TWU negotiations.........what?

[odie01]

Agreed. Bob, Larry, and the other's who wanted to be released need to join together and lobby for a different union, even if it gets them terminated from their twu elected positions. The line has been drawn in the sand, and if they don't cross it after the international excepts a concessionary ta, then we know they are in this for personal gains, and are no different than the High Speed Steel bootlickers.

TWU Mechanics & Related Negotiation

"TOP SECRET” Vote Results


The results of a vote that took place were "TOP SECRET!” The vote was for the TWU Mechanics & Related (Title I & II) Negotiating Team to request a release from NMB negotiations. A 30 day cooling off period for seeking “self-help”. The term “Self-help” DOES NOT mean STRIKE! “Self-help”, is legal means of CHAOS or Strike, could or may take place. Why is the contract negotiation information so hard to get from the TWU?

The M&R Membership has already stated and voted for a "strike vote". TWU Negotiators need to follow the NMB system for the next step. TWU is again stalling negotiations, by not moving to the next step for a deadline. TWU International does not have a plan and never had a plan to seek “self-help.” The lack of leadership from the TWU International has been evident since the beginning of negotiations over 3 years ago. What does this vote show the company? WE ARE WEAK! The vote results were: 8 votes FOR release to 9 votes AGAINST release.


8 Neg. Reps who VOTED FOR A RELEASE with NMB to make a legal ruling for “self-help”. (Information gathered from multiple sources)

1) Vinny Argentina (Line station: Title II, Local 501)
2) Brian McMahon (DCA-Line station: Title I, Local 510)
3) Jorge Rojas (MIA-Line Station: Title I, Local 561)
4) Bob Owens (JFK-Line Station: Title I, Local 562)
5) John Ruiz (LAX-Line Station: Title I, Local 564)
6) Larry Pike (AFW-Station: Title I, Local 567)
7) John Compton (AFW-Station: Title II, Local 567)
8) Rep ? (line station: Title II, Local ?)

MOST IMPORTANTLY, who voted AGAINST A RELEASE, for asking NMB to be released- "30 day cooling off period" to establish a deadline, the next step of "self-help?” WHY?

 

[toroshark]

Nope. No joke Red. Its right in line with what the "NO voting" majority authorized the negotiating committee to do moving forward. Now, lets look at what the intent was by breaking down the statement on your 2010 ballot. The statement as written said. "I vote to reject and authorize the negotiating team to take whatever action necessary up to and including a strike."

Part #1) "I vote to reject and authorize the negotiating team to take whatever action necessary "

You'll love this part Red B) This means the "No voters" authorized the negotiating committee to whatever action they deem appropriate to reach an agreement. Even if it includes leaving you in the dark, if they so choose, or serving Exlax tainted cookies to the companys negotiators as they negotiate a deal.

Part #2) " up to and including a strike."

Progress has been made and to date the parties are no where near impasse.

Your spinning goes completely beyond the pale. Are you this stupid or do you belief others are that stupid. If that is what a "no" vote meant than Jim Little and Phat Don are no better than Tony Soprano and Paulie Walnuts.

 

[Bob Owens]

I asked very easy questions, but all I get in return is a flipant remarks. Answer my questions with some proof. Bob has no problem damning these other presidents, but we have only his accusations without hearing the whole context of how any of the votes or proposals went. We have only Bob's version.

What accusations did I make? Observations are more like it. After going around the system on the Road Show and telling guys in NY, Bos and SFO, three meetings where I was present, that they supported GEO pay those two voted to take it out, I witnessed that as well, and a few months later both were picked by the Incumbants team to get International titles. Those are facts, witnessed by dozens of members from those stations who went to the Road Show and plain to see from the Convention and TWU International Letterhead. Are you claiming that they do not have International titles? Are you cliaming that they did not go around on a Road Show telling guys that Tulsa supported the proposal for Geo Pay?

You asked questions for which I could only give opinions and cited things I did not say, how do I know what their motives were? Maybe they did believe that going back to the August 2008 Union proposal in order to "show the 6th floor we were serious about filling those white spaces" (that mysteriously dissapeared less than a year later) was in their members best interestsand that despite all the concessions that the $5 million for Geo would be a deal breaker.

Maybe they also thought that giving up Retiree Medical, having SMAs and all the other concessions was in their members best interets as well, and maybe having been put on the list for those spots at the Convention was pure coincidence. The fact is I cant prove that they took the positions they did to get the spots they got, but I can see what positions they took, how they changed and what spots they got. What was in their hearts we do not know, I have no doubt that the information they were being fed by the International would lead to lowered expectations, Steve Luis did say that 95% of his guys would vote YES on the agreement, so assuming that he truly did believe that then he did in his mind act in his members interests however he was very out of touch with his members by a margin of two to one.

 

[Bob Owens]

Progress has been made and to date the parties are no where near impasse.

Define "Impasse".

I ask because the NMBs statements indicate otherwise. They have walked away from the process citing a lack of progress. Are you claiming that you have greater insight than the NMB as to the status of Negotiations?

 

[Duke787]

What accusations did I make? Observations are more like it. After going around the system on the Road Show and telling guys in NY, Bos and SFO, three meetings where I was present, that they supported GEO pay those two voted to take it out, I witnessed that as well, and a few months later both were picked by the Incumbants team to get International titles. Those are facts, witnessed by dozens of members from those stations who went to the Road Show and plain to see from the Convention and TWU International Letterhead. Are you claiming that they do not have International titles? Are you cliaming that they did not go around on a Road Show telling guys that Tulsa supported the proposal for Geo Pay?

You asked questions for which I could only give opinions and cited things I did not say, how do I know what their motives were? Maybe they did believe that going back to the August 2008 Union proposal in order to "show the 6th floor we were serious about filling those white spaces" (that mysteriously dissapeared less than a year later) was in their members best interestsand that despite all the concessions that the $5 million for Geo would be a deal breaker.

Maybe they also thought that giving up Retiree Medical, having SMAs and all the other concessions was in their members best interets as well, and maybe having been put on the list for those spots at the Convention was pure coincidence. The fact is I cant prove that they took the positions they did to get the spots they got, but I can see what positions they took, how they changed and what spots they got. What was in their hearts we do not know, I have no doubt that the information they were being fed by the International would lead to lowered expectations, Steve Luis did say that 95% of his guys would vote YES on the agreement, so assuming that he truly did believe that then he did in his mind act in his members interests however he was very out of touch with his members by a margin of two to one.

When the final TA was ready to take to the membership, what would we have to give up to get geo pay? I can tell you that the executive board members from local 563 that would give their personal opinion on the TA, they were not for it. What spot does Gilboy hold in the international, or the yes voting presidents?

 

[eolesen]

Define "Impasse".

I ask because the NMBs statements indicate otherwise. They have walked away from the process citing a lack of progress. Are you claiming that you have greater insight than the NMB as to the status of Negotiations?

Lack of progress means just that -- no progress towards an agreement. It could be a refusal by one or both sides to budge, or it could mean that there is waffling going on by one or both sides which is not allowing things to progress.

An impasse typically follows when both sides are firmly dug into their corners. If the TWU is perceived as still waffling, then it's not an impasse. If the company continues to move towards the middle, even if it is only a snail's pace, it's not an impasse.

 

[Birdman]

Lack of progress means just that -- no progress towards an agreement. It could be a refusal by one or both sides to budge, or it could mean that there is waffling going on by one or both sides which is not allowing things to progress.

An impasse typically follows when both sides are firmly dug into their corners. If the TWU is perceived as still waffling, then it's not an impasse. If the company continues to move towards the middle, even if it is only a snail's pace, it's not an impasse.

While there may have been movement on minor articles recently, there has been no "move toward the middle" since May of last year by the compAAny economically. I'm pretty sure most would agree that 16+ months with no economic movement, actually regression according to Bob, qualifies as a tipping point towards an impasse?

 

[Duke787]

http://www.twu.org/international/IECandB/international_executive_board



i have nothing to say

 

[Bob Owens]

Lack of progress means just that -- no progress towards an agreement. It could be a refusal by one or both sides to budge, or it could mean that there is waffling going on by one or both sides which is not allowing things to progress.

An impasse typically follows when both sides are firmly dug into their corners. If the TWU is perceived as still waffling, then it's not an impasse. If the company continues to move towards the middle, even if it is only a snail's pace, it's not an impasse.

Thats not what the NMB website says. There is no use of the word "Impasse". When the NMB decides that further mediation will not produce an agreement, which is what they said, then we should progress to the next step.

By the way the NMB recently released a major rail carrier.

The NMB currently has over 50 open contracts in the airline industry where the parties have entered mediation.

 

[Bob Owens]

http://www.twu.org/international/IECandB/international_executive_board



i have nothing to say

Missed this;

http://www.twu.org/international/IECandB/international_vice_presidents

 

[Bob Owens]

When the final TA was ready to take to the membership, what would we have to give up to get geo pay? I can tell you that the executive board members from local 563 that would give their personal opinion on the TA, they were not for it.

The first time I saw GEO pulled off the table was after the "White Spaces" powerpoint presentation in the Summer of 2009. It was not a question of what would we have to give up to get it, it was sold as 'We have to show the sixth flor we are serious about filling those white spaces". A"supposal" was presented to the company, they rejected it, we went back to our prior table position that was put together in 2007 I believe. There were no counter proposals in May of 2010 when the company threw their proposal across the table, it was accepted as presented with the exception of the mysterious spin off protection that came from the International. The first time I as a committee member saw it was after the Company had already accepted it. IMO the language was a lot of words with no real content, hollow.

 

[Bob Owens]

While there may have been movement on minor articles recently, there has been no "move toward the middle" since May of last year by the compAAny economically. I'm pretty sure most would agree that 16+ months with no economic movement, actually regression according to Bob, qualifies as a tipping point towards an impasse?

Theres no real debate as to it being regressive, they added another year of zero increases. Thats regressive, they took money off the table.

 

[enough already]

AA TWU-Represented Ground School and Simulator Pilot Instructors Ratify Contract..... :blink:

http://aanegotiations.com/joint.asp

 

[eolesen]

Thats not what the NMB website says. There is no use of the word "Impasse". When the NMB decides that further mediation will not produce an agreement, which is what they said, then we should progress to the next step.

By the way the NMB recently released a major rail carrier.

The NMB currently has over 50 open contracts in the airline industry where the parties have entered mediation.

No, the NMB didn't release just one rail carrier. They released a coalition of 28 carriers and I forget how many unions (led by the Teamsters) who were engaged in trying to create a "one size fits all" agreement like what you have advocated from time to time.

Fact is, not all railroads can afford the contract that the Teamsters wanted. The Class 1's like NS, CSX and UP will likely come to an agreement. The shortlines and regionals? Some of them are hanging by a thread right now. Some will wind up with PEBs.

 

[Overspeed]

Thats not what the NMB website says. There is no use of the word "Impasse". When the NMB decides that further mediation will not produce an agreement, which is what they said, then we should progress to the next step.

By the way the NMB recently released a major rail carrier.

The NMB currently has over 50 open contracts in the airline industry where the parties have entered mediation.

So if the NMB won't declare an impasse - for now - and the company or union can continue to make incremental changes to narrow the gap where does that leave us? Sounds like we the members will be waiting, and waiting, and waiting for the TWU to either dig in - based on your description of those in the room, not likely - or the Company to dig in. Company knows that by making incremental changes they push the likelihood of an impasse. So even though you feel that you have the upper hand you don't. The rules of the "game" are set and you still refuse to acknowledge that. Given your position, we the members are stuck with watching, feeling frustrated, and eventually we are faced with the reality of negotiations that seem endless. Is the strategy to get enough "no" voters and get us to the "impasse" declaration you so desire? If that's true maybe you should start now to prepare your members for a possible walkout now. We need to start building that cash reserve to pay our bills if we have to truly be prepared for job losses that could come unless the Company gives in and no one gets negatively impacted by a strike - yeah, that will happen.