louie Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Make your selection Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VDTRANSMAN Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Make your selection You need to modify your poll. A Support company wide seniority to bump lowest member company wide at time of layoff. B Keep current structure with the zone bumping rules put in place with the modifications. C Keep current structure but get rid of zone bumping rules put in place with the modifications. I dont think people realize how messed up this zone bumping rule is, but I am sure they will find out real soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
local400future Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 You need to modify your poll. A Support company wide seniority to bump lowest member company wide at time of layoff. B Keep current structure with the zone bumping rules put in place with the modifications. C Keep current structure but get rid of zone bumping rules put in place with the modifications. I dont think people realize how messed up this zone bumping rule is, but I am sure they will find out real soon. Zone bumping makes sense. It tries to limit the disruption to employees lives by seniority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VDTRANSMAN Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 (edited) Zone bumping makes sense. It tries to limit the disruption to employees lives by seniority. Really? Hows that gonna work out when the low man in his zone gets bumped out even though he has a ton of people under him in another zone? Limit the disruption to which employees lives and by WHO'S seniority? If low man is in Kentucky and you want to bump somebody, bump the person in Kentucky. Leave me the fk alone if Im not low man. National seniority or nothing. Edited February 19, 2010 by VDTRANSMAN 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim Reaper Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Really? Hows that gonna work out when the low man in his zone gets bumped out even though he has a ton of people under him in another zone? Limit the disruption to which employees lives and by WHO'S seniority? If low man is in Kentucky and you want to bump somebody bump the person in Kentucky. Leave me the fk alone if Im not low man. National seniority or nothing. the way zone bumping was explained to me was any zone with at least 1 person on ILO will fall under the zone bumping/placement. So all zones with ILO would actually start the bump with the zone with the lowest seniority out of all affected zones. Then the next lowest person in a ILO zone etc, etc. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VDTRANSMAN Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 the way zone bumping was explained to me was any zone with at least 1 person on ILO will fall under the zone bumping/placement. So all zones with ILO would actually start the bump with the zone with the lowest seniority out of all affected zones. Then the next lowest person in a ILO zone etc, etc. ??? After reading what you wrote several times I have no idea what you are talking about. ??? Anybody else understand what he wrote? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chriper Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 the way zone bumping was explained to me was any zone with at least 1 person on ILO will fall under the zone bumping/placement. So all zones with ILO would actually start the bump with the zone with the lowest seniority out of all affected zones. Then the next lowest person in a ILO zone etc, etc. i vote no,,my seniority is not that great,,,avg 13 yrs,,what is,,is folks,,,but you want me to bump someone in buffalo if i get laid off?? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 Do we really trust our "leadership" to do it honestly or by the book? Or do we believe that games will be played? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trufflebuns Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 Do we really trust our "leadership" to do it honestly or by the book? Or do we believe that games will be played? Ahahaha! The games have never stopped. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
local400future Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 Really? Hows that gonna work out when the low man in his zone gets bumped out even though he has a ton of people under him in another zone? Limit the disruption to which employees lives and by WHO'S seniority? If low man is in Kentucky and you want to bump somebody, bump the person in Kentucky. Leave me the fk alone if Im not low man. National seniority or nothing. So the guy with 25 years should be forced out of state 5 years before he can retire so the 5 year guy isn't inconvenienced? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
louie Posted February 20, 2010 Author Share Posted February 20, 2010 Majority wants the language unchanged by a slim margin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
louie Posted February 21, 2010 Author Share Posted February 21, 2010 :stats: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el norte Posted February 21, 2010 Share Posted February 21, 2010 So the guy with 25 years should be forced out of state 5 years before he can retire so the 5 year guy isn't inconvenienced? if you have 25 yrs, I doubt you would be laid off. Of course, that is if your plant isnt shuttered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VDTRANSMAN Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 So the guy with 25 years should be forced out of state 5 years before he can retire so the 5 year guy isn't inconvenienced? If the 5 year guy isn't low seniority, ABSOLUTELY! Looks to me like you want your cake and eat it too. Shit why dont you demand a reserved parking spot while your at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Von Munchenhausen Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 Really? Hows that gonna work out when the low man in his zone gets bumped out even though he has a ton of people under him in another zone? Limit the disruption to which employees lives and by WHO'S seniority? If low man is in Kentucky and you want to bump somebody, bump the person in Kentucky. Leave me the fk alone if Im not low man. National seniority or nothing. Like it or not seniority rules. The union should allow low seniority in zone to be forced to go out of zone. The union is based on seniority. Why should someone with 20 years be forced out while someone with 5 stays put? That makes no sense at all and goes against everything the union stands for. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
local400future Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 If the 5 year guy isn't low seniority, ABSOLUTELY! Looks to me like you want your cake and eat it too. Shit why dont you demand a reserved parking spot while your at it. But he is the low seniority guy IN ZONE. That's the whole puposes of the zones, to limit the disruption to the membership BY SENIORITY. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilTwin Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 (edited) But he is the low seniority guy IN ZONE. That's the whole puposes of the zones, to limit the disruption to the membership BY SENIORITY. I think plant seniority should stay golden...I'm a high seniority employee looking for placement but i'm not looking forward to displacing anyone. What we need to do is get the company to hire at the plants that are working O.T. or have outside contractors working. Also, make some of the parts plants ford plants again for now until the economy gets going again. Point is , the company could work with the membership if they want to...but will they? Do they care or is it all about low cost. I say if that's their stance than we should strike... Edited February 23, 2010 by EvilTwin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerad Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 Make your selection Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenhawkings Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 Really? Hows that gonna work out when the low man in his zone gets bumped out even though he has a ton of people under him in another zone? Limit the disruption to which employees lives and by WHO'S seniority? If low man is in Kentucky and you want to bump somebody, bump the person in Kentucky. Leave me the fk alone if Im not low man. National seniority or nothing. key words "in zone" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VDTRANSMAN Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 But he is the low seniority guy IN ZONE. That's the whole puposes of the zones, to limit the disruption to the membership BY SENIORITY. You keep speaking of seniority but only want seniority to rule when and how it benefits you the most. I say yes to seniority regardless of what ZONE your in. Anything different you can kiss my ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
local400future Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 (edited) You keep speaking of seniority but only want seniority to rule when and how it benefits you the most. I say yes to seniority regardless of what ZONE your in. Anything different you can kiss my ass. No, I think seniority should always rule, regardless of whether it benefits me or not. It's part of being in a union, you take the good with the bad. Edited February 24, 2010 by local400future 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe B Gone Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 No, I think seniority should always rule, regardless of whether it benefits me or not. It's part of being in a union, you take the good with the bad. I'll take it one step further. One date, period, things get more "gray" when you have " company, trade, date of entry ect..., " hell you can have 3 different dates, that's Bull Sh@t. you got hired on date X period. That is the benefit of seniority. If you don't like it then you should of got hired earlier, period!! This system would stop any hanky-panky from going on. International would only have to maintain 1 list. No more hiding Peter, to screw Paul. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VDTRANSMAN Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 No, I think seniority should always rule, regardless of whether it benefits me or not. It's part of being in a union, you take the good with the bad. Really? So the guy with 25 years should be forced out of state 5 years before he can retire so the 5 year guy isn't inconvenienced? If you believed what you are saying then you would be in agreement that high seniority should take out low seniority regardless of what zone they are in. You take the good with the bad right? Dont tell me your going to bump me out but I cant do the same to lower seniority because they are not in my zone. FK that. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buyus Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 I believe in one seniority but I don't think you shoul be able to bump someone out. When there is an openning you should have your seniority wether in trades or not. NONE OF THIS TEMP FULL TIME BULL SH@T, LIKE AT AAI. When AAI went down in the 1990's Monroe, Wixom, Maumee, ect., took people from AAI and they had there seniority. Most of those people didn't return to AAI when the plant ramped back up in the late 1990's because assembly is alot harder work, as we all know. Just an example when the situation is reversed the temp full time employees get FK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
local400future Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 Really? If you believed what you are saying then you would be in agreement that high seniority should take out low seniority regardless of what zone they are in. You take the good with the bad right? Dont tell me your going to bump me out but I cant do the same to lower seniority because they are not in my zone. FK that. Let's say I'm laid off. An opening occurs in Chicago and I am offered the job. I don't want the job and staying on layoff is not an option. Therefore, I bump the lowest seniority person in zone. That person then has the choice to either go out of zone to Chicago or basically quit. I would imagine they would start ask high/force low of all the people on layoff to go out of zone and depending on their zone seniority they either bump low zone, take the job out of zone, or quit (for lack of a better word). So yes, if I bump you it's because there is an opening in another zone that I don't want that will go to you. 1 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.