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

[Bob Owens]

Sure.

It's basically the same plan that active PMNW employees still have available under our CBA. Retirees pay 1/2 the premium, and can be covered until the month they turn 65. Same with their spouses. Annual deductible is $350 (or $700 for family). 80/20 plan, and Out of pocket max is 1k per person. We don't do any kind of pre-funding that I know of.

Thanks, how much is the 1/2 you pay per month?

 

[toroshark]

Really? Even though John Hewitt and John Carlise, both from Tulsa voted for release?
Yeah blame Tulsa that's it. Keeping driving that wedge and then bitching we dont have a union.
Maybe we should go sign cards and put in a union strucutre that is one man-one vote, stomp on democracy and then we can find something else to blame.



Robert Todd (Against)
Brian McMahon (For)
Mike Rubel (Against)
Don Dougherty (Against)
John Hewitt (For)
John Carlisle (For)
Charlie Meyer (Against)
Jorge Rojas (For)
Eddie Suarez (For)
Bob Owens (For)
Scott Reardon (For)
Steve Gilboy (Against)
John Ruiz (For)
Bill Houseman (For)
Gary Peterson (For)
Larry Pike (For)
John Compton (For)
Vinnie Argentina (not present)
John Mizwa (not present)
Glenn Jeanes (not present)
Howard Blaydes (not present)

They voted against the 1st vote but for the 2nd ! But of course you only paste the results from the 2nd to justify your indignation. I wish you guys would quit all of the line vs o/h shite, both sides ! I would like to know the logic that was used from the persons that wanted to give the generous company 1 more chance and 1 more month. Would it be possible for Bob to let us in on the jist of the debate?

 

[Kev3188]

Thanks, how much is the 1/2 you pay per month?

Last year, it was ~ $450/mo. for both employee and spouse...

 

[toroshark]

Really? Even though John Hewitt and John Carlise, both from Tulsa voted for release?
Yeah blame Tulsa that's it. Keeping driving that wedge and then bitching we dont have a union.
Maybe we should go sign cards and put in a union strucutre that is one man-one vote, stomp on democracy and then we can find something else to blame.



Robert Todd (Against)
Brian McMahon (For)
Mike Rubel (Against)
Don Dougherty (Against)
John Hewitt (For)
John Carlisle (For)
Charlie Meyer (Against)
Jorge Rojas (For)
Eddie Suarez (For)
Bob Owens (For)
Scott Reardon (For)
Steve Gilboy (Against)
John Ruiz (For)
Bill Houseman (For)
Gary Peterson (For)
Larry Pike (For)
John Compton (For)
Vinnie Argentina (not present)
John Mizwa (not present)
Glenn Jeanes (not present)
Howard Blaydes (not present)

They voted against the 1st vote but for the 2nd ! But of course you only paste the results from the 2nd to justify your indignation. I wish you guys would quit all of the line vs o/h shite, both sides ! I would like to know the logic that was used from the persons that wanted to give the generous company 1 more chance and 1 more month. Would it be possible for Bob to let us in on the jist of the debate?

 

[Bob Owens]

They voted against the 1st vote but for the 2nd ! But of course you only paste the results from the 2nd to justify your indignation. I wish you guys would quit all of the line vs o/h shite, both sides ! I would like to know the logic that was used from the persons that wanted to give the generous company 1 more chance and 1 more month. Would it be possible for Bob to let us in on the jist of the debate?

Not here, but I think you can guess where I stood.

 

[TWU informer]

IMO the Presidents Council and Negotiating committee should be like our Senate, the Senator from Rhode Island has the same vote as the Senator from California. The membership is is like the Congress, the number of votes (congressmen) is based upon the number of citizens. As long as the vote has to go through both houses its Democratic and as fair as it can be. If Rhode Island and a few other states push through something that California doesnt like California can get their greater number of Congressmen to try and kill it, just Like Tulsa representatives could always go directly to their members and get them to vote against anything that smaller locals helped push through at the table. A proper check and balance that would be more reflective of the true feelings of the majority of the members would be for the Committee members to have the option in the event of a dissagreement to have a membership refferendum on the issue with just a Second on the motion for refferendum, like the current weighted vote. So lets say Tulsa felt that the Line stations were trying to ram something through that it did not want, they could stall the proicess and have it go to the floor, where their members could cast votes directly on the issue. Just the ability to delay an undesired outcome would provide enough incentive for compromise.

You seem to forget the House of Representatives is a larger voting body that would be between the membership and the one-man one- vote body and the House body is based on state population. I am all for the one man-one vote system if you will place in a balance vote requirement between the membership and the power hungry that is based on membership size.

I am taken aback that you think our political system is so successful that you want to use it as an example for the Union. Would we have an appointed N.M.B. group to hose the membership over too? We could even make it where money is free speech and if you pay more union dues you get more access and votes in your favor. One day you are very pro socialist and anti republic, then the next day you want to emulate the union after what you wish so desperately to change. Unreal. You are really just in favor of whatever helps Bob and Bob's agenda, like a hybrid of some sort. NO THANKS

I can just see it now under your one man - one vote system, line locals would then outnumber overhaul locals and my job would have been gone long ago, and you would have your's brother.

Thanks to the Line Guys here on this forum, I find myself more supportive of the TWU no matter how bad it sucks.

 

[strikeforce]

Correct, based on 2007 Headcount numbers.

I have no problem with one man one vote but the weighted vote(roll call) is patently un-democratic, especially when the rules are Fluid. Some times only the President carries the weighted vote, sometimes who ever happens to be there carries it.

One man one vote is each man gets to cast a vote.

Less than half the people in Tulsa voted for any candidate yet in the weighted vote whoever wins gets to vote for them in a weighted vote. Its one thing to vote as the representative but another to vote for them. In past elections we have seen where despite the fact that Tulsa has around 5000 members people take office with less than 1000 total votes. There are no run-off elections per the TWU Constitution so majority doesnt rule, just simply which candidate got the most votes out of an unlimited field of candidates and not neccisarily the majority of the votes cast.

IMO the Presidents Council and Negotiating committee should be like our Senate, the Senator from Rhode Island has the same vote as the Senator from California. The membership is is like the Congress, the number of votes (congressmen) is based upon the number of citizens. As long as the vote has to go through both houses its Democratic and as fair as it can be. If Rhode Island and a few other states push through something that California doesnt like California can get their greater number of Congressmen to try and kill it, just Like Tulsa representatives could always go directly to their members and get them to vote against anything that smaller locals helped push through at the table. A proper check and balance that would be more reflective of the true feelings of the majority of the members would be for the Committee members to have the option in the event of a dissagreement to have a membership refferendum on the issue with just a Second on the motion for refferendum, like the current weighted vote. So lets say Tulsa felt that the Line stations were trying to ram something through that it did not want, they could stall the proicess and have it go to the floor, where their members could cast votes directly on the issue. Just the ability to delay an undesired outcome would provide enough incentive for compromise.

We often hear of unity, but if there is no equality then there can be no unity. If one guy sits at the table with more votes than the guy sitting next to him then they are not equal. I hear many complaints at the table about how putting stuff on the blogs and revealing what goes on hurts the process, that it lets the company know things that they should not know but the fact is this process is broken, deceitful (the real reason for the desire for secrecy) and harmful to our members. Its been that way for a long time, long before I ever showed up. Letting our members know what the company has known all along, since half the people on the company's side came from the Union side, can only help bring about the changes that are needed.

Getting rid of the Weighted Vote would be one step in the right direction. But then again is it this way by accident or by design?

From my recollection on a much earlier thread, I thought you said "the roll call vote wouldn't be used during negotiations"??

Then, people wonder why there's this rift between TUL and everybody else!!!

 

[strikeforce]

You seem to forget the House of Representatives is a larger voting body that would be between the membership and the one-man one- vote body and the House body is based on state population. I am all for the one man-one vote system if you will place in a balance vote requirement between the membership and the power hungry that is based on membership size.

I am taken aback that you think our political system is so successful that you want to use it as an example for the Union. Would we have an appointed N.M.B. group to hose the membership over too? We could even make it where money is free speech and if you pay more union dues you get more access and votes in your favor. One day you are very pro socialist and anti republic, then the next day you want to emulate the union after what you wish so desperately to change. Unreal. You are really just in favor of whatever helps Bob and Bob's agenda, like a hybrid of some sort. NO THANKS

I can just see it now under your one man - one vote system, line locals would then outnumber overhaul locals and my job would have been gone long ago, and you would have your's brother.

Thanks to the Line Guys here on this forum, I find myself more supportive of the TWU no matter how bad it sucks.

We ALL pay the same union dues.....so WE should have a system where WE ALL have an equal say!!! And, until the LINE gets EQUAL say, we will always have this rift! I guess your against a FAIR and balanced process for ALL??? Why does your vote carry more weight than mine....you think that's fair????

 

[strikeforce]

From all the rhetoric and non-sense that happened this week in negotiations....WE will have a T/A in November!

There must be a reason why the TUL reps changed their vote between October and November????? They must know something that the company already knows, and again they're not telling the membership??? And, No, I don't expect Bob to explain it on this forum.....but, a special membership meeting or e-mailing the info would be nice!

 

[TWU informer]

We ALL pay the same union dues.....so WE should have a system where WE ALL have an equal say!!! And, until the LINE gets EQUAL say, we will always have this rift! I guess your against a FAIR and balanced process for ALL??? Why does your vote carry more weight than mine....you think that's fair????

My vote carries no more weight than yours. There are just more of us paying dues here so that is the majority.
What part of that don't you understand?

You actually have it back asswards. If the smaller group had equal or more say than the larger group, that would be YOUR VOTE CARRYING MORE WEIGHT THAN MINE.

Wake the F Up

 

[TWU informer]

From all the rhetoric and non-sense that happened this week in negotiations....WE will have a T/A in November!

There must be a reason why the TUL reps changed their vote between October and November????? They must know something that the company already knows, and again they're not telling the membership??? And, No, I don't expect Bob to explain it on this forum.....but, a special membership meeting or e-mailing the info would be nice!

At least agree on this!

 

[Tex-Mech]

Really? Even though John Hewitt and John Carlise, both from Tulsa voted for release?
Yeah blame Tulsa that's it. Keeping driving that wedge and then bitching we dont have a union.
Maybe we should go sign cards and put in a union strucutre that is one man-one vote, stomp on democracy and then we can find something else to blame.

Yes Really...but you already knew that while you defended your hero's John and John. They voted against a request for immediate release, and voted for some BS down the road release. No one else to blame on this vote other than Tulsa, Gilboy, and a few minor committee voters. The vote passed otherwise on a straight up vote.

After the report to the full M&R Negotiating Committee, a motion was made “to request a formal release from the NMB dated October 7, 2011”. In addition to the motion, a roll-call vote was requested. The following are the results of that vote:

Robert Todd (Against)
Brian McMahon (For)
Mike Rubel (Against)
Don Dougherty (Against)
John Hewitt (Against)
John Carlisle (Against)
Charlie Meyer (Against)
Jorge Rojas (For)
Eddie Suarez (For)
Bob Owens (For)
Scott Reardon (For)
Steve Gilboy (Against)
John Ruiz (For)
Bill Houseman (For)
Gary Peterson (For)
Larry Pike (For)
John Compton (For)
Vinnie Argentina (not present)
John Mizwa (not present)
Glenn Jeanes (not present)
Howard Blaydes (not present)

This motion failed.

 

[Bob Owens]

From all the rhetoric and non-sense that happened this week in negotiations....WE will have a T/A in November!

There must be a reason why the TUL reps changed their vote between October and November????? They must know something that the company already knows, and again they're not telling the membership??? And, No, I don't expect Bob to explain it on this forum.....but, a special membership meeting or e-mailing the info would be nice!

My concern is you may be right on a TA by Nov30.

While none of this of course was discussed and its all my opinion, IMO , it has to do with three elections, 562, 563 and 564. All three elections are in December.

I dont know if the Tulsa reps are in it or not, I hope not, but I've been pushing for a release since April and the comment was made that I was doing so just to get re-elected. My opinion is Tulsa is caught in the middle of all this and I understand their reluctance to want to get to self help as they are more vulnerable in Tulsa than other stations if things go badly.

In April we were told "wait till they actually make a counter proposal in May"

In May we were told " they moved a little so lets see what happens in June"

In June we were told "the full committee has to make that decision, and there will be a big announcement in July and the company will have a better idea where they can go by then"

In July the vote passed but we were told "wait till Larry Gibbons shakes up the company in August and there should be a deal with the pilots by then"

In August Gibbons slamed us and we were told not to ask because the company said they were willing to talk as long as talks were productive. So lets wait till September. The committee voted to wait on asking for the release.

In September we were told that there was a big board meeting and they should have a deal with the pilots by the end of September. So lets wait till October, that was the Friday before Peterson took office.

In October those wanting to call for the release were now the majority and we wanted to call for it Friday, so we could maximize pressure during the Holiday season, the weighted vote was called for and in the end we settled on Nov 30th. If granted that would put us into self help just after Christmas.

Last time I ran all of a sudden four guys , two of whom now hold International Titles show up in our Local saying "We are at a critical point in Negotiations and we dont want any changes to the Committee".

This time it may be another roll called TA, thats worse than what we turned down, with the hope that the members of 562 and 564 will vent their fustrations on their sitting Presidents who were against the TA. Only then will I know where the Tulsa reps stand. I believe some are hoping that JR and I get voted out and they get their concessions put in place.

 

[TWU informer]

Yes Really...but you already knew that while you defended your hero's John and John. They voted against a request for immediate release, and voted for some BS down the road release. No one else to blame on this vote other than Tulsa, Gilboy, and a few minor committee voters. The vote passed otherwise on a straight up vote.

After the report to the full M&R Negotiating Committee, a motion was made “to request a formal release from the NMB dated October 7, 2011”. In addition to the motion, a roll-call vote was requested. The following are the results of that vote:

When somone points out the facts, that makes these two my hero? Really?

Emotional outburst, name calling, and proposterous claims is more childhood playground rhetoric than debate.

Maybe we are getting exactly what we desrerve. Should unprofessional and childish jack asses really be compensated top in the industry?

What everyone should be asking is "IF THE MEDIATOR REALLY SAID WE WOULD NOT BE RELEASED", then why ask in November?
We are obvioulsy being lied to and your Hero Bob Ownes refuses to tell the truth here. He participates just like the rest in the secret keeping.
This is nothing more than another TWU Ruse

 

[Tex-Mech]

This time it will be another roll called TA, thats worse than what we turned down, with the hope that the members of 562 and 564 will vent their fustrations on their sitting Presidents who were against the TA. They are hoping that JR and I get voted out and they get their concessions put in place.

Exactly, and that is why the concession voter (pusher) TWU Informer is now trying to justify the roll call vote, and at the same time take cheap shots at Bob. I'm starting to think that Informer is working with the TWU or the company to see to it that JR and you are not relected, so he can get the Tulsa concession agenda through.