Rejecting offers have consequences that responsible local leaders explain. Hopefully the voters of L89 had the possible consequences of their rejection votes explained to them.
I'm not sure it's a matter of right or wrong, but I'll play. I think what happened to L89 was not "right". Where we differ is who was more responsible for that wrong. The present IBT leaders or a guy who wants to lead. Looks like the big egos on both sides trumped the members needs, but Fred Z knew he was playing with fire and his members got burned. He's not the one wearing out shoes walking 1/2 mile to work.
How was he playing with fire?
Are you saying he should have known that the IBT was going to throw autonomy to the wayside and sell out his members by enacting the travesty that is Art 12 sec 6 of the IBT Constitution, imposing the National Master and all its supplements?
How could anybody with as significant a bargaining chip as Worldport acquiesce to concessions while not addressing their members needs?
In hindsight, isn't it fair to say that Fred Z was unwittingly bargaining with UPS and IBT officials in the shadows?
Perhaps that's why UPS retreated from the better offer in "anticipation" of the contract being imposed anyway?
Or perhaps, they knew all along?
After all, they certainly were suspiciously patient while it all unfolded.
You're correct that Fred Z isn't the one wearing out shoes walking to work, but his continued service to those members is predicated on representing their needs, not feeding from the scraps at the negotiating table.
Opportunities were squandered as our union continues its downward spiral.