Originally Posted by G4er

You believe AR has “no knowledge at all of any issues”

Ok

Originally Posted by tom11011

I am not looking to disparage you or your thoughtful post, but I belive you may be conflating some things here. I am only pointing this out because your post says these are facts. When you say facts, you imply that the information is final, accepted, or undisputed.

First, this term "forensic audit" is a made up term by some pilots. The union is having a normal audit required by the Department of Labor conducted by Teamsters. The audit has nothing to do with any investigation or election protests. I don't know for sure, but I think the audit would have occured regardless of whether there was an election or not. At the end of the audit, IBT will submit a list of improvement items to the union.

Second, regarding an investigation, there is one occurring from a claim about destroying election documents. But the election was conducted by a third party Global Election Services who retains all election documents. Even knowing this, Teamsters are still required to investigate this claim. To date, no charges have been filed against the Eboard.

Third, there are several protests regarding the election. Those protests are not part of the aforementioned audit or investigation. Those protests will be investigated by the Teamsters JC42. Having said that, this investigation has not even begun yet, there's not even a date to start as far as I know. Again, the election was conducted by third party Global Election Services. If this JC42 investigation comes up with something, it would be directed at the third party not the union members. The protests revolve around a claim that 115 ballots were not counted. But according to the Q4 quarterly meeting call last night, GES has no knowledge of these ballots. AR has no knowledge at all of any issues as all protests reside with JC42, and even if he did know, he can't do anything as it resides with JC42 (I am paraphrasing from the call).

Originally Posted by Captainbfv

I apprecuate the engagement brother. The reason I state FACTS bc my post isn't just thoughtful, it's factual. Factual in the sense that this is exactly what is happening. The reason for saying Forensic, is based on the letter sent to the e-board about their misconduct investigation. Regular Audits do no take that long unless you're talking about a large corporation or company. For example, the FAA does audits of operations every few years. When i was chief pilot I went through one, it's pretty cut and dry and didn't take that many weeks. Nothing takes that many weeks if you have all you "tickets" in order. But if a whistle is blown in the operation of any misconduct, or the fed find any mischief, THEN you can find yourself in a Forensic Audit. Which depending on what they are looking for can take weeks.

Forget the word forensic. This AUDIT was sprung up FROM the whistle being blow, that right there is a fact and it's on paper. Whether you or anyone else wants to spin it or ignore that, well brother, that's on you.

Originally Posted by pipercub

If you state something is fact you have to present the actual evidence of the supposed facts. If not it's all hearsay and rumor. It may be true the audit was a result of the report of wrongdoing, it is also possible that it was bad timing for the Eco. Without an actual document from the National saying it's one or the other you can not state either side as fact. If someone puts up an accusation it is required to be checked out regardless of Truth or not. Most of the so-called facts are just rumors, when any audits and or investigations are completed then we might get all the Facts.

Originally Posted by G4er

These are undisputed facts.

Local 2118 is under audit.

Some one who was elected is charged.

At least 115 ballots that were at the Post Office on or before Election Day were uncounted.

There is a hearing on the election coming up.

Tom says everything is normal.





AR says he is unaware of an issues on anything.

Originally Posted by pipercub

Have you seen a legal document of charges brought against an elected 2118 persons?

Originally Posted by G4er

I seen a document from the Transparency Slate saying they have charged someone who was elected with Federal and fiduciary crimes and some other stuff which I cannot think of right now. But the legal document no so if you want split hairs on that.

Originally Posted by tom11011

lol that’s not how it works. I think you are setting yourself up for disappointment.

Originally Posted by G4er

I seen a document from the Transparency Slate saying they have charged someone who was elected with Federal and fiduciary crimes and some other stuff which I cannot think of right now. But the legal document no so if you want split hairs on that.