Why Tim Nelson is Dangerous to IAM-represented employees at United Airlines

[mike33]

Why yes I do, unlike nelson. He wants to steal my money. Who does he think he is Jesse James of the airlines? I WANT MY RETRO and I will hold him accountable.

Well let me rephrase that !...... Are you a united employee? That's a more specific way of putting it. We know alot of union people " work for " UA but are not UA employees.....

 

[jet job]

rephrase it anyway you want, but dont misquote this " I WANT MY RETRO "

 

[mike33]

rephrase it anyway you want, but dont misquote this " I WANT MY RETRO "

ts a simple ?...are you a united employee?

 

[cltrat]

ts a simple ?...are you a united employee?

Mike his main job is powdering Delaney's behind

 

[jet job]

How many x's do I have to answer. Ok just for. Yes

 

[jet job]

Now the same question to you? or are you just another nelson handle?

 

[mike33]

How many x's do I have to answer. Ok just for. Yes

TY that answers my question of who you aren't.

 

[mike33]

Now the same question to you? or are you just another nelson handle?

US employee..no other handle necessary

 

[jet job]

ouch,

 

[jet job]

nice job on the video timmy

http://facebookunplugged.blogsplot.com

 

[Tim Nelson]

Be Strong and not weary: Vote No and Stick Together
Nobody is proud of these TA's that management created. Nobody. Your company just turned a $600 million profit in 3 MONTHS. For the graces of the membership, stick together. It's not just YOU, you have 30,000 others that can stand with you so it shouldn't be too heavy. You deserve more of a commitment from management than only 7 stations and you deserve work rules. Don't be tired, be strong!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRbuIS2L2Hw

 

[jet job]

nelson you came back. sorry i missed you got tired of your pom pom squad so i took a nap.
you keep going in circles. you just cant admit you are wrong on the TA and keep repeating yourself. the job protection w/ the inclusion of UAX work. What you are babbling about scope is misleading and is a lie.

your video should receive a day time emmy for comedy

 

[jet job]

RETRO + SIGNING BONUS= BETTER TIMES AND MOVING FORWARD TOGETHER 30000 MEMBERS STRONG

 

[jet job]

And we have people in those stations as well. The difference is, 95% of them, under the rejected TA could not be involuntarily furloughed. The other 5% have traditional bumping rights. Big difference from non-union DL, right Kevvie?





Again, ALL the language serves to protect work and jobs. If only 5% can be involuntarily furloughed than there is a limit to outsourcing. Unless, you want to pay vendors to do the work AND pay IAM-represented workers.



Absolutely not true:


Should the Company have a need to contract with third parties for the
performance of covered work at stations where flight activity does not exceed 12
departures per day, the Company shall be entitled to do so.

That language would whack alot of jobs at UA.





The light is being "shone" on Nelson and his minions who have a fundamental misunderstanding of job security and collective bargaining.





Not pissed. He deceives the membership that is why is is a danger to UA employees.





Very sure.





Best contract in the industry. That's the bar set by the IAM in the rejected TA. Next one, we'll see.

just to refresh everyones memory

 

[jet job]

Kev,
DL141 did not ignore the membership's direction that scope protections are a priority. As it stands now, under current agreements, less than 20 percent of the IAM-represented membership at UAL possess scope protections. The rejected proposed contract extended scope protection to more than 20,000 out of the approximately 28,000 IAM-represented membership at United.

When you factor in the seniority based protections--no furlough for any reason if on the seniority list as of 7/1/1999 and no furlough due to outsourcing if on the seniority list as of 4/1/2006--then more that 90 percent of the membership attained protections they never had before.

The goal of collective bargaining is to improve current conditions for the group as a whole. Regarding job security, it is no debatable that the rejected proposed contract did that. However, the membership spoke and DL141 is back at the table to try and make changes to reflect the will of the membership.

The "red herring" that Brother Nelson uses is that we can achieve an infinite amount of gains. There will always be things that could be better. However, we should not make the perfect the enemy of the excellent.

I claim Brother Nelson is dangerous because there are many jobs at risk here and the "drumbeat of no" will only serve to have more people lose their jobs because they are not protected.

The point is, IAM DL141 made vast improvements for all regarding the issue of scope. Nelson says otherwise and he is completely wrong.

just to refresh everyones memory