National back to routes?
- Thread starter Dazy
- Start date
I stay away from everyone in office now. When a new hire comes to me I answer any and everything I can. Beyond that I don’t get involved what so ever. I have my reasons, namely I enjoy my peace way to much to jeopardize it for anyone.
Yep, I remember THAT , QWL/EI as well. And those DJSCs, too !!!
Where is this guide on RRECS?
Dominator
Well-known member
Gotta love that pay wall. 
If NRLCA members not in good standing plunge into sub-standard territory and subsequently absorb an auxiliary route of an NRLCA member in good standing, but the reduction and absorption could have been prevented through enforcing info available within the RRECS guide, would the aux carrier's detriment be the result of a representational failure (DFR)?
I suppose that whole "The Association shall seek, with all of the resources at its command, to assist its members in the realization of their highest aspirations as workers" bit in their constitution's purpose statement (Article II) only applies to certain members in certain situations.
If NRLCA members not in good standing plunge into sub-standard territory and subsequently absorb an auxiliary route of an NRLCA member in good standing, but the reduction and absorption could have been prevented through enforcing info available within the RRECS guide, would the aux carrier's detriment be the result of a representational failure (DFR)?
I suppose that whole "The Association shall seek, with all of the resources at its command, to assist its members in the realization of their highest aspirations as workers" bit in their constitution's purpose statement (Article II) only applies to certain members in certain situations.
gotstamps
Well-known member
sorry, assumed you were talking about the Art 25 Task Force for Hostility.
Dominator
Well-known member
Since the union's purpose is labor relations, I'm not sure what would escape the pool of practicality for each laborer. There may be things, but for me, it's analogous to a "7 ways to Kevin Bacon" tree.
While I'm convinced that terms are misunderstood and misrepresented, I believe locking it up under the premise that others don't/won't understand is too close to thought censorship.
I'm not asserting that's your rationale behind your position (as your rationale is not completely stated), but I believe when an authority head controls truth values, then locks out others from considering or challenging the origins of those truth values, it lays the foundation for power-hungry groupthinkers that go along to get along, with hopes of someday becoming one of the anointed.
I'm not convinced the stewardship (as a whole) has a firm grasp on interpretation. Maybe things are different now with a new board. I haven't received any open arms that convince me otherwise, but who knows what the next few weeks might bring.
As for steward stuff, I'm stuck on whether a good steward "actively enforces the contract" or clings to NRLCA discouragement and sits on their hands when "no one wants to take action".
Last edited:
I don't disagree with open formats. I simply have concerns about opening grievance records to privacy and comprehension issues. Without the ability to have a seasoned union administrator explain the language to someone without any background - it's leads to anarchy. If someone has questions, they can always ask a union official for the background or understanding of a topic.Since the union's purpose is labor relations, I'm not sure what would escape the pool of practicality for each laborer. There may be things, but for me, it's analogous to a "7 ways to Kevin Bacon" tree.
While I'm convinced that terms are misunderstood and misrepresented, I believe locking it up under the premise that others don't/won't understand is too close to thought censorship.
I'm not asserting that's your rationale behind your position (as your rationale is not completely stated), but I believe when an authority head controls truth values, then locks out others from considering or challenging the origins of those truth values, it lays the foundation for power-hungry groupthinkers that go along to get along, with hopes of someday becoming one of the anointed.
I'm not convinced the stewardship (as a whole) has a firm grasp on interpretation. Maybe things are different now with a new board. I haven't received any open arms that convince me otherwise, but who knows what the next few weeks might bring.
As for steward stuff, I'm stuck on whether a good steward "actively enforces the contract" or clings to NRLCA discouragement and sits on their hands when "no one wants to take action".
View attachment 13668
View attachment 13669
While much is shared on this site and, I'm certain others, much is inaccurate in facts. Many times answers given are not correct or truthful. Leading to greater mistrust among the craft. I support accurate, factual answers for all carriers.
One of the reasons I'm sooooo glad we have a new director of labor...JS.
Dominator
Well-known member
Reacting personal info in a document shouldn't be tough for the union. Comprehension is achieved through education. I don't believe it would be difficult for the union to go line by line and explain basic application and interpretive schools of thought on an article.
They have video recording capabilities, and have no issue sidestepping their parliamentary authority to hold Zoom meetings. If they want to build a strong foundation, perhaps explaining the language without any background is just the thing they need to do. Baby steps. It worked for Bob.
Maybe mine is an unusual case, but I've not been very successful when asking the union's ruling class about constitutional or contractual rules. The default seems to be something along the lines of "grieve it and we'll see what happens". The kick the can method also one I've experienced. Directly Asking what constitutes a violation of a particular constitutional rule got me a "we only respond to actual cases and controversies" response, then later getting blasted for presenting an actual "case and controversy"
I hope nobody else experiences similar nonsense in their union communications.
I'm not convinced that holding a higher title inherently identifies skill.
I put that on the people for not dusting off their contract. I feel answers given here or by a rep aren't necessarily correct, but regardless if they are, they could be good starting points for one to look for themselves.
I've not crossed paths with the new DLR, and doubt I ever will. I hope he manifests beneficial results, and that his successor does better, and the same hope for the successor after that.
Or nrlca could actually hire a professional to answer challenges to constitution. Or, I don't know, maybe hire a capable law firm to research, analyze and respond to questions about self rule.
I would support that expense.
Dominator
Well-known member
At least a majority of the National Board can't even handle simple constituional questions/issues, and exempt themselves from their own rules.
I'd love to learn the certified tracking number history of the Appeals Committee report correspondence I should have received "at least 24 hours before the report [was] presented to the National Delegates." at the 2023 National Convention.
If someone can get the National Board to announce that speciific certified mail number on the floor of the next National Convention, I'd get a chuckle out of seeing yet another falsehood in the minutes.
Lou Paloma
Well-known member
Joey wasn't given that option. He had enemies on the board who squeezed him out. So he went back to his route.Hopefully he is doing well with it, but wasn't Joey Johnson also a DLR during the manifestation of RRECS? I wonder if they were both given the same offer to assist.
I can't really take the "task force" bit seriously. Back when I was still shackled to the union, I asked up the chain what solutions the MOU 24 task force had pumped out. If memory serves me well, the DRs I asked had no answer. I was referred to Jeanette who also had no answer. She referred me to Stutts who had/gave no answer.
Any likelihood you'd be able to land a spot in that group, @gotstamps (presuming you're not already on it)?
Jeanette went back to her route for two years.
Not really. She physically only worked the route for 3 months.
Dominator
Well-known member
She just took a break from holding a national board title. She was appointed into the upper level stewardship shortly after "stepping down".
- "fair and equal treatment" requires an absence of discrimination
- "Discrimination" can be detrimental or beneficial.
- Political maneuvering through leveraging appointments conflicts with officer/agent duties.
Dominator
Well-known member
Is the moral of the NRLCA story, "go along to get along"?
