IPA: "We are a union, not a social club"
05-01-2010, 09:07 PM
#52
Tri-tanic operator
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Doggie
Posts: 2,382
05-01-2010, 09:12 PM
#53
Tri-tanic operator
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Doggie
Posts: 2,382
I'm not trying to say anything other than the fact that criminal charges against TG won't accomplish everything that needs to be accomplished. Criminal charges appear to be warranted, but it appears that civil claims are being ignored. And outside counsel can't press criminal charges. Only the government can do that. Some people appear to be very confused about the way our legal system works.
please enlighten me ! what am i missing ?
05-01-2010, 09:28 PM
#57
Tri-tanic operator
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Doggie
Posts: 2,382
I don't think the IPA is overlooking any of your ideas, yet.
There still could be an injunction in the works. A lot of good that does when UPS fires Gumbies. Or just gets a court order to stop that one particular type of incident.
I think that IPA letter is vague in certain areas for a reason. Apparently you disagree with that tactic.
I'll let it go at that ...
And if just half of your PM is true. It won't be long until you have what you need.
Without getting into additional detail of the incident I can tell you that the Company has been put on notice that they can expect charges to be filed against UPS and the ACP in the very near future. IPA has contracted with an outside attorney and we are vigorously looking into all possible avenues to ensure the Company understands we will not tolerate these blatant intrusions and violations of our privacy and our contract when we are on layover and not required to be available.
I think that IPA letter is vague in certain areas for a reason. Apparently you disagree with that tactic.
I'll let it go at that ...
And if just half of your PM is true. It won't be long until you have what you need.
05-01-2010, 10:12 PM
#59
Gets all holidays off
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: Retired UPS 767 Captain, SDF Z
Posts: 431
05-02-2010, 08:20 AM
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 1559
Posts: 1,535
),First thing - awesome letter.
Possible stupid question alert......... actually 2 questions:
1- With such direct, no-nonsense language basically telling the membership not to JA or pick up open time, how is this not going to become a "status quo" issue legally? (in light of recent rulings against "job actions" by other airline unions).
2- If this actually isn't a problem, the why the heck have we not seen a similar letter from the Fedex ALPA leadership?
Possible stupid question alert......... actually 2 questions:
1- With such direct, no-nonsense language basically telling the membership not to JA or pick up open time, how is this not going to become a "status quo" issue legally? (in light of recent rulings against "job actions" by other airline unions).
2- If this actually isn't a problem, the why the heck have we not seen a similar letter from the Fedex ALPA leadership?
It is not in the FedEx contract.
It's not about "balls," it is about knowing what you can legally do.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
