QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear Thanks Bob. It appears that friend Jim is a trucker. Not even on the rails at all. I guess that explains a few things. LC
QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear Yup. Lets all come out fighting...
QUOTE: Do you really think the union fatcats care about us at the bottom of the pyramid??! Look at the UTU. I'm sure Boyd and company were much more into lining their pockets than they were about representing the working man...that is why they ended up in the big house... Pretty much everybody else has run to the Teamsters, paragon of virtue that they are...LOL.... thanks, but I'll believe that they will actually advance my agenda when I see it...and it hasn't happened yet...
QUOTE: Ever try to get help from a General Chairman or even many Local Chairmen?? Don't hold your breath...
QUOTE: Sorry, not much there that makes it worth fighting for. Certainly nothing I want to strike over or have to feed my family on some other BS job while I wait for others who decided they just had to be hotheads...
QUOTE: Originally posted by wabash1 limited clear and csx engineer If you noticed people like ed and myself and a few others dont stop in here much anymore . you try and give them the right info and tell them who is leading them astray and the train order crowd that happen to come over hear knows it all. bunch tries to intimidate us . the thing is i work so much right now that i dont have time to argue with them and dont plan on doing so in the future.
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
QUOTE: Originally posted by SP9033 QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear Thanks Bob. It appears that friend Jim is a trucker. Not even on the rails at all. I guess that explains a few things. LC No, I'm not a trucker, I'm a Teamster. A member of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. And I was proud that the International Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers found a home within our union. A home that provided them a place to teach us many things...I see our web site now looks like yours. The only thing I'm trying to say, is I'm here to support all of the coalition as a brother. We either meet these overpaid CEO's as a united front, cut their run-around, mark the line in the sand and show a united front or your grand kids who follow your path will do so at sub-standard wages and working conditions. And how you two craft folks could minimize my commitment demonstrates you have not only forgotten your history, but also have turned your back on the future. Its do or die here fellows. You are either part of the solution or you're part of what's wrong with the labor movement and will help in its death. And please, share with your Local Chairman this thread. This Teamster is in your corner. And they will see my passion for support! And there are many of us. Its really good that both of you are here sharing your expertise on the craft, but as brothers, should you not also be sharing some of labors experiences over the past 30 years? Jim - Lawton, NV MP 236 A Brother of Labor
QUOTE: Originally posted by SP9033 Well I see Limitedclear and CSXenginer have not replied to this thread. Guess there no reply makes my statements fact. Guess we've learned not only are these two folks selfish about today's needs. They completely have turned there back on tomorrow's needs and there kids and grand-kids! Where I work, 100% are union brothers even though our barn is in a "RIGHT TO WORK FOR LESS STATE." Sounds like you two craft folks are non-dues paying members of a brotherhood that operates in a "RIGHT TO WORK FOR LESS STATE." So, just what kind of situation have you planned for your kids that are non-proformers! Jim - Lawton, NV MP 236.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear QUOTE: Originally posted by SP9033 Rail Carriers’ outright rejection of Rail Labor’s proposed ‘ground rules’ derails negotiations WASHINGTON, D.C., March 11 -- The second bargaining session over changes in wages and work rules of the national rail carriers concluded prematurely on March 9 when the National Carriers Conference Committee (NCCC), representing the Class One carriers, refused to entertain or even discuss ground rules for negotiations proposed by the Rail Labor Bargaining Coalition (RLBC), representing seven rail unions comprised of 85,000 rail workers. The RLBC proposed the ground rules after questions regarding the bargaining process were raised at the first negotiating session, held 1/24/2005. At yesterday’s meeting, the rail carriers’ chief negotiator, Robert Allen, said, “There will be no ground rules for these negotiations.” “By refusing to even discuss the Rail Labor Coalition’s proposed ground rules, the rail carriers have gotten these negotiations off on the wrong track,” said George Francisco, coordinator of the Coalition and President of the National Conference of Firemen & Oilers (SEIU). “These ground rules are an attempt to clarify the process in which seven rail unions are bargaining in concert.” The proposed Ground Rules simply covered the following eight issues: -- Who each side represented; -- Who would participate in negotiations; -- The advance notification of presentations by experts; -- The scheduling of negotiations; -- The alignment of common and craft-specific issues so the suitable representatives would be available; -- Mutually agreeing upon negotiation locations and provisions for bargaining and caucus rooms and the sharing of expenses; -- Provisions for information sharing and confidentiality agreements; and -- The finalization of contract language and the process for the ratification of the contract by the members of the coalition. “Since the 1930s, the NCCC has assumed master contract bargaining on behalf of the majority of the carriers. For the first time in decades, rail unions are joining together in a coalition to make sure our members get a fair contract,” said Francisco. “For that reason, we felt a clear set of ground rules would help streamline the process. It is outrageous that the Rail Carriers dismissed our proposal out of hand.” Robert Allen, chief negotiator for the National Carriers Conference Committee (NCCC), representing the Class One carriers, refused to discuss the issue and refused carte blanc to point out what objections the NCCC had to the proposed ground rules. For the first time in two decades, seven major railroad unions joined together in the creation of the "Rail Labor Bargaining Coalition" to coordinate contract negotiations with the rail carriers. The seven unions of the coalition represent nearly 85,000 rail workers from American railroad corporations. The Coalition has developed a coordinated contract negotiating strategy and each individual union will not sign off on any tentative agreements with the rail carriers until all the coalition members concur. The Coalition is comprised of the following railroad unions: -- Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division (BMWED-IBT) -- Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET-IBT) -- National Conference of Firemen and Oilers (SEIU) -- Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen (BRS) -- Sheet Metal Workers International Association (SMWIA) -- International Brotherhood of Boilermakers (IBB) -- American Train Dispatchers Association (ATDA) By presenting a unified front at the bargaining table, members of the Rail Coalition have taken an important step in combating rail management’s divide and conquer bargaining strategy. That strategy features the coercion of individual labor organizations into divisive contract settlements, which then are said to form a ‘pattern’ of substandard agreements that are, in turn, forced on other labor organizations through over-long mediation, Emergency Board proceedings or legislation. A united union movement will restore balance to contract negotiations. Now here is some meat to stimulate discussion on RAIL Labor issue! Jim _ Lawton, NV MP 236 I was reading this thread, now that I have a moment and noticed that nobody had really looked at the root of the issue. As noted in the article above rail labor has formed a new coalition. Interesting, one wonders how long it will last. Now, this new coalition has met with the NCCC representing the railroads and wants to force the NCCC into a bunch of new rules concerning negotitations, that the labor coalition has no legal right to impose and the railroads have no legal obligation to accept. The railroads, represented by NCCC reject the new rules proposed by labor. Big surprise. Now labor wants to impress all of the men out there working about how they are "standing up" for us. Sounds to me like a waste of time and dues money. Perhaps they could simply coordinate their negotiations instead of wasting time trying to bind the other side to rules that no one is obligated to accept. LC
QUOTE: Originally posted by SP9033 Rail Carriers’ outright rejection of Rail Labor’s proposed ‘ground rules’ derails negotiations WASHINGTON, D.C., March 11 -- The second bargaining session over changes in wages and work rules of the national rail carriers concluded prematurely on March 9 when the National Carriers Conference Committee (NCCC), representing the Class One carriers, refused to entertain or even discuss ground rules for negotiations proposed by the Rail Labor Bargaining Coalition (RLBC), representing seven rail unions comprised of 85,000 rail workers. The RLBC proposed the ground rules after questions regarding the bargaining process were raised at the first negotiating session, held 1/24/2005. At yesterday’s meeting, the rail carriers’ chief negotiator, Robert Allen, said, “There will be no ground rules for these negotiations.” “By refusing to even discuss the Rail Labor Coalition’s proposed ground rules, the rail carriers have gotten these negotiations off on the wrong track,” said George Francisco, coordinator of the Coalition and President of the National Conference of Firemen & Oilers (SEIU). “These ground rules are an attempt to clarify the process in which seven rail unions are bargaining in concert.” The proposed Ground Rules simply covered the following eight issues: -- Who each side represented; -- Who would participate in negotiations; -- The advance notification of presentations by experts; -- The scheduling of negotiations; -- The alignment of common and craft-specific issues so the suitable representatives would be available; -- Mutually agreeing upon negotiation locations and provisions for bargaining and caucus rooms and the sharing of expenses; -- Provisions for information sharing and confidentiality agreements; and -- The finalization of contract language and the process for the ratification of the contract by the members of the coalition. “Since the 1930s, the NCCC has assumed master contract bargaining on behalf of the majority of the carriers. For the first time in decades, rail unions are joining together in a coalition to make sure our members get a fair contract,” said Francisco. “For that reason, we felt a clear set of ground rules would help streamline the process. It is outrageous that the Rail Carriers dismissed our proposal out of hand.” Robert Allen, chief negotiator for the National Carriers Conference Committee (NCCC), representing the Class One carriers, refused to discuss the issue and refused carte blanc to point out what objections the NCCC had to the proposed ground rules. For the first time in two decades, seven major railroad unions joined together in the creation of the "Rail Labor Bargaining Coalition" to coordinate contract negotiations with the rail carriers. The seven unions of the coalition represent nearly 85,000 rail workers from American railroad corporations. The Coalition has developed a coordinated contract negotiating strategy and each individual union will not sign off on any tentative agreements with the rail carriers until all the coalition members concur. The Coalition is comprised of the following railroad unions: -- Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division (BMWED-IBT) -- Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET-IBT) -- National Conference of Firemen and Oilers (SEIU) -- Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen (BRS) -- Sheet Metal Workers International Association (SMWIA) -- International Brotherhood of Boilermakers (IBB) -- American Train Dispatchers Association (ATDA) By presenting a unified front at the bargaining table, members of the Rail Coalition have taken an important step in combating rail management’s divide and conquer bargaining strategy. That strategy features the coercion of individual labor organizations into divisive contract settlements, which then are said to form a ‘pattern’ of substandard agreements that are, in turn, forced on other labor organizations through over-long mediation, Emergency Board proceedings or legislation. A united union movement will restore balance to contract negotiations. Now here is some meat to stimulate discussion on RAIL Labor issue! Jim _ Lawton, NV MP 236
QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe But that it were just BS. So the railroads can bargain as a group via the NCC but the unions cannot do the same through the RLBC because the NCC and Limited Clear say they cannot? The unions met with the carriers with what seems to be some very reasonable proposals and the carriers summarily rejected them all and walked out. Talk about setting the tone.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan I know that a perfect world doesn't exist but wouldn't it be nice if people could get along and know what is fair and not fair and negotiate from there understanding the facts and feelings of both sides. I'm sure that is something that we all can agree on.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod I can tell you part of the problem NCCC has with this. The maintenance-of-way and BLE are affiliated with the Teamsters now. (Somebody tell me what MoW has to do with 'teamsters' in the first place...) Teamsters also set up and coordinated RLBC. I spot a power grab. Perhaps it's just paranoia on my part, but I can't help but wonder who's calling the shots, determining policy, etc. for the Coalition... or whether any Coalition success would be used, tacitly or overtly, to encourage other rail-related unions to affiliate with the Teamsters... I usually have high regard for csxengineer's posts, but that stuff about 1991 just won't wash. Just who was representing the unionized truckers back then? I fail to see what the point of the implied sarcasm about 'solidarity' might be directed, since if you're BLE, those folks are effectively YOUR union now. Oh, wait... I remember now, where you stand is where you sit and all that. don't see anything particularly evil about NCCC slamming the door on this effort. Perhaps somethng a bit less obviously associated with the Teamsters might have some more validity with them. arfbfe, there seems to be some controversy about exactly who refused to negotiate on matters of substance. Look here, for example: http://news.corporate.findlaw.com/prnewswire/20050316/16mar2005180203.html Of course, YMMV... but I think this comes via a relatively trustworthy source. Kum-ba-yah, my lord, kum-ba-ya, ohhhhhh Lord! Kum-ba-yah.
QUOTE: Originally posted by csxengineer98 also...a thought that just came to me...i do remember the railroad strike of 91....i remember the news meida talking to BLE members that where on the picket lines for the few hours that they where on strike...i remember one of the engineers that was on strike...talking about the trucks where halling the freight and not honnering the BLE picket lines...and all the news outlets also talkinga bout the strike and how trucks where trying to pick up the slack..... funny how you talk union thier jim..when the teamsters and other truckers where cashing in on the railworkers strike...what was that about labor solidartity? csx engineer
QUOTE: Oh, and lets not forget the wonderful job they did on those negotiations last year with Red Star Lines. I think it was over 6,000 truckers (or should I say Teamsters) who lost their jobs in that fiasco. I believe the IBT demanded so much from the Company in that case that management performed the financial analysis and discovered the whole company was worth more on the auction block as real estate and equipment then it would still operating. I'm sure those guys and their families just love the IBT for that. Hope they enjoy living on food stamps.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.