You're the one that's playing politics. No. 1 past practice doesn't apply if the language is clear and unambiguous.
The language is clear and unambiguous, JW brought up past practice.
You should know that since you seem to know everything else. How many cases have you presented at the region or national panels???
I am not a B.A.
Your bench (no pun intended) was part of the presentation, not something JW came up with. Your agent did not call a point of order on the change in exhibits and if you had any experience at the Panel, you would know that POO's have to come from the parties not from the Panel.
The B.A. addressed the change of exhibits in rebuttal as I have previously stated.
There was only one executive session.
Correct. JW in the call asks "which executive session?" which is why it's either gross incompetence or corruption.
You would know that if you had been there.
I know this from my B.A. JW did not. Perhaps he was not 'all there'???
You stated that he talked to you personally.
Correct, on the phone. I record all my calls.
I assume to help you understand the decision.
To deflect and cover it seems.
You should know that in the past 25 years I'm not aware of one Panel Chair that has taken the time to talk to a member and explain their decision.
I am tremendously good at applying pressure when motivated.
You took that and turned it on him for your own political BS.
No, he provided more questions than answers.
You had a bad case with bad facts. You lost. Stop blaming the Panel.
The facts were no different than thousands of other subcontracting cases that led to a break in the 10 year hiring freeze in 2005, paid at 10 hours, or have been sitting in 'committee hold' waiting to be paid or arbitrated. Please state specifically what facts were bad. We had a subcontractor performing BU work that a member asked to do and no bench because of decades of understaffing. Why don't you state the facts the Company changed?
BTW did you talk to any other Union Panel members that voted to deny your case?
JW offered to have them contact me but to date has not come through. Regardless, the Chair makes the decision, the other members are only advisors. Why does it seem you have a suspiciously close relationship to this case, having alluded to being there? I'm available anytime.
I believe you were given contact info for at least one of them. I
Incorrect. Feel free to provide the information to me.
nstead of calling the other members of the Panel, you attack JW.
JW's name is on the decision. JW is the Chair. He chose to deny instead of deadlock.
Oh yea, the other panel members aren't running against VH are they?
I have no idea and my BA didn't know who JW was until after the decision. Neither did I. political decision and that is just plain wrong on any level. JW has proven to have an inadequate grasp of the facts and how the hearing transpired.
One more thing, how are those hundreds of cases that are on Committee Hold in the West and have been for years? I don't hear you railing about those.
We have complained about those for years. We understand the huge monetary value and are more looking at getting more Feeder drivers trained which had been happening on a regular basis until they announced a freeze immediately following this decision. Those grievances were still in play, now thanks to JW they are in doubt and so are hundreds of Feeder jobs in Local 104.
Now let me ask you something. I don't know JW. I had never even heard of him before this decision came out. This decision has directly harmed my members. Is it really worth it to you to defend this incompetent, corrupt pos knowing all this? How do you stand for someone like that on your Slate? Do you honestly believe I would do the same if the situation were flipped and someone from my Local had harmed your members? How do you defend denying our grievance after the JALM and West deadlocked it? Wouldn't the logical decision be to deadlock these to arbitration? We would have even accepted committee hold.
I just wonder how you, JW, and all the blind defenders live with yourselves. I'd walk before I would sell out one Teamster member anywhere. People are corruptible, people are incompetent. It's what we do when we are shown incompetence and corruption that tells us who we are.
