Ktp1989 Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 Send your comments to feedback@uaw.org IUAW, You guys can't be serious. We have given everything you have ask for to the company that was promised to be returned to us but nothing has...not gotten a raise in 10 years while IUAW has gotten several. Our membership has dropped by 20k in past 10 years but did International reduce it's number like plants leadership based on head count...of course not. Now you get two-tier wages into the system and wonder why your coffers have dropped. How can a strike fund drop from 1 billion to 1/2 billion when we have not struck in 40 years? We will never strike again...those days are gone! The company gets whatever it wants and when we negotiate a contract and the leadership tells us it's the best we can get...it's not considered a negotiation any longer. If you want the coffers restocked for the 1/2 billion you blew on failed attempts at organizing and lawsuits...get me a raise. 40 thousand plus workers at Ford...get each of us $1 per hour raise and that puts 1 million extra in the bank...imagine how much you can get if the raise is larger. You ask us to make money when the company makes money through profit sharing...how about you get more dues when we get more pay? The UAW is nothing more then a pyramid scheme...kiss the ass of the guys above you so one day you can move up it. Oppose them and you get pushed down further. Problem is everyone doesn't get to the top...only the select few "yes men". I am glad that the Reps from KTP said no to the increase...but I suspect it won't matter because there is plenty of others who will suck up in hopes of a job with the golden goose one day. Bottom line, get back what we gave up when times were tough...like you said you would. Get us the cost of living returned to just remain even with inflation and take the cap off the profit sharing...feed us a line of BS that when the company makes money we make money...yet you cap it? NO...HELL NO to a union dues raise....you guys really think you can pass anything through this membership. Now go scare the Reps into agreeing to do this...just as you did the membership in the last national agreement. I miss my UAW from 25 years ago...this one has no heart. Bring back Ron G! Now delete this before anyone of any substance reads it. Local 862 25 year UAW Member 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 Amen and Solidarity! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 You do understand that the concession contracts were under Gettlefinger correct? Bob king was head of the Ford Dept, but Gettlefinger was the Head of the UAW when they happened. so it seems pointless to ask for a President back that was instrumental in our concessions. And i'm really not the guy to say this, because my grammar is not good, but if your sending a letter to Solid house, then perhaps having someone else proof reading it would be a good idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigphish Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 You do understand that the concession contracts were under Gettlefinger correct? Bob king was head of the Ford Dept, but Gettlefinger was the Head of the UAW when they happened. so it seems pointless to ask for a President back that was instrumental in our concessions. And i'm really not the guy to say this, because my grammar is not good, but if your sending a letter to Solid house, then perhaps having someone else proof reading it would be a good idea. I sent iuaw an e-mail it was only 2 words long. The first word started with an f the second word started with an o. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal50 Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 I sent iuaw an e-mail it was only 2 words long. The first word started with an f the second word started with an o. It matters little if its your short letter or the 1st one above posted, they should be able to figure it out and get the message. ( Or not ) Until the membership gets back any of the things we voluntarily gave up the IUAW has a lot of balls suggesting any dues increase. Remember this same IUAW group was in charge when they asked for and supported even more give backs than what we originally agreed to, it was voted on and failed by a large margin. If they raise dues look for more people to seriously opt out of paying any dues all together and they would have themselves to blame. Need money ? Cut your own staffing , travel , overhead , expenses or sell Black Lake and get office space in downtown Detroit or closer to where the members actually work. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) I sent iuaw an e-mail it was only 2 words long. The first word started with an f the second word started with an o. Well, I can understand your sentiment. Edited March 3, 2014 by Langston Hughes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
focusfrank Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 The international states that one of the reasons the strike fund is low is because they used some of our dues fund to organize. My question to them is did this organizing pay off in getting more members if so what companies did they organize and how many members did they gain? If they spent our money and got very little in return then it was a waste of money. This dues increase is going to pass because the delegates will see that it does and when it does wait until they see how many members opt out of the union. Them trying to justify this dues increase is bullshit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
focusfrank Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 The international states that one of the reasons the strike fund is low is because they used some of our dues fund to organize. My question to them is did this organizing pay off in getting more members if so what companies did they organize and how many members did they gain? If they spent our money and got very little in return then it was a waste of money. This dues increase is going to pass because the delegates will see that it does and when it does wait until they see how many members opt out of the union. Them trying to justify this dues increase is bullshit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rn4 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 If you all opt out of paying union dues, you will have no chance of getting any concessions back, hell you will be lucky if you don't lose even more if you all weaken the union any further than it is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal50 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 If you all opt out of paying union dues, you will have no chance of getting any concessions back, hell you will be lucky if you don't lose even more if you all weaken the union any further than it is. Two way street. The union is suppose to work for its members , not the other way around. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
focusfrank Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Two way street. The union is suppose to work for its members , not the other way around. I agree. .... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trailfndr Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 They also want to change the name from Strike fund, and call it "Strike and Defense Fund" This move will allow them to use the fund to pay for organizing efforts with NO input from the membership. We surely don't want that, as they have already proven that they can not be trusted with OUR money. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildosvt Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 They also want to change the name from Strike fund, and call it "Strike and Defense Fund" This move will allow them to use the fund to pay for organizing efforts with NO input from the membership. We surely don't want that, as they have already proven that they can not be trusted with OUR money. Unless I missed something, It is my understanding that this move will lock the "SnD" fund to where they cannot touch it? If I did miss it, PLEASE link me (us) to it. Thanks in advance! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigphish Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) Unless I missed something, It is my understanding that this move will lock the "SnD" fund to where they cannot touch it? If I did miss it, PLEASE link me (us) to it. Thanks in advance! This is what the flyer says, the iuaw executive board is recommending that any dues increase be earmarked solely to the strike and defense fund, where it will be used to pay strike benefits, support contract fights and defend members collective bargaining rights. the fund cannot be used for ongoing operations or for political activity. any use of the strike and defense fund will require approval by the international executive board. The last sentence is nothing but a giant loophole and you can bet they will raid this fund just like they raided the current one. Anyone who is gullable enough to believe they wont has their head in the sand. Edited March 4, 2014 by bigphish 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildosvt Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 This is what the flier says, the iuaw executive board is recommending that any dues increase be earmarked solely to the strike and defense fund, where it will be used to pay strike benefits, support contract fights and defend members collective bargaining rights. the fund cannot be used for ongoing operations or for political activity. any use of the strike and defense fund will require approval by the international executive board. The last sentence is nothing but a giant loophole and you can bet they will raid this fund just like they raided the current one. Anyone who is gullable enough to believe they wont has their head in the sand. Thank you for chiming in. I have not completed reading the flyer just yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Two way street. The union is suppose to work for its members , not the other way around. I agree. .... Actually, they both are supposed to work for each other. The membership gets out of the union what they put in and with most people that;s very little so in return you get very little. Our union is weak because people stopped being involved and caring. The most effort the majority put in is noticing that union dues were taken out of their check and to bitch. They can't be troubled to do anything positive like go to meetings, be involved in the charity projects. It's the same at almost every plant, with the same people showing up and the same people getting involved. Our local has 9 union meetings a year and out of 1,500 people you'll see the same 65-100 people roughly every meeting give or take. When only 10% of your membership is involved what do the rest of you think is going to happen. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rn4 Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 If your not getting involved, then you have no right to bitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal50 Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 If your not getting involved, then you have no right to bitch. If you are a due paying member then you have every right to bitch. The dues paying member is the customer in essence paying for a service rendered or not rendered as the case may be. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lquidspine Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 cal50; If that's how you (and judging by member involvement) how the majority feel, that belonging to a union is a "service" no wonder for the decline. If you and a majority of members are going to treat our union like a business why shouldn't the leaders? You are right though you have a right to bitch and do not have to be involved at all, but as far as I am concerned; those that bitch and do not get involved at all, carry as much weight as someone that bitches about the government but does not vote. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal50 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 cal50; If that's how you (and judging by member involvement) how the majority feel, that belonging to a union is a "service" no wonder for the decline. If you and a majority of members are going to treat our union like a business why shouldn't the leaders? You are right though you have a right to bitch and do not have to be involved at all, but as far as I am concerned; those that bitch and do not get involved at all, carry as much weight as someone that bitches about the government but does not vote. I came from being a member ( and steward ) from the IAM / International association of Machinist and Aerospace workers union of 20 years to the UAW / Ford union environment. There is not really a lot of difference between the two how they work on the inside. On the outside they essentially function the same as well IMHO. You or a group of members can get involved as much as you want but it will have minimal if any effect on how the day to day is handled inside your plant. Its mostly set by your building chairman & management and the IUAW that usually backs the building chair irregardless if the local or national contract is followed or not. The one sad thing is how there is very little uniformity on how similar tasks ,jobs, operations are handled at different Ford plants. Select or playing games with transfers or posting jobs and the solidarity line that gets slapped on every campaign poster in the plant but many of those same people you never see past elections time. There are some very good people that do care but I feel they are largely outnumbered by career politicians union staffing that only care about themselves and staying in a position. The only way a person can make a change is at the voting box. People in elected or appointed jobs know they are basically untouchable for the most part. The UAW use to be a real voice for the workers but lately it seems more like an extension of the company and the members are getting double teamed. That is a crappy feeling especially when you are paying for it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lquidspine Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 All that said cal50 think back to how the second modification agreement vote went in 2009, that was led by and far by a bargaining rep, while I can agree most things are decided at higher levels things can happen if enough of the members let their voice be known. That should show at all levels politicians need votes, when enough members are against something and voice their displeasure, trust that it will not happen. 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.