When does a union have the right to supercede the first amendment, for any reason???
"you'll have to talk to the lawyers on that man"
"you'll have to talk to the lawyers on that man"
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nightwatch said:Let's see there Nuggett...AMFA places 38% (UNGRIEVABLE) cap on outsourcing at NWA...outsourcing immediately soars to over 40%..thx
[post="168176"][/post]
Radman said:PROVE IT!! EWE TWU SHEEP ARE ALL THE SAME. YOU JUST PUT OUT WHAT THE HERDER TELLS EWE TO SAY. SO WHY DON'T EWE GO SNIFF THE DOMINATE RAMS BUTT AND GET TOMORROWS POSTING. :bleh: :bleh: :bleh:
[post="168189"][/post]
Nightwatch said:My my..did I hit an amfa nerve location? I do not blame you for not wanting to admit to amfa ineptness...it's the amfaway...and you are a follower...Now, go tell delle what a big man he is....HAHAHA
[post="168201"][/post]
Bob Owens said:LIE # 1.
"The members have the right to vote on contracts, its written in the Constitution."
Despite the language we do not have this right. The TWU argued in court, citing other cases where Unions were allowed to impose contracts without a vote, that the language guaranteeing our right to vote is open to interpretation by the International. The TWU testified that that language only applies to completely new contracts, not amended contracts. Since under the RLA contracts are only amendable under most conditions then as long as the members who were on payroll back in the 1940s got to vote on the first "completely new" contract, the TWU has satified that Constitutional right to "the members".
LIE #2
"You dont need to vote for the International Officers who represent the TWU to the company because the Presidents council has control over everything they do."
The fact is that the Presidents council has no Constitutional, enforcable decision making powers. Basically its a fascade, it exists to make the members, and many Presidents, feel that they really have some input. Over the years the International has gotten very good at ensuring that the council eventually comes to the conclusion that the International desires. However back in 1999 the International did not get its way. The International wanted seperate Locals. The Presidents could not be swayed, so Sonny imposed it on them. I'm told that ORD President Joy Calloway cursed out Sonny Hall. In retaliation Sonny Hall illegally interfered in the next election at ORD and may have had a hand in the termination of another ORD Local union official. They sued, and both reportedly walked away with out of court settlements.
Sonnys vindicive heavy handedness has cost Union members money. Depite losing lawsuits, being convicted of violating members rights and costly out of court settlements Sonny has not changed his ways. He is being sued for various transgressions against the former militant Local 501 board. Some of whom were terminated during an election in what appears to be a case of company-union collusion to rid Sonny Hall of rivals. Several of those victimized by this apparent conspiracy ran against Sonny Hall in the last Convention. I nominated one of thoose officers, Jack Sullivan to run against John Kerrigan who also had a part in my removal.
Faced with the examples of Joy Calloway, Local 234(where Sonny interfered with elections), the officers of Local 501, and the officers of Local 562, all vocal opponents of Sonny Hall, who were subsequently removed by Sonny Hall, any President who opposes Sonny does so at the risk of at the very least removal from office, a significant pay cut and possible termination from the company.
The fact is the Presidents have no power. According to the International, their oath dictates that all local officers must put the Internationals interests ahead of the members. This was clearly stated by the International in the document they sent to me describing their reasons for removing me from office.
LIE #3
"The Locals are autonomous."
While they may be "on their own" they most certainly are not self governing or independant of the laws of another. The laws of the local, in other words the bylaws are subject to the approval of the International. If you can not make your own rules, if another body determines what rules you can have, then you are not autonomous.
The Constitution of the TWU clearly gives the International total control over the Local Union. From approving its bylawsa and reviewing its finances to control over its charter. It even gives them the right to eliminate the entire Local. Clearly with such broad powers over them Local unions are not "autonomous". The International simply allows them enough of a leash so long as they dont do anything to annoy the International. Any Local that dares to annoy the International shall soon experience how short the International can make that leash.
Several of the previuos examples, Joy Calloway, Local 501 and Local 562 all reveal how "autonomous" the locals are. Once again, this brings us back to Sonny Halls interpretation of the Oath of office.An oath that according to the International pledges Loyalty to the International ahead of the members.
Lie #4 from the TWU;
"The membership is the Ultimate authority"
This is a lie. The Constition is clear that the members are only the supreme authority of the local "at meetings", but then goes on to say that the Local E board-who by virtue of the Oath of office have been determined to be subordinate to the International- "shall have the power and authority to administer the affairs of the Local Union.
If you read the TWU Constitution it makes clear over and over again that the International is supreme over all Locals. Who is in charge of the International? Its not the members. Article VIII, Section 2 states "the International Executive Council shall be the supreme authority in the International Union (pg 16).
In fact when you read the TWU Constitution its very clear that the power of the Union is confined to the top levels of the union, none of which face electoral accountability from the members. While the Constition clearly designates what powers the International has it is silent as to what powers the members actually have other than at the Local level. As stated already the locals are subordinate to the International. Article XIII(pg 34) makes clear that the membership is subordinate to the International union. With the TWU we are paying to have a second boss. All you need to do is read the Article.
Sect 1 "Any person seeking membership shall be required,,,"
Sect 2 "An applicant shall not be accepted for membership until,,,"
Sect 3 "Any member who fails to pay his/her dues before the 15th day of each month shall be in bad standing."
Sect 4 "Any member in bad standing shall be inelligible to attend union meetings,,,"
Sect 5 "It shall be the duty of each member to pay,,,"
Sect 6-Grants the international power to extendtime limitations for the payment of fines.
Sect 7 "A member shall be required to advise the Local Financial secretary,,,,"
The remaining sections cover transfers, layoffs etc, none of them grant the membership rights to have input into the affairs or direction of the TWU.
It is clear from this article, in fact from the whole document that the membership has duties and obligations to the TWU but the TWU has no duties or obligations to the members.
In direct contrast to Article XIII, which states what the members shall do for the TWU, Articles V through X apply specific and broad powers to the International.After reading the Constitution it is clear that the TWU is not a membership run organization. The Constitution only applies duties and responsibilities upon the members to finance and support the organization but does not grant them any rights to 'participate" in determining the direction of the organization.
So while the Constitution is clear, when taken as a whole, that the membership is not in control, proponents of the TWU, obviously with the hope that no one will actually research the facts behind the statement, claim over and over again that the "membership is the ultimate authority". As long as people actually believe this, its easy for the next TWU lie that "its all the memberships fault" to be believed.
Still no challenge from the TWU supporters. Maybe because they know that what I've said is true and they can think of any new lies to make anyone believe the old lies again!
[post="169315"][/post]
AMFAMAN said:Say it aint so........
Turn out the lights the twu party is over......
Thanks Bob...
[post="254458"][/post]
Bob Owens said:Gless is Luby's boy, Luby even went to Gless's second wedding, however in the TWU loyalty only goes up, not down. That goes for everyone, especially the members.
[post="254475"][/post]