DEFCON Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 At this juncture I can say that like most other employee's, I don't like what's going on however, I depend on Jazz and it would be my opinion that the votes from here on in should be "recorded". In that way an individual choosing to vote "no" could then be terminated by Farley as they have indicated that they no longer wish to be employed here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfhunter Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 The various “DEFCON” levels of the past were established, at least in part, to protect us from the very ideology you now seem to embrace. Lets hope Elections Canada doesn’t run with your idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 That's very funny, thank you.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Databus Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 *****sniff...sniff....smells like....truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 sniff sniff the truth?.. I must have missed something?.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Gapper Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 That's what there will be if AC liquidates because of an ACPA "NO" vote. We all know that they'll point the finger elsewhere. They've done it twice in two weeks, first at ALPA, now at Keller!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Databus Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 If you read DEFCONs post, then there was nothing to miss. There is a lot of truth to what he says...with a few grains of salt of course... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Gapper Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 That's what there will be if AC liquidates because of an ACPA "NO" vote. They will point the finger elsewhere, they always do, heck they've done it twice in 2 weeks, first at ALPA, now at Keller, did we really expect anything else? I think ACPA should be held accountable for every negative press release they're actions have created toward AC. Each press release/fiasco drives away more passengers, costing everyone more money and possibly their jobs. After ACPA's last crisis that gained the front page (it was avoidable),Joe Public didn't care about ratification votes until ACPA has to start chirping again about the possibility of a "NO" vote because of seniority issues, now it's front page news again. What a friggin gong show!!! By the way, Northwest Airlines thanks ACPA for removing all faith in AC and providing them with an additional $20,000 in revenue as my extended family booked with them for their flight to Asia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 still don't get it, the truth that is, but I'll be the first to admit I'm a little slow. cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peanuts Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 I second that ! Can that also be done at the Teamsters ratification meetings ? The people who think they can arbitrarely go screw up the lives of their co-workers because they don't think the TA is "fair", can go find employment elsewhere. I don't believe I'd be a "fair" co-worker to work with if I heard that they had voted "no". Ah,...I feel much better now that I vented a little Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 Unless you know exactly what the other bargaining units giving up, I do not see how you can make this type of statement.The majority of folks I have spoken to in maintenance have stated that it will be a "no" vote, we all realize that we will have to have some sort of give backs, but we feel that what the union and the company has agreed to goes to far, and ya ya I know all the doom and gloom,be we are willing to take our chances.In fact many have stated that they would be willing to give up more in some areas to protect other areas, but neither the company nor our union is willing to liste to us, so a s a result it will be a no vote, but by no means does that equate to not wanting to work for this company, that is a foolish statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peanuts Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 sorry Robert but I don't believe it is a foolish statement. That's it, that's all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Databus Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 No worries...get the voters to sign their ballots. Farley terminates the "no" voters... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 Try reading the entire TA from the IAM, you will se why the majority of maintenance is voting NO.go to www.iam140.org click on the post CCAA contract and read all 30 pages, you may have a different view of you thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peanuts Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 Allrighty then, I will go and read the TA. Thankx for the website. Peanuts. If I don't come back anytime soon it may mean I changed my mind, it may not have changed my mind. Means I am still busy reading. Peanuts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Wingjockey Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 Who says all maintenance are voting no? Certainly not in yhz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 No worries...get the voters to sign their ballots. Farley terminates the "no" voters... Ok good, then it is as I thought, thank you.. So, first off, it is an opinion I think, as opposed to the “truth”.. however, what I was really getting at is that should DEFCON’s foresight be realized, where would it end, hence my ‘funny’ remark. Do not intend to get into a long debate, especially as I am feeling a little blue these days, only trying to point out that though you may agree with DEFCON’s POV, in reality, it is not something anyone will take too seriously. IMO. Have a nice evening. dragon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Wingjockey Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 You STILL don't get it do you? This is not a negotiation. It is a SIMPLE yes I want to keep my job or no I do not and I will bring the company down with me. Try reading up on EXACTLY what CCAA is. Why not just quit, you'll get your ei that much sooner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre Garneau Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 Short and to the point! PG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peanuts Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 Read the maintenance TA. Not pretty ! Could you show me one that is ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 ....sigh... Where to start?... 200 NEW messages since last night! Anyway, don't assume Robert's got the surest handle on how it'll go in maintenance. Yes, a lot of us are thouroughly *annoyed* at this, but what can we do? Sweet diddly doo-dah, except take it. Some of us (not Robert apparently) believe there will be no government saviour, so we'll accept this horrible deal. In fact, most of those I talk to will vote to accept it. Given a split vote among maintenance, and a probable majority yes vote among station attendants, the IAM will very likely be accepting this one. At least, that's my opinion. Mitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bat Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Seems odd that you demand to know who is voting YES/NO whilst hiding behind your handle here. How about you decloak here so that your co-workers can hear your views from the source? Maybe we can have hidden cameras at all of your work stations, this would assist us in eliminating unproductive employees. While your at it, why not torch the Charter of Rights? Voted Liberal last time, didn't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bat Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Seems odd that you demand to know who is voting YES/NO whilst hiding behind your handle here. How about you decloak here so that your co-workers can hear your views from the source? Maybe we can have hidden cameras at all of your work stations, this would assist us in eliminating unproductive employees. While you're at it, why not torch the Charter of Rights? Voted Liberal last time, didn't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peanuts Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 And you are ????? To you it really isn't important as to WHO I am, is it ? As I really don't need to know who you are. But I'll let you in on a secret.....ssssssh,...I work for Jazz. And I knew I saw a Bat at the Liberal voting office last year I am a "yes" voter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 I would be a yes voter also , except for about two items I feels need changing, number one being that there is no way tatthe folks who are forced to work mids, should have the premium for that shift pulled from them, it was the only consolation that hey had for working that shift, I would even give up another half percent to ensure thatthese folks retained that premium. The other item is this mandatory 200 hour overtime time bank, that is for only maintenance, this will come back to hurt the company, as very few will work O/T and very few will now go on AOG's.If they were to change those 2 items, they will get my yes vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.