatHero]

Never claimed I did, unlike you and others.

 
Where did i make that claim?
 
Citing the clear and unambiguous text from the NMB representation manual doesn't require a law degree.
 
That's just your sorry excuse for an attempt at deflection when you cant argue against the rule as written.

 

[CMH_GSE]

Wasn't the RLA amended recently because the NMB decided to deviate from traditional rules?
What is stopping them from doing it again?

Clearly, they aren't following anything but the money.
This decision should have been made after a few weeks, at the most.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

On a side note I'd also point out your flagrant hypocrisy.
 
You're wailing away on the Delta board on how the FAs and ACS need a collective voice in representation, and yet here you are clearly advocating for a position that would deny current AA/US members a collective voice on their representation.
 
It is precisely that type of shady situational unionism that's crippling the movement as a whole

 

[700UW]

I have never stated about the association not having a vote, if you go back to when the announcement was made I have always stated the Association has stated a vote will be done by the NMB and have been a proponent on the matter.
 
Are you pretending to be WT today?

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

I have never stated about the association not having a vote, if you go back to when the announcement was made I have always stated the Association has stated a vote will be done by the NMB and have been a proponent on the matter.
 
Are you pretending to be WT today?

 
Really?
 
Oh sure, when I pinned you down once before you renounced it, but with just a 30 sec search I already found one post of yours where you are clearly NOT the proponent of a vote as you now claim to be
 
Would you like to revisit that BS statement?  Or are you going to try and requalify your statement when I throw one of your previous posts up.

 

[swamt]

 
Really?
 
Oh sure, when I pinned you down once before you renounced it, but with just a 30 sec search I already found one post of yours where you are clearly NOT the proponent of a vote as you now claim to be
 
Would you like to revisit that BS statement?  Or are you going to try and requalify your statement when I throw one of your previous posts up.

Exactly. I have said this from the very beginning.  He is actually hiding something, and may even know something...

 

[NYer]

 
The association is an applicant and per rule ALL applicants must provide a showing of interest

 
By agreeing to file as the Association, the showing of interest has already been met by the unions.

 

[CMH_GSE]

By agreeing to file as the Association, the showing of interest has already been met by the unions.

So now the NMB is going to make up rules as they go along?

Nothing has been met. The association is new and different dynamic than we are currently under and there is zero showing of interest for this new applicant.

Again , they are no more relevant than few guys getting together saying " we think this is cool, let's file jointly"...

 

[Overspeed]

If I understand the foundation for the case is that the Association is not a new union but a partnership of two existing unions. The gray area seems to be in the swapping of members at locations and transitioning to a new JCBA that will be substantially different than either the IAM or TWU members currently have. However getting a new CBA with changes is part of the normal negotiating process so maybe the latter point is not as big an issue.

 

[NYer]

So now the NMB is going to make up rules as they go along?
Nothing has been met. The association is new and different dynamic than we are currently under and there is zero showing of interest for this new applicant.
Again , they are no more relevant than few guys getting together saying " we think this is cool, let's file jointly"...

That is not a new rule. It's always been part of the process and rules.

 

[1AA]

That is not a new rule. It's always been part of the process and rules.

Any references to past practices or the rules you claim exist to our situation? Most of us went through the regs and come to the same conclusion that interest must be shown and a vote is in place.

 

[NYer]

So now the NMB is going to make up rules as they go along?

Nothing has been met. The association is new and different dynamic than we are currently under and there is zero showing of interest for this new applicant.

Again , they are no more relevant than few guys getting together saying " we think this is cool, let's file jointly"...

 


19.601--Showing of Interest on the Single Transportation System
 
All applicants must submit evidence of representation or showing  of interest from at least fifty (50) percent of the employees in the craft or class. Evidence of representation or showing of interest from incumbent organizations or individuals on the affected carrier(s) includes, but is not limited to, a seniority list, dues check-off list, a current collective bargaining agreement or a certification, or other indicia of current representation.

 

[1AA]

And the association represents 50% plus one of who? No cards signed and no incumbent representative members. No members from either union signed off on approving a joint association. If a twu station becomes a IAM station and vice versa then representation has been changed. One day I'm twu and the next day I am IAM. Without a vote? That should create a huge legal mess. But we will wait and see the decision made by the nmb.

 

[scorpion 2]

19.601--Showing of Interest on the Single Transportation System
 
All applicants must submit evidence of representation or showing  of interest from at least fifty (50) percent of the employees in the craft or class. Evidence of representation or showing of interest from incumbent organizations or individuals on the affected carrier(s) includes, but is not limited to, a seniority list, dues check-off list, a current collective bargaining agreement or a certification, or other indicia of current representation.

That might work for the twu as a stand alone incumbent but not for others to ride in on their coat tail without a showing of interest. The twu can't just say this unions our buddy and they are coming with us!

 

[NYer]

That might work for the twu as a stand alone incumbent but not for others to ride in on their coat tail without a showing of interest. The twu can't just say this unions our buddy and they are coming with us!

 
They didn't. It was a joint submission for the Association by the TWU and IAM.