Company wide seniority poll

[VDTRANSMAN]

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.

 

I am very well aware of the current rules. That was not the question proposed, but since you want to bring it up, that rule needs to be fixed as well. Either get rid of it entirely or go nationwide. I dont care where or what zone low seniority is in, low is low. You take the good with the bad right? If you dont want the job in Chicago, bump low nationwide or move the fk on.

Edited February 26, 2010 by VDTRANSMAN

[Ktp1989]

We all work for Ford and are UAW members.........company wide seniority.............just my 2 cents.

[local400future]

I am very well aware of the current rules. That was not the question proposed, but since you want to bring it up, that rule needs to be fixed as well. Either get rid of it entirely or go nationwide. I dont care where or what zone low seniority is in, low is low. You take the good with the bad right? If you dont want the job in Chicago, bump low nationwide or move the fk on.

 

You do realize that it would only benefit the company and low seniority to do it your way, don't you? If the company wants to get rid of high seniority on layoff, they just make openings out of zone and force the high seniority people to take it. If the choose not to, then the company just dumped a full pension and a butt load of benefits. Be careful what you wish for.

[lovelincolns]

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.

Plant seniority should only be transferable if work is transferred to that location.

[WTFisgoingonhere]

We all work for Ford and are UAW members.........company wide seniority.............just my 2 cents.

Would that date be the day you went to work for the company or the date of entry that you were given with another company and allowed to roll ford hired workers out of a job.

[VDTRANSMAN]

You do realize that it would only benefit the company and low seniority to do it your way, don't you? If the company wants to get rid of high seniority on layoff, they just make openings out of zone and force the high seniority people to take it. If the choose not to, then the company just dumped a full pension and a butt load of benefits. Be careful what you wish for.

 

No, I do realize that it would benefit high seniority by being able to remain with the company as long as their seniority allowed. It would not benefit the low seniority as they would be out of a job.

 

What you propose (true zone bumping) would protect low seniority as they would continue working while high seniority gets shoved to the street by even higher seniority. The guy in the middle gets screwed while the high guy gets to pick his parking spot and the low guy never misses a beat. That is the utmost disrespect for seniority you could dream up. If you choose to not take an out of zone posting or dont want to bump out of zone, that is all on you. Dont try to force your shit on me. If you want seniority to rule then go for it. Dont try to make up some bullshit that fits your particular wants. The zone bump rules that were put in place with the modifications are bad enough. I honestly cant believe you are retarded enough to try and sell that line of shit.

Edited February 28, 2010 by VDTRANSMAN

[local400future]

No, I do realize that it would benefit high seniority by being able to remain with the company as long as their seniority allowed. It would not benefit the low seniority as they would be out of a job.

 

What you propose (true zone bumping) would protect low seniority as they would continue working while high seniority gets shoved to the street by even higher seniority. The guy in the middle gets screwed while the high guy gets to pick his parking spot and the low guy never misses a beat. That is the utmost disrespect for seniority you could dream up. If you choose to not take an out of zone posting or dont want to bump out of zone, that is all on you. Dont try to force your shit on me. If you want seniority to rule then go for it. Dont try to make up some bullshit that fits your particular wants. The zone bump rules that were put in place with the modifications are bad enough. I honestly cant believe you are retarded enough to try and sell that line of shit.

 

What the hell are you talking about? It protects seniority by zone, then company. It's not rocket science. How the hell does that protect low seniority over high?

[VDTRANSMAN]

What the hell are you talking about? It protects seniority by zone, then company. It's not rocket science. How the hell does that protect low seniority over high?

 

There you go again with your (BY ZONE) shit. If low man in another zone has say 2001 seniority and I am low in my zone with 1999, why should you be able to bump me to the street? Why protect the low man with 2001 (different zone) and send the 1999 to the street? The only right way to do it is company wide seniority. Bump low man regardless of where he is. If Im not low man keep walking. If you dont want to move to keep your job then that is YOUR decision. Dont try to pin any blame on anyone but yourself. I should lose my job because you dont want to move? U can go fk yourself!!!!

Edited March 1, 2010 by VDTRANSMAN

[whereswaldo]

You do realize that it would only benefit the company and low seniority to do it your way, don't you? If the company wants to get rid of high seniority on layoff, they just make openings out of zone and force the high seniority people to take it. If the choose not to, then the company just dumped a full pension and a butt load of benefits. Be careful what you wish for.

Come on....if I had the coice btw. termination and moving half way acrss the states, first thing I'd do is start working on my accent. Reasonable people will bite the bullet and move. Better to have a good paying job and struggle to work things out rather than be terminated and only getting food stamps from DHS.

[local400future]

There you go again with your (BY ZONE) shit. If low man in another zone has say 2001 seniority and I am low in my zone with 1999, why should you be able to bump me to the street? Why protect the low man with 2001 (different zone) and send the 1999 to the street? The only right way to do it is company wide seniority. Bump low man regardless of where he is. If Im not low man keep walking. If you dont want to move to keep your job then that is YOUR decision. Dont try to pin any blame on anyone but yourself. I should lose my job because you dont want to move? U can go fk yourself!!!!

 

That's not how it works. There has to be an out of zone opening offer for the high seniority person to accept/deny. If he denies, then he bumps the low zone person who then has the option to move or quit. It's an ask hi/force low seniority move. No one gets bumped to the street without the option of moving.

[local400future]

Come on....if I had the coice btw. termination and moving half way acrss the states, first thing I'd do is start working on my accent. Reasonable people will bite the bullet and move. Better to have a good paying job and struggle to work things out rather than be terminated and only getting food stamps from DHS.

 

Obviously if it comes down to that, then yes, anyone with half a brain would take it. What this rule does is give an option to higher seniority, what is wrong with that?

[VDTRANSMAN]

I know how the current rules work. They are as screwed up as true zone seniority would be. I know there has to be an offering with the current rules put in place with the modifications. That still does not make it right. Take the job, bump low man company wide, or move the fk on. What is wrong with giving high seniority the option of picking their parking spot? Because you are fucking up my life out of line with seniority (you and your zones can go to hell). If you are out of a job either take the job offered you, bump low man company wide to the job you dont want, or turn in your badge. Simple as that. But Nooooo........thats not good enough for you. You want to pick your parking spot too.

 

If you bump me to Chicago but I would rather go to Ohio or Kentucky, should I not be afforded the opportunity to bump low man in Ohio or Kentucky to Chicago? They gave you the option based on seniority, why not me?

Edited March 1, 2010 by VDTRANSMAN

[Monroe B Gone]

As far as I'm concerned my seniority is like personal property to me! A long time ago the international started playing games with our property making 2 , 3, or 4 different seniority dates to fit their own personal agenda ( protecting kids, self, or cronies). Most if not all the folks that created this mess are long gone. Everyone needs to turn in a resolution at their local during resolution acceptance period and show up with many friends to the meeting when the proposed resolutions are read and voted on at the local level to be brought to the national negotiating board. If we would send 75% of the locals with the same resolution something might get done. If not just do like Dearborn truck does and vote in a new committee every election. IMOHO One National Seniority Period!!!!!! The date you first got hired, how can that benefit or screw anyone??? Your date is your date, period! Don't like it........then you should of got hired sooner!

 

 

 

 

I know how the current rules work. They are as screwed up as true zone seniority would be. I know there has to be an offering with the current rules put in place with the modifications. That still does not make it right. Take the job, bump low man company wide, or move the fk on. What is wrong with giving high seniority the option of picking their parking spot? Because you are fucking up my life out of line with seniority (you and your zones can go to hell). If you are out of a job either take the job offered you, bump low man company wide to the job you dont want, or turn in your badge. Simple as that. But Nooooo........thats not good enough for you. You want to pick your parking spot too.

 

If you bump me to Chicago but I would rather go to Ohio or Kentucky, should I not be afforded the opportunity to bump low man in Ohio or Kentucky to Chicago? They gave you the option based on seniority, why not me?

[local400future]

I know how the current rules work. They are as screwed up as true zone seniority would be. I know there has to be an offering with the current rules put in place with the modifications. That still does not make it right. Take the job, bump low man company wide, or move the fk on. What is wrong with giving high seniority the option of picking their parking spot? Because you are fucking up my life out of line with seniority (you and your zones can go to hell). If you are out of a job either take the job offered you, bump low man company wide to the job you dont want, or turn in your badge. Simple as that. But Nooooo........thats not good enough for you. You want to pick your parking spot too.

 

If you bump me to Chicago but I would rather go to Ohio or Kentucky, should I not be afforded the opportunity to bump low man in Ohio or Kentucky to Chicago? They gave you the option based on seniority, why not me?

 

Odds are the more seniority you have, the older you are and the more impact a move will have on you and your family. I can completely understand your frustration if you're married with kids or divorced with kids, but not if you're just some guy who doesn't want to move. The more time you have, typically the more you have invensted in your family and community. A move could seriously damage, or God forbid, tear your family appart. The house you've been in for the past 15-20 years won't sell, so you are unable to get a mortgage on another house in say Chicago. After putting in 20 years at a company and all that happening to you, is that fair?

 

Look, I don't know your situation, everyone's is different, but to sit there and slam a rule that is based on seniority is utterly ridiculous. Hopefully you'll have some seniority and you'll be able to enjoy the benefits and securtiy that comes with it. Why? Because you did your time like the rest of us.

 

Try looking at this from another perspective and maybe you'll see the benefits of this rule to the union as a whole, not just yourself.

[VDTRANSMAN]

Odds are the more seniority you have, the older you are and the more impact a move will have on you and your family. I can completely understand your frustration if you're married with kids or divorced with kids, but not if you're just some guy who doesn't want to move. The more time you have, typically the more you have invensted in your family and community. A move could seriously damage, or God forbid, tear your family appart. The house you've been in for the past 15-20 years won't sell, so you are unable to get a mortgage on another house in say Chicago. After putting in 20 years at a company and all that happening to you, is that fair?

 

Look, I don't know your situation, everyone's is different, but to sit there and slam a rule that is based on seniority is utterly ridiculous. Hopefully you'll have some seniority and you'll be able to enjoy the benefits and securtiy that comes with it. Why? Because you did your time like the rest of us.

 

Try looking at this from another perspective and maybe you'll see the benefits of this rule to the union as a whole, not just yourself.

 

No, you look at it from another perspective. I am not slamming a rule that is based on seniority. It is a rule that is based on whiney bitches that want their cake and eat it too. Odds are the older you are the more time you have in and your kids are grown and moved or close to it. You should have your house either paid for or damn close to it. Your probably about ready to buy that condo and retire to Florida anyhow. If that is not the case then sorry about your luck. What the fk makes you and your family any more important than me and mine? As I have stated numerous times, I am all for seniority. If Im not low man company wide then move on or quit. Look your not gonna win this argument. You are wrong. I am right. END OF STORY

[louie]

As far as I'm concerned my seniority is like personal property to me! A long time ago the international started playing games with our property making 2 , 3, or 4 different seniority dates to fit their own personal agenda ( protecting kids, self, or cronies). Most if not all the folks that created this mess are long gone. Everyone needs to turn in a resolution at their local during resolution acceptance period and show up with many friends to the meeting when the proposed resolutions are read and voted on at the local level to be brought to the national negotiating board. If we would send 75% of the locals with the same resolution something might get done. If not just do like Dearborn truck does and vote in a new committee every election. IMOHO One National Seniority Period!!!!!! The date you first got hired, how can that benefit or screw anyone??? Your date is your date, period! Don't like it........then you should of got hired sooner!

 

Great post Monroe.

 

We are the union. We can make contract changes exactly the way you quoted the resolution process.

 

The only problem I see is that people would have to actually go to union meetings to make this happen.

 

Most will probably not get involved.

[local400future]

Look your not gonna win this argument. You are wrong. I am right. END OF STORY

 

I'm sorry. I thought your were over the age of 12.

[VDTRANSMAN]

I'm sorry. I thought your were over the age of 12.

 

You obviously dont listen to common sense or reason, so why continue to converse? Move along and skip a few more of your union meetings.

Edited March 3, 2010 by VDTRANSMAN

[local400future]

You obviously dont listen to common sense or reason, so why continue to converse? Move along and skip a few more of your union meetings.

 

Just because we disagree does not make your point right. You don't like the rule, yet it is still the rule. I explained the logic behind the rule, but since it doesn't benefit you it must be wrong. You call that common sense? As to seeing reason, your previous two posts show how unreasonable you are.

[VDTRANSMAN]

Just because we disagree does not make your point right. You don't like the rule, yet it is still the rule. I explained the logic behind the rule, but since it doesn't benefit you it must be wrong. You call that common sense? As to seeing reason, your previous two posts show how unreasonable you are.

 

You are quite wrong, the rule actually DOES benefit me. With the current zone bumping rules, it makes it virtually impossible for me to be forced out of state. That still does not make it right. NOBODY should be forced out of their job if they are not low seniority, regardless of what damn zone they are in. So like I said move along.

[local400future]

You are quite wrong, the rule actually DOES benefit me. With the current zone bumping rules, it makes it virtually impossible for me to be forced out of state. That still does not make it right. NOBODY should be forced out of their job if they are not low seniority, regardless of what damn zone they are in. So like I said move along.

 

So the rule may not affect you, but it's still a difference of OPINION. No one is right or wrong, it's business. Odds are you're worried about higher seniority coming into your plant which will affect you. You seem to be obsessed by this and I highly doubt you are being altruistic.

 

A rule was put in place to protect seniority employees. The membership voted this rule in, so yes, it is right because it is what the membership wants. Maybe you should start going to union meetings so you can learn how a union operates.

[VDTRANSMAN]

So the rule may not affect you, but it's still a difference of OPINION. No one is right or wrong, it's business. Odds are you're worried about higher seniority coming into your plant which will affect you. You seem to be obsessed by this and I highly doubt you are being altruistic.

 

A rule was put in place to protect seniority employees. The membership voted this rule in, so yes, it is right because it is what the membership wants. Maybe you should start going to union meetings so you can learn how a union operates.

 

This does not protect seniority employees, it protects low seniority that happen to live in a different zip code. What part didn't you understand when I said it actually benefits me? With this rule in place I am virtually guaranteed that I can't ever be forced out of state. Unlike yourself, I actually believe in doing what is morally right and fair for EVERYBODY. Get rid of the rule completely or go full National Seniority.

 

I bet you have tshirts that say: (UNITED WE STAND, BY ZONE)

 

The membership didn't vote this in. This rule was a pork barrel rule slipped in with the modifications to the 2007 agreement. Put it to a vote in a stand alone ratification vote and see how it does. I guarantee it fails MISERABLY!

 

It is not an opinion. You are WRONG, as this is a rule that is complete BS.

 

I understand how the union operates. I am sure I attend more union meetings than you do. It is your own people calling you out for skipping most of them, and you not only admitting to it but trying to justify it.

Edited March 5, 2010 by VDTRANSMAN

[VDTRANSMAN]

Do you even know which side of your mouth your talking from?

 

First you vote for National Seniority in the poll.

 

Then you say the current rules are more fair.

Zone bumping makes sense. It tries to limit the disruption to employees lives by seniority.

 

Then you flip back to National Seniority.

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.

 

Then back to the current rules.

 

You want to speak to others about attending union meetings, yet you admittedly skip most of your own.

 

The only problem I see is that people would have to actually go to union meetings to make this happen.

 

Most will probably not get involved.

 

Maybe you should start going to union meetings so you can learn how a union operates.

 

I missed the last three JC meetings due to work and one for personal reasons. In total I have missed four for work and two for personal reasons. We had the summer off and no meeting in December.

 

You have the "do as I say not as I do, whatever way I can personally benefit most, fish out of water flip flop flip flop" mentality.

Edited March 5, 2010 by VDTRANSMAN

[local400future]

Do you even know which side of your mouth your talking from?

 

First you vote for National Seniority in the poll.

 

Then you say the current rules are more fair.

 

 

Then you flip back to National Seniority.

 

 

Then back to the current rules.

 

You want to speak to others about attending union meetings, yet you admittedly skip most of your own.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You have the "do as I say not as I do, whatever way I can personally benefit most, fish out of water flip flop flip flop" mentality.

 

Zone bumping falls under national seniority, not the way you would like it to, but it does. It basically adds a layer of protection for the higher seniority employees.

 

Working instead of going to a joint council meeting is not skipping, it's working. The whole purpose of the union is to protect our rights AT WORK. Plus Sunday is double time, which I am not going to turn down so I can go to a meeting that is essentially a rehash of the meeting I went to four days earlier. All I was doing was explaining to people from my local why I haven't been going to all the joint council meetings. I have only missed one executive board meeting.

 

"It is not an opinion. You are WRONG, as this is a rule that is complete BS."

 

That is one of the dumbest things I have heard so far. You THINK the rule is BS, therefore it makes it an OPINION. Whether or not YOU agree with the rule, it is still the rule. Righteous indigantion doesn't make you right.

 

As to the people who call me outt, wow, it's a whole three people out of a local of around 6,000 people.

 

Respond or not, doesn't really matter, I'm done with this topic.

[VDTRANSMAN]

Zone bumping falls under national seniority, not the way you would like it to, but it does. It basically adds a layer of protection for the higher seniority employees.

 

Working instead of going to a joint council meeting is not skipping, it's working. The whole purpose of the union is to protect our rights AT WORK. Plus Sunday is double time, which I am not going to turn down so I can go to a meeting that is essentially a rehash of the meeting I went to four days earlier. All I was doing was explaining to people from my local why I haven't been going to all the joint council meetings. I have only missed one executive board meeting.

 

"It is not an opinion. You are WRONG, as this is a rule that is complete BS."

 

That is one of the dumbest things I have heard so far. You THINK the rule is BS, therefore it makes it an OPINION. Whether or not YOU agree with the rule, it is still the rule. Righteous indigantion doesn't make you right.

 

As to the people who call me outt, wow, it's a whole three people out of a local of around 6,000 people.

 

Respond or not, doesn't really matter, I'm done with this topic.

Zone bumping is not national seniority. Do you honestly not know the difference?

 

You skip most of your union meetings while telling everyone else they should show up.

I missed the last three JC meetings due to work and one for personal reasons. In total I have missed four for work and two for personal reasons. We had the summer off and no meeting in December.

 

Plus Sunday is double time, which I am not going to turn down so I can go to a meeting

 

I honestly dont give a shit if you ever show up to a union meeting.

However, you shouldn't throw stones if you live in a glass house.

You should also quit talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Edited March 5, 2010 by VDTRANSMAN