lampshade Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Lima engine votes yes by small margine! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBodette68 Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Lima engine votes yes by small margine! why? because low seniority production people thought this had to pass in order to get a new 2.7 v-6 engine.. the old carrot on a stick routine...pathetic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flipuaw164 Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 why? because low seniority production people thought this had to pass in order to get a new 2.7 v-6 engine.. the old carrot on a stick routine...pathetic YUP SOUNDS LIKE IT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lampshade Posted October 28, 2009 Author Share Posted October 28, 2009 Sorry about the spelling, I meant margin not margine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBodette68 Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Lima engine votes yes by small margine! 246 - Yes 233- NO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2dogs Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 why? because low seniority production people thought this had to pass in order to get a new 2.7 v-6 engine.. the old carrot on a stick routine...pathetic No the skilled trades guys knew what wat up with this deal a ride on the assyline express toot toot. I Love it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2-dogs Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 No the skilled trades guys knew what wat up with this deal a ride on the assyline express toot toot. I Love it. Are you sure that you want to use the name 2dogs? I see that you just joined in July. I'm the original 2-dogs with a dash between the 2 and the dogs. Just so everyone is aware of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkansashog Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 Are you sure that you want to use the name 2dogs? I see that you just joined in July. I'm the original 2-dogs with a dash between the 2 and the dogs. Just so everyone is aware of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkansashog Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 I own two dogs, just wondering if you had a problem with me changing my name to "two dogs" no hyphen? lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CandyCane Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 why? because low seniority production people thought this had to pass in order to get a new 2.7 v-6 engine.. the old carrot on a stick routine...pathetic It passed cause Lima has smart people working there.....They want to work and secure jobs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggtone Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 It passed cause Lima has smart people working there.....They want to work and secure jobs! thought we already did that with the 2007 CBA and all the concessions we gave in that?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
local400future Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 It passed cause Lima has smart people working there.....They want to work and secure jobs! Way to go Lima! Just keep giving and giving at the expense of your union brothers and sister so you'll be the only ones left working! For two dollars an hour! You ever hear of the term "solidarity"? I was told that the plants voting no will lose work. From what I have seen so far none of the plants in Michigan have voted yes. Does that mean if all the plants in Michigan vote no that Ford will shut them down? That'll go over real well with the state. Do fall prey to the scare tactics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
local400future Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 thought we already did that with the 2007 CBA and all the concessions we gave in that?? We were guaranteed work after the 2005 givebacks, the COA ratification, the 2007 contract and the 2009 concessions. Has anyone seen any of that work, or are they going to keep dangling that carrot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digimon Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 why? because low seniority production people thought this had to pass in order to get a new 2.7 v-6 engine.. the old carrot on a stick routine...pathetic I am not a low seniority production person. I can not believe how we could vote yes to giving up our cost of living, pay raises, bonuses, holiday, etc. And now our National Bargaining Committee and Leadership negotiates a modification to the agreement that would bring about 7000 jobs and millions of dollars in investments to plants. That would be jobs for our Brothers and Sisters that are laid off or working in ACH plants that are to be sold or closed. This would even create new jobs in an economy that has little opportunity for the unemployed. Could it be that the cheerleaders to vote no didn’t even take time to go to the informational meetings and find out the reality of the Agreement, JOBS. This was my observation at our meeting. A majority of the members that attended have a genuine interest in their future. There were no concessions. In a time that we are experiencing one of the worst economies since the great depression, its not the time to say no to jobs and security. RECORD FORECLOSURES, RECORD BANKRUPSIES, MILLIONS UNEMPLOYED, HOMELESS RECORD HIGHS, FOOD BANKS EMPTY. WAKE UP!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lquidspine Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 (edited) I am not a low seniority production person. I can not believe how we could vote yes to giving up our cost of living, pay raises, bonuses, holiday, etc. And now our National Bargaining Committee and Leadership negotiates a modification to the agreement that would bring about 7000 jobs and millions of dollars in investments to plants. That would be jobs for our Brothers and Sisters that are laid off or working in ACH plants that are to be sold or closed. This would even create new jobs in an economy that has little opportunity for the unemployed. Could it be that the cheerleaders to vote no didn’t even take time to go to the informational meetings and find out the reality of the Agreement, JOBS. This was my observation at our meeting. A majority of the members that attended have a genuine interest in their future. There were no concessions. In a time that we are experiencing one of the worst economies since the great depression, its not the time to say no to jobs and security. RECORD FORECLOSURES, RECORD BANKRUPSIES, MILLIONS UNEMPLOYED, HOMELESS RECORD HIGHS, FOOD BANKS EMPTY. WAKE UP!!!!!!!! The 7 thousand jobs where recognized as entry level opportunities in the 2007 CBA, why add that many entry level or more without a cap when we still have over 2 thousand workers laid off? I have gone to more meetings than most, I have been to the regional explanation meeting and two unit meetings at local 600. I have debated this for over over 20 minutes with Bob King himself, as well as talked at length with at least 4 of the national negotiators. I can not speak for everyone but please do not try to claim that people are not informed, read the 2007 contracts unpublished letters 7 U through 12U many of these products where already promised. OHAP was earlier this year promised the Connect and now they are dangling another carrot in front of their noses, except this time they wont even give a name or show paperwork on the product allocation. The claim that the arbitration clause is Only over wage and benefits increases is false, if we are in arbitration we can Not strike over ANY ISSUE untill there is a decision made from the arbitrator. Entry level freeze divides this obviously already divided membership /leadership. Our contract is good until 2011 we can start renegotiating then, and in good faith if the company Proves the commitments they have already made in 2007 come to fruition. *edit* I will ask you to ask someone in the know , what happens to all the workers that are Ford workers when they actually find a buyer for these ACH sites....new buyer does not necessarily have to use the current workforce or for that matter use the same labor contracts. Edited October 30, 2009 by lquidspine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReDemption Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Digimon it looks like we did wake up. For the very reason’s you posted. Our jobs are gone, where the hell have you been? Did you ever stop to think about the reasons that people are walking away from there homes? Because of lost manufacturing jobs. You say there are no concessions in the contract modification. So why would they want it? What is in store? What is really hidden? What’s the real reason if no savings to company? Isn’t that a complete oxymoron to concession or should I say “modification”? Why would they (IUAW) even open it if the Delegates told them not to? What’s really not being told? But, I have my reasons for not supporting it. I will never support giving up our right to strike. Remember this great Bob statement, ‘we must live to fight another day”, what the hell are we going to fight with our attitudes? I don’t support an arbitrator telling us we are not “comparable” to non union shops. Or comparable to plants in TN that received 100’s of millions in tax breaks, land deals and building deals. I don’t support more lost tradesmen when in every single plant the tradesmen are out numbered 2 – 1 with contractors. I don’t support the word “commitment” of product. I want the word “guarantee” I can’t support two tier wage worker language period, let alone lifting the cap. What ever happened to “I’m my brother’s keeper” (did they strike that from the Black Lake morning Chant?) Did they really even need it? They have not hired one yet, but FMC is on the news saying that they are looking to turn the corner earlier then expected. I’m not supporting the “will not resort to using economic weapons” language. Not being able to use “Economic Weapons” means that if any of our plants “committed” product is pulled and shipped overseas because their not “comparable” we can’t strike in other plants to cripple them and push our brothers issues back to the table and product back to the plant. But remember, there are no concessions in this modification (sarcasm). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.