| Author | My letter to the IBT |
|---|
planedoctor
Site Admin
Joined: Oct 08, 2002
Posts: 306
|
 |
|
Today I mailed my letter to Mr. Treichler, IBT Airline Division Director.  I decided I had better send it priority mail and have a signature confirmation on it also. I wouldn't want to USPS to loose it you know! 
I will give exerts from it for comments. I would love to here from other IBT represented companies and compare notes. 
| Quote: |
I feel as a union the teamsters should have either backed it or given a negative recommendation towards this T.A. Your letter to the Continental Technicians lacked direction. Although you did not state it directly, it appeared were backing the Continental Airlines position.
As a Union member I would like to see the union provide more information as to the economic issues that you used to determine fair market wages. I would assume the IBT did some research during or prior to the negotiations. I think since we paid for this we should have access to this data and have it presented to us.
I feel that the union didn’t take a stand for the Continental Airline members by coming forward with a recommendation on this vote. I look to the union, its lawyers, its economic advisors and the like to evaluate what is best for me. I will of course take time to evaluate for myself the issues presented to me, but feel I’m not getting the support from your organization I’m paying for. I received more information from the IBT on how I should have voted for the local elections then this TA. |
Yes, there was some stats passed out among members and sent in the packages. This available information was not accurate and didn't not compare CAL with the rest of the industry using befiefits factored into the equations. This lack of information in my eyes would have drastically set the gap further then it was presented to the membership.
| Quote: |
My second issue involves the handling of the ballots that were misplaced on the first TA vote.
In the week that followed there was a meeting called by Mr. Greenwell (local 769). Mr. Greenwell informed us of the information he had concerning the misplaced ballots and what would happen now. It was mentioned by Mr. Greenwell that there have been past contract ratification votes that had ballots come up missing. These instances occurred with other companies.
I feel if this information is correct the teamsters should have long ago reviewed the contract ratification procedure and made steps to correct this potential problem so it would never happen again. I think it’s very sad if an organization this size cannot move with technology and correct issues that arise. On this issue I also feel there was a great lack of communication on behalf of the IBT. The IBT never publicly announced its intentions towards this issue. Is there an investigation under way as to where the ballots went? What steps are being made to correct potential problems like this? Not even a “Were sorry and will make necessary steps to correct this” letter! |
I don't think this needs commented on. It speaks for it self! 
| Quote: |
| Concerning the length of time between votes I feel it’s a grave error and one seen only to benefit Continental Airlines to postpone the second vote for over one month. There is no reason there couldn’t have been a “secret ballot” vote done the next week as UAL did under the IAM’s supervision. We lost the two most important chances to make our voices heard and have no one to blame but the IBT. |
Can anyone give an explanation as to a positive reason why this second vote time frame was carried out like it was. I don't find any reason other then the one stated as to why it needed to be carried out this way!
| Quote: |
| This last week local members started receiving their NEW ballots. I find it ODD and once again very interesting that there is yet again another potential problem occurring. I would think that the IBT would make a 110% effort to ensure 100% accuracy in this second vote, but yet there have been numerous people I know that have received two separate mailings each containing ballots. I believe this discrepancy could open the question as to the validity of the vote once again. |
I know for a fact this view is not only mine. This whole vote has been (to use a old term) FUBAR.
This next issue is one I just caught and haven't heard discussion about before. I have had prior experience in the printing industry and with that knowledge and the knowledge I have with document manipulation in the digital world thought this was interesting.
| Quote: |
In the latest mailing I noticed an issue I would like to point out.
Included in this mailing was a letter from yourself as well as a letter appearing to be addressed to you from Continental Airlines. This 3 page document had all the looks of an official Continental Airlines document. The only thing that gave it away as being official was the “Allied Printing” logo at the bottom of the 3rd page. I would like to believe that this document contained all the original material as you had received it from CAL, but question it as you have obviously tried to make it appear original. It would behoove you not to make the document appear original, but only as an included photocopy. |
Are these issues valid?  Are other companies under the IBT having similar issues. Lets hear about it. Networking is the key to a better life. 
I will post excepts from the response from Mr. Treichler when I receive them.
_________________
|
|
 Posted:
Wed Dec 11, 2002 11:21 pm |
|
 |
737
Manager
Joined: Nov 20, 2002
Posts: 43
Location: USA
|
|
Good for you Plane Doctor.  This is the kind of feedback that the membership should have and not the  rhetoric. Hopefully, you will get a prompt response. |
|
Posted:
Thu Dec 12, 2002 2:15 am |
|
|
COLSLATS
Newbie
Joined: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 1
Location: USA
|
|
| that was well put planedoctor its time that we get some real answer from the teamster |
|
Posted:
Tue Dec 17, 2002 1:47 am |
|
|
planedoctor
Site Admin
Joined: Oct 08, 2002
Posts: 306
|
|
Thanks guys, I cannot wait to find out what he will say.
I know the IBT has it seems finally gotten the message that AMT's require a little more attention then they have been getting. If you think about it we (AMT's under IBT) have not gotten shit for the BIG money we have been putting into the organization.
I respect the IBT for the political pull they have and believe if they really want to do something they have the influence in the government to make it happen. They just need us to speak out on our issues a little more and they will react. Silence doesn't get you anywhere!
_________________
|
|
Posted:
Tue Dec 17, 2002 9:52 am |
|
|
planedoctor
Site Admin
Joined: Oct 08, 2002
Posts: 306
|
|
HELLO ! anyone like to comment on this 
It's been viewed over 100 times yet only 2 comments! 
Were these issues valid?
Do you have other problems?
What is something you would like to get a answer from the IBT about?
Hello! Anyone home?
_________________
|
|
Posted:
Thu Dec 19, 2002 10:30 am |
|
|
planedoctor
Site Admin
Joined: Oct 08, 2002
Posts: 306
|
|
Well I received my response back today from Mr. Treichler. Nothing really blew me out of the water.
I don't have the time at this moment to get all the Q&A don't so I will ask just a brief question that maybe someone could answer in the mean time.
Did anyone receive or see a public or even private statement from the IBT apologizing and giving steps that were being taken as to prevent this from happening again(ref the screwed up first vote)?
Could any legal beagles explain to me how data received by and reviewed by the IBT for the purpose of establishing economic issues that are used to determine fair market wages could be if leaked to competitors may be damaging to the company and subject to litigation?
Is there anywhere in the IBT constitution that allows for secret balloting? I.e.. casting your vote in a ballot box at your station vs. mailing it in?
I will get back and publish the Q&A Monday
PLEASE SOMEONE POST SOMETHING!
_________________
|
|
Posted:
Sun Dec 22, 2002 1:05 am |
|
|
planedoctor
Site Admin
Joined: Oct 08, 2002
Posts: 306
|
|
|
This is the response from Don Treichler Director, Airline Division
This reply is to your letter dated December 9, 2002. I will comment on the issues you raised in the order they appeared in your letter.
Why didn't the union recommend for or against the Cal T/A?
| Quote: |
| The Company did not make a last and final offer. Members had requested that we allow them to vote on whatever was on the table. The Company offer did not meet the Union's demands, so we could not recommend it. The Company would not put it out with a Union recommendation to reject. Because of the industry problems and the improved job protection language in the T/A, it was decided to let the members provide guidance with their vote. If the members reject it, the Company then knows it is the members and not simply the union who believes it needs improvements. |
Why doesn't the Union publish all of its data to the members that it shares with the Committee?
| Quote: |
| Some of the data is proprietary and cannot be released. Release of such information to competitors may be damaging to the Company and subject to litigation. |
I (you) was told that ballots had been lost in prior counts. Why was this not corrected already?
| Quote: |
| I am unaware of such instances. On this T/A count we had testimony from Committee members that their ballots were missing. For these reasons, the count was stopped and reballoted. |
Why didn't the IBT apologize and publish what steps were being taken to prevent reoccurrence?
| Quote: |
| Such statements were made. Additionally, the reballoting involved a period of four weeks as opposed to three weeks before. |
Why didn't we reballot the T/A within the week as IAM did at United?
| Quote: |
| The IBT Constitution did not allow for the type of balloting you describe. |
Why have some people received two ballots during the reballot?
| Quote: |
| To help achieve greater accuracy, the IBT dues list was compared with a Company list. Errors such as E. Smith and Edward Smith may have been introduced. These will be screened and corrected at the count. |
Why was the Continental letter of agreement a copy of an original?
| Quote: |
| It was signed through fax copies. The original was sent by CAL to our Washington headquarters for inclusion in the ballot package. The original arrived after the ballot mailing. We were told this occurred due to a security problem with the shipping company. A faxed copy was used in its place. |
Why were three postcards sent to CAL employees announcing the new website instead of one card?
| Quote: |
| This is the first I heard that three cards were sent. I will see why this occurred. |
The IBT should get "its act together."
| Quote: |
| Many initiatives have been undertaken to respond to concerns. Local Union leaders and BA's are being invited to attend the IBT's leadership academy. On site training is being held for shop stewards. A new website was instituted and a Quarterly Airline Division Journal will be mailed to members shortly. Site visits are being instituted for the Airline Division staff. These along with other efforts are designed to deal with the issues identified. Lastly, the Union seeks greater unity within the work groups since "Union starts with a you." Through cooperation and a lot of effort, we can improve both the workplace and family quality of life. |
_________________
|
|
Posted:
Mon Dec 23, 2002 12:44 pm |
|
|
737
Manager
Joined: Nov 20, 2002
Posts: 43
Location: USA
|
|
|
Based on Mr. Treichler's comments I feel he was forthright in his response to your concerns. Particularly, his explanation of the lack of IBT endorsement of the TA. It only makes sense that the IBT negotiatiors as well as the Intn'l could not recommend ratification of a contract that was not acceptable in their eyes. At the same time they could not advocate rejection of the TA knowing that the company would refuse to even make it available for the membership to review.
As he had stated, the decision to approve or reject the TA would be determined solely by the membership, without IBT endorsement. And, if it was declined it would simply mean that the negotiating team had to return to the table with some more firepower.
Regarding the method in which the re-vote was to take place, it's a fact that all union elections are governed by it's constitutional requirements. And, much like one cannot channge the U.S. Constitution arbitrarily, the election or re-vote process must be adhered to the IBT constitutional provisions.
Whether you were in favor of the TA or not, it's worth noting that Mr. Treichler responded and did not rebuff you. |
|
Posted:
Tue Dec 24, 2002 3:13 am |
|
|
planedoctor
Site Admin
Joined: Oct 08, 2002
Posts: 306
|
|
|
I agree it was nice that he responded in the way he did. I honestly didn't think he would do otherwise.
The problem I have and maybe someone could help me understand is: Isn't one of the functions of the union structure to aid in recommending the best interest of the member? Yes, the membership from what I was told pushed to have the TA made. The vote to make this a TA by the negotiating committee was not 100% unanimous and a best and final was never reached between the negotiating committee and the company. Still as it was stated by Mr. Treichler and my local
| Quote: |
| The Company offer did not meet the Union's demands, so we could not recommend it. |
This means to me that the union rejected it.
He also stated
| Quote: |
| The Company would not put it out with a Union recommendation to reject. |
This means to me that the company is in control of the out come of the talks. Is it not the unions decision to say what should and should not be put out? Another way to read this would be that the company is dictating the unions actions. How can this be acceptable?
Regarding the method in which the re-vote was to take place I have not had the opportunity to review the constitution, but understand if there wasn't anything in place then there was no other alternative voting procedure in place. If this were the case it would sure be something I think should be looked at.
| Quote: |
Why didn't the IBT apologize and publish what steps were being taken to prevent reoccurrence?
Quote:
Such statements were made. Additionally, the reballoting involved a period of four weeks as opposed to three weeks before.
|
I nor the guys I talked to received or have heard of such a statement. If anyone has could they please come forward!
_________________
|
|
Posted:
Tue Dec 24, 2002 10:14 am |
|
|
planedoctor
Site Admin
Joined: Oct 08, 2002
Posts: 306
|
|
This is a bump.
Doesn't anyone have any comments with the problems I brought up? 
_________________
|
|
Posted:
Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:13 am |
|
|
dash8avionic
Newbie
Joined: May 09, 2003
Posts: 1
Location: USA
|
|
I really liked your post planedoctor, that same stuff happened to me and the guys at Allegheny. IBT wouldn't give us any information either, only here's the new ta, vote on it. It only passed on the third vote because IBT left a lope hole in the old contract that the company could raise our insurance premium to anything. So the company raised our premium to $700 a month until the ta passed. Hope you guys have better luck.
Dash8avionic |
|
Posted:
Fri May 09, 2003 4:13 am |
|
|
planedoctor
Site Admin
Joined: Oct 08, 2002
Posts: 306
|
|
Welcome dash8avionic,
Yea, our contract ended up passing on the second vote.
That was back in January.
_________________
|
|
Posted:
Sat May 10, 2003 6:57 pm |
|
|
|
Welcome, Guest
Membership:
Latest: 
Today: 0
Yesterday: 0
Overall: 497
Visitation: 
Guests: 13
Members: 0
Total: 13
