Originally Posted by
finis72
I imagine the results don't vary much from contract survey to contract survey; more pay, more time off, etc etc.
Don't think that's true finis. Seems like there's always new dangers that change my priorities. For example, after our merger with you guys I didn't see the danger in European JV's and the need for punitive language for non-compliance. For C2015, I'll be prioritizing punitive language that automatically triggers since I don't trust that my union will file a grievance to defend the language. I think survey results would vary quite a bit from contract to contract. There's no reason not to release the results AFTER the contracted is voted in.
Originally Posted by
finis72
I think T said it best, do your due diligence on a TA and vote accordingly and accept the fact that majority rules and you might not be on that side of the fence. You also have to realize that most every voting pilot did their own due diligence and voted accordingly. The fact that they didn't vote the way you did doesn't make them any less than you or "sheep" or some other derogatory name.
This premise of yours gives a complete pass to the C2012 MEC admins finis and that's wrong. Some of our own yes voting reps did so because they felt the MEC admins put them in a no-win situation by signing a TA that had provisions specifically prohibited by the reps. They were worried greater harm might be done by forcing an angry and humiliated NC to go back to the table with management.
Nobody is disputing majority rules. I'm just saying we deserve metrics by which we can determine the effectiveness of union leadership and its internal processes.
Originally Posted by
finis72
The only reason to see a prior survey would be to cast dispersion on the elected NC and try to come up with a conspiracy theory or some tidbit to support your losing side on the TA, neither of which is good with contract 2015 gearing up.
I think you mean cast aspersions, and no that's not the only reason to see survey results. Even the "winning" side might like to measure effectiveness. I'll bet a significant portion of the C2012 "winning side" did so because it was the least bad of two very bad choices (the worst choice being forcing the NC to go back to the table). Those folks also deserve the ability to know what happened and measure effectiveness. It could very well change their vote rationale next time.
Originally Posted by
finis72
Good luck on contract 2015, I hope it's such a slam dunk that it passes 75-25 which in itself would be historic.
Thanks man. It will very likely be my last one, so I'm very hopeful also.
Carl