|
Post by trinitus on Feb 24, 2012 12:12:52 GMT -5
Maybe I missed it but I haven't seen an answer to Marcus question yet, he's being sarcastic but he makes a good point. Why are you voting on it in the first place? Do we vote on fork drivers or repair? A better job with better pay should always be a seniority job in a union plant, it should not matter if 90% are against it its a seniority issue & not a democratic issue, that's what seniority is supposed to be about. On the other hand if you are going to vote on it, then vote on it without the grandfather clause & see what happens. You cant talk to the team leaders & get the real story as many have already pointed out of course they are going to say that, & you cant come around to the areas & talk to the team either, what if they keep the same team leader & he hears that they wanted to bid it out, now they have to deal with him for pee breaks etc. so many wont tell you what they really feel face to face. Put it to a vote without the grandfathering & see, or do what should have been done in the beginning forget the vote & make seniority count for what its supposed to count for. Bravo Well Said! Once again it should not even be put up to a vote PERIOD. For all of those that say they don't want to bid them out, I say why did some of you (if not all) voted the National contract in? It CLEARLY stated in the National that the Company wants to make the TL's a BID job, why is that so hard to understand. You in a sense already voted to make them bids. It shouldn't even be in the local contract at all but instead our local Leader's need to move forward by implementing the TL's into bids that will be fair for all.
|
|
|
Post by rky792 on Feb 24, 2012 15:52:02 GMT -5
Ok, as to why we met with team leaders. As I stated in another post prior to us doing it. We have walked and talked to alot of the membership prior to the vote and were not hearing negative things. So when it got voted down, we felt maybe people were either intimidated or did not want to tell us directly so we decided to meet with the team leaders to see if they were hearing things from their teams that we had not when we are walking around. Turns out we are not. Team leaders are already by election. The only way that will change it is if the membership votes to change it, and they have shown no willingness to do that. The national language on this issue says "the local parties may need to adjust local agreements in support of work group/team implementation". Meaning we have to adjust the local to have what they want, which is: "they will be selected for this position through a jointly established process"...... So, if we didn't vote on it, we just made up our own team and team leader rules and didn't put it to a vote you guys would be whacking on me for that. And we wouldn't do that anyway. Marcus does it allow for 10 to 1, yes IF we have a selection process for team leaders(as stated above) That is a package deal. We tried very hard to get the 10 to 1 with bid team leaders and they absolutely would not do it. The only reason the company is willing to do 10-1 is if they get bid team leaders, Bid team leaders is what they get out of that agreement. They want this very badly team leaders would no longer answer to the teams as they do know. 10-1 is the carrot they are hanging out to select TL's. Mule, quit being part of the problem. Stop the old vague "they wont help" or "They are company" crap. People come here and see your vague claims and think if they fight we won't help. And that's BULLSHIT. If someone fights a job I can protect them through the whole process, I can tell them the minute we can't win the fight anymore and they can decide what they want to do based on THE TRUTH. But, you come on here and try to convince them NOT TO FIGHT cause they won't get help. Are you company? If you are walking around with no safety glasses can i help? no. But, if you got real issues we can help, or damned sure try. And if you aren't company I would appreciate you trying to be part of the solution not the problem. And I do want to point out, No one has posted a team that wants bid team leaders. As far as saying all of trim does, that isn't true. For the record I think I know of one team on night-shift frame. I am just guessing they do from knowing those guys well and talking to their team leader. I will go see them soon and see but I bet its still 50/50. Getting out of bid jobs, we have had some negative on it but far more people seem to like that letter than do not, so I don't see that changing. But again I am 1 of 5. As far as why vote on trades, we didn't know that it would be that big of an issue to til they voted on it. So, now we will fix it. That's what you do. Why would the company want bid team leaders? The fact that they do should be telling.
|
|
|
Post by slimer on Feb 25, 2012 11:46:16 GMT -5
Just some food for thought but there have been comments about the TL selection in regard to it being in our national contract. Would someone please point that out in the actual contract language because I cannot find it and I hope that everyone remembers that it was in the HIGHLIGHT book which don't mean much to me. Our international only puts the good stuff in the highlights. I downloaded the national contract before we voted on it and could find no language in regard to this issue, maybe I missed it which is why I'm asking for someone to point it out. Personally I believe that the TL should be voted in versus bid and yes I am a TL and have been for over 13 years. In regards to protecting my job, I could care less that's just my opinion. Was cut out(by management)once before,survived just fine being loaned all over the place and had a lot more piece of mind when I didn't carry a radio for a couple of years. It's a thankless job and everyone should have to do it once just to better understand it. In regard to the 100 jobs it would create if bid, do you really think the company is going to add a bunch of additional labor costs and not cut somewhere else? There is a controller up front that pulls the purse strings and he has a budget he's going to stick to. Was in one of those meetings with Scott and BC and we had very frank discussions about all issues. Noone, and this is a very seasoned group of TLs, seemed a bit concerned about losing their position to whatever comes our way on this issue, so there was no butt kissing to try to skew the BC to think that all the current TLs did not want it bid. And yes if they had teammates that had issues with the local they were addressed to the BC. Just a report from someone who was actually in one of those meetings.
|
|
|
Post by kbrundag on Feb 25, 2012 12:15:46 GMT -5
Look, this whole Team Leader thing boils down to individual selfishness. Is it better for the whole to add 100 new jobs? Is it better for the whole to have 10 to 1 teams? Is it better for the whole to be able to bid on a good job when your time comes? I would say yes to all.
The thing is though, when I bid on that job, I'm going to do the job I bid on... I don't give a shit about your bitching an slinging snot. I don't care if you don't like the guy you work next to. I don't care if someone won't rotate with you. I don't want to hear about Broke Dick going home early thru medical. I don't care if you're pissed because Joe Smoke had three smoke breaks today. I just don't care about the drama. I'm there to do a job, do it well. That doesn't include caring about your bullshit.
That's the selfishness... KTP does not not want the good for the whole. There is a fucked up Team mentality with individuals who want a Team Leader with a finger up their ass making them feel special. Awesome...
|
|
|
Post by rclap on Feb 25, 2012 12:35:24 GMT -5
Look, this whole Team Leader thing boils down to individual selfishness. Is it better for the whole to add 100 new jobs? Is it better for the whole to have 10 to 1 teams? Is it better for the whole to be able to bid on a good job when your time comes? I would say yes to all. The thing is though, when I bid on that job, I'm going to do the job I bid on... I don't give a shit about your bitching an slinging snot. I don't care if you don't like the guy you work next to. I don't care if someone won't rotate with you. I don't want to hear about Broke Dick going home early thru medical. I don't care if you're pissed because Joe Smoke had three smoke breaks today. I just don't care about the drama. I'm there to do a job, do it well. That doesn't include caring about your bullshit. That's the selfishness... KTP does not not want the good for the whole. There is a fucked up Team mentality with individuals who want a Team Leader with a finger up their ass making them feel special. Awesome... Case in point why the TL should not be bid.
|
|
|
Post by kbrundag on Feb 25, 2012 12:48:35 GMT -5
Look, this whole Team Leader thing boils down to individual selfishness. Is it better for the whole to add 100 new jobs? Is it better for the whole to have 10 to 1 teams? Is it better for the whole to be able to bid on a good job when your time comes? I would say yes to all. The thing is though, when I bid on that job, I'm going to do the job I bid on... I don't give a shit about your bitching an slinging snot. I don't care if you don't like the guy you work next to. I don't care if someone won't rotate with you. I don't want to hear about Broke Dick going home early thru medical. I don't care if you're pissed because Joe Smoke had three smoke breaks today. I just don't care about the drama. I'm there to do a job, do it well. That doesn't include caring about your bullshit. That's the selfishness... KTP does not not want the good for the whole. There is a fucked up Team mentality with individuals who want a Team Leader with a finger up their ass making them feel special. Awesome... Case in point why the TL should not be bid. See what I mean? Likes the finger up his ass...
|
|
|
Post by brenteskridge on Feb 25, 2012 17:58:28 GMT -5
SLIMER, you can find that language starting on 38A-47A.
|
|
|
Post by Ktp1989 on Feb 25, 2012 18:22:54 GMT -5
SLIMER, you can find that language starting on 38A-47A. So whats the plan Brent? Where do we go from here? Are we going to have a meeting at the hall as we should have when the contract came down do discuss? Why no letter put out by Scott 4 days after the contract has been voted down? What will the union do to see what the membership wants to get this local passed? And since you stated in a earlier message it was know what it would take to make the Skilled Trades (74% against) pass the contract....fill us in on what that is and why wasn't it fixed prior to the vote! Thanks
|
|
|
Post by brenteskridge on Feb 25, 2012 19:16:34 GMT -5
SLIMER, you can find that language starting on 38A-47A. So whats the plan Brent? Where do we go from here? Are we going to have a meeting at the hall as we should have when the contract came down do discuss? Why no letter put out by Scott 4 days after the contract has been voted down? What will the union do to see what the membership wants to get this local passed? And since you stated in a earlier message it was know what it would take to make the Skilled Trades (74% against) pass the contract....fill us in on what that is and why wasn't it fixed prior to the vote! Thanks Well the plan is as of right now is to go back to the table with the company. I know your thinking "duh" lol but that is what they will do. I am not sure yet if they are going to have a meeting or do what they did before and be down at the hall so whomever wants to come down and discuss their issues on why they didn't like the contract. Not sure why a letter wasn't put out. I do know they were meeting with all team leaders in the plant to get a feeling of what teams are saying on what they liked and disliked about the contract. After the BC gather more information then that is when they will meet back with the company and negotiate on those issues. Sorry I don't have specifics but as soon as I here more, we will make sure it gets posted. I will post facts on here. I don't want to post anything until we are told on what they are going to take back to the table. That would have been Bryan K making the statement on skilled trades. I'm not 100% to all of skill trades issue so I will leave that to Bryan to answer.
|
|
|
Post by ScottR@KTP on Feb 25, 2012 20:59:37 GMT -5
And going to the TLs so they can speak for 99% of the plant is total horse shit...especially when ppl like TonyV and I don't even have a TL. So out of touch...
|
|
|
Post by rclap on Feb 25, 2012 23:41:35 GMT -5
Look, this whole Team Leader thing boils down to individual selfishness. Is it better for the whole to add 100 new jobs? Is it better for the whole to have 10 to 1 teams? Is it better for the whole to be able to bid on a good job when your time comes? I would say yes to all. The thing is though, when I bid on that job, I'm going to do the job I bid on... I don't give a shit about your bitching an slinging snot. I don't care if you don't like the guy you work next to. I don't care if someone won't rotate with you. I don't want to hear about Broke Dick going home early thru medical. I don't care if you're pissed because Joe Smoke had three smoke breaks today. I just don't care about the drama. I'm there to do a job, do it well. That doesn't include caring about your bullshit. That's the selfishness... KTP does not not want the good for the whole. There is a fucked up Team mentality with individuals who want a Team Leader with a finger up their ass making them feel special. Awesome... Case in point why the TL should not be bid. I think the first sentence of your post proves why most people don't want the TL job bid. Selfish individuals don't make good team leaders. Also, a team leader needs to come from the team, or else he wouldn't be a team leader.
|
|
|
Post by thintwowin on Feb 26, 2012 6:26:01 GMT -5
I been saying it all a long... Get rid of teams... Then bid upgraders...no team meetings... Stupid team rules...management doesn't want to improve things with the team... Go traditional agreement. Bid everything!
|
|
|
Post by nascarfan08 on Feb 26, 2012 11:03:15 GMT -5
Obviously, seniority doesn't mean much at KTP. Why is this such a debated issue?? There are a few of us (hopefully more) that would love the opportunity to get off the line with a bid job. With this opening up the possibility for 100+ jobs...I would jump at the chance. I've paid my dues and have decent seniority. I have bid on jobs in the past but my seniority didn't make the cut. I have a good record and come to work everyday. So, if I did get a bid team leader job, I would still give my best and perform the requirements of that bid job. Isn't seniority supposed to open up doors for a better job and give you hope that someday you can get off the line and/or maybe get the feeling back in your hands. All this talk about if it was bid out that teams would be stuck with a high seniority, lazy, don't give a care, "all about me" team leader is a cop out. I want my seniority to mean something!! And, like all bid jobs, if you don't perform the tasks set forth, than you will be held accountable. It amazes me that our Union is treating this issue so casually. SENIORITY, SENIORITY, SENIORITY. Bid the team leader positions!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Grimace on Feb 26, 2012 12:48:20 GMT -5
"I am not sure yet if they are going to have a meeting or do what they did before and be down at the hall so whomever wants to come down and discuss their issues on why they didn't like the contract." Brent Eskridge
Brent Eskridge reads from this board. Why don't some of you who didn't care for the proposed contract list your reasons, and or experiences as to why you thought this wasn't a good contract? Then maybe Scott, Marcus or JR could do a straw poll on those issues and see which ones are the key issues.
|
|
|
Post by Ktp1989 on Feb 26, 2012 13:01:24 GMT -5
Are you serious....ask the Team Leaders what the issues are with the contract that was just voted down? Really? That is absolutely about the most ignorant thing I have ever heard. Do you really think members will voice their displeasure if the TL issue is the big problem when they are being asked about their concerns from....their team leader? That makes no sense at all. Set up a meeting for the day shift and a meeting for the night shift at the hall and get a real feeling from the membership on what they disliked about the local. Hell, if we are gonna have the TL give us their input....why don't we just ask management? It is amazing to me over my 23 years how this union has gone from being so strong...to being so weak. When did seniority and bid jobs become something of a debate? It's embarrassing and understandable why, on some levels, most people dislike unions. Do what's right and protect seniority and most people can live with it...but this MOA/COA has ruined this plant....period.
|
|
|
Post by slimer on Feb 26, 2012 16:25:51 GMT -5
Brent thanks for reply on where teamwork is addressed in national but let me be more specific. In the national contract highlights, on page 18, and I quote "This ratio is expected to be guided by Ford's recognized standards fo work groups, which is one leader for up to 10 workers." "Team leaders who accept the new roles and responsibilities will now be paid an additional 1.50 per hour on top of their base pay." Nowhere in the national contract on the pages that you listed is there any verbage stating what is stated in the highlight book about 10-1 ratio or TL pay being 1.50 more per hour. It also should be pointed out that TLs currently make close to this amount above "base pay" with the ARPS and current TL wage rate. Not trying to beat a dead horse, but again the national language does not spell out what's in the highlights. I know the debate here is about the local agreement but the local has to follow the national guidelines and those are contradictory between the highlights and what the actual national language states.
|
|
|
Post by slimer on Feb 26, 2012 16:28:08 GMT -5
Brent thanks for reply on where teamwork is addressed in national but let me be more specific. In the national contract highlights, on page 18, and I quote "This ratio is expected to be guided by Ford's recognized standards fo work groups, which is one leader for up to 10 workers." "Team leaders who accept the new roles and responsibilities will now be paid an additional 1.50 per hour on top of their base pay." Nowhere in the national contract on the pages that you listed is there any verbage stating what is stated in the highlight book about 10-1 ratio or TL pay being 1.50 more per hour. It also should be pointed out that TLs currently make close to this amount above "base pay" with the ARPS and current TL wage rate. Not trying to beat a dead horse, but again the national language does not spell out what's in the highlights. I know the debate here is about the local agreement but the local has to follow the national guidelines and those are contradictory between the highlights and what the actual national language states.
|
|
|
Post by nvsked1 on Feb 26, 2012 21:37:47 GMT -5
Duh... It may be they are going to team leaders for answers on the contract... Because they are getting the answers they want to hear??
|
|
|
Post by almost30 on Feb 27, 2012 6:42:57 GMT -5
Does anyone other than me see the irony in this?? We are using the democratic process to ELIMINATE another democratic process! (Which by the way, should have never been with a vote, in my opinion.) On the Sunday prior to the last election of our team leader, the incumbent hosted a golf outing for eight team members at his expense. Eight making a majority of members. Guess who won the TL election? Now my opinion: If TL's are chosen by election, there will always be a certain amount of corruption in the electoral process. If you want to resort back to the "buddy system" or "good ole boy" way of doing things, retain the selection by voting of TL's. I guarantee there will always be dissention. If you go by seniority, I guarantee there will be dissension. But at least with seniority, that person accepts a position that his seniority and experience entitle him to. And who knows, he might take ya golfing!
|
|
|
Post by jeter3000 on Feb 27, 2012 12:04:51 GMT -5
Look, this whole Team Leader thing boils down to individual selfishness. Is it better for the whole to add 100 new jobs? Is it better for the whole to have 10 to 1 teams? Is it better for the whole to be able to bid on a good job when your time comes? I would say yes to all. The thing is though, when I bid on that job, I'm going to do the job I bid on... I don't give a shit about your bitching an slinging snot. I don't care if you don't like the guy you work next to. I don't care if someone won't rotate with you. I don't want to hear about Broke Dick going home early thru medical. I don't care if you're pissed because Joe Smoke had three smoke breaks today. I just don't care about the drama. I'm there to do a job, do it well. That doesn't include caring about your bullshit. That's the selfishness... KTP does not not want the good for the whole. There is a fucked up Team mentality with individuals who want a Team Leader with a finger up their ass making them feel special. Awesome...
|
|
|
Post by jeter3000 on Feb 27, 2012 12:06:36 GMT -5
Kbrundag wins hands down.....lmfao........ ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by brenteskridge on Feb 27, 2012 23:24:46 GMT -5
Brent thanks for reply on where teamwork is addressed in national but let me be more specific. In the national contract highlights, on page 18, and I quote "This ratio is expected to be guided by Ford's recognized standards fo work groups, which is one leader for up to 10 workers." "Team leaders who accept the new roles and responsibilities will now be paid an additional 1.50 per hour on top of their base pay." Nowhere in the national contract on the pages that you listed is there any verbage stating what is stated in the highlight book about 10-1 ratio or TL pay being 1.50 more per hour. It also should be pointed out that TLs currently make close to this amount above "base pay" with the ARPS and current TL wage rate. Not trying to beat a dead horse, but again the national language does not spell out what's in the highlights. I know the debate here is about the local agreement but the local has to follow the national guidelines and those are contradictory between the highlights and what the actual national language states. I do agree with your saying and your not beating a dead horse. Yes, the team leaders do make this and have ever since this plant went to the MOA but this language was put in for plants that were going or wanting to implement this process. I myself was confused as to the 1.50$ an hour as well until BK explained it to us. I believe that there is still a .22 cent difference that the team leaders would make more on top of what they make now. I know what the highlights said but in the national, it just breaks it down to how it would work if each plant could come to an agreement on making it work at each plant. The national doesn't say that this is going to take place but rather if the plant could come to an agreement on the process. If we followed what it says in the national without trying to come to a good agreement, then the company would go by the selection process and hand select who they want as team leaders. I for one can not accept the company hand picking the team leaders. This is where the debate is right now for our membership because half wants the team leaders to be bid and the other half does not want them to be bid. I know that we have now a lot of people in this plant KTP and LAP from different locals which means that each persons local did things different. I am not saying that trying something different wouldn't work and I am for team leaders being a bid job but as to how it is right now, that is all that I have ever know. The issue that I am at right now with it is this. We have about 600 UAW members that need to placed back into the system. I could be wrong on that number but for discussion purpose lets just go with that number. Those brothers/sisters are going to be placed into different plants sooner than later. I have heard that LAP is getting ready to get about 400 from Indy so that is going to leave 200 to be placed in the near future. I am sure with the 3rd shift that will start over at LAP, they will soak them up as well or they will stay close to the in zone placement around their hometowns. I would like to see us get 100 new jobs but I would also like to see the 100 jobs be all new hires so that the men and women that have been here get closer to getting to day shift. I don't want to sound like I am talking out both sides and go against seniority and leave them out there but they are going to placed by the time we did any hiring here. I would also like for people to get the chance to get to days that are close to going but still have sometime before they get that chance that have been here on nights for the past 12-14 years. So that is my 2 cents on this.
|
|
|
Post by thintwowin on Mar 12, 2012 7:00:11 GMT -5
Sunday 10 hours for paint and body... They told us Friday 1 hour before shift ended we where working 10 hours Sunday , be there at 9:00. Any rule as far as when they have to let us know?
They robo called us Sunday afternoon that we where only working 9 hours Sunday be there at 10:00 instead of 9:00. Any rules in place against this? Should I have to be home all day Sunday to wait for a start time change? Should they be made to leave it at 9:00 and just let us leave early?
If I am working 10 hours can I get my 30 minute lunch? Or one 20 minute break with 20 on the end sound fair? Granted they would have to bring us in at 8:30 to get their 10 hours production.
Also I know Easter monday is no longer a holiday, but could we have a rule they cannot bring us in early for 10 hours on Easter Sunday?
Also I think there should be some robo call rules established.
Thanks in advance
|
|
|
Post by marcus on Mar 12, 2012 8:16:41 GMT -5
Are we going to get a vote on bid team leaders no grandfathering and company not getting to pick who they want?
|
|
|
Post by coconut on Mar 13, 2012 20:12:16 GMT -5
Did you ever think that people on the line won't tell you what they really want as far as bidding TL jobs because everyone is watching you talk to that person or the team leader is keeping an eye out and they don't want a backlash from speaking their true feelings on the issue ? They might even think that you would tell their TL what they told you and didn't want retaliation ? Yes that bull shit does go on in here big time. I see it on different teams everyday as a loan out. Open your eyes dude to the real picture. Also people voted the contract down because they were so pissed that the national passed that this is the only way they can retaliate. Plain and simple.
|
|
|
Post by Ktp1989 on Mar 13, 2012 20:30:51 GMT -5
Did you ever think that people on the line won't tell you what they really want as far as bidding TL jobs because everyone is watching you talk to that person or the team leader is keeping an eye out and they don't want a backlash from speaking their true feelings on the issue ? They might even think that you would tell their TL what they told you and didn't want retaliation ? Yes that bull shit does go on in here big time. I see it on different teams everyday as a loan out. Open your eyes dude to the real picture. Also people voted the contract down because they were so pissed that the national passed that this is the only way they can retaliate. Plain and simple. my point exactly..why to you ask TL's to ask the teams on a issue involving the guy who holds the position now...makes no sense. Some TL's are good but alot are not...some think they are bosses so why as the boss what they want changed in the local to pass it?
|
|
|
Post by almost30 on Mar 14, 2012 2:50:39 GMT -5
Kinda like having the defendant be on his own jury and voting for the death penalty. Did you ever think that people on the line won't tell you what they really want as far as bidding TL jobs because everyone is watching you talk to that person or the team leader is keeping an eye out and they don't want a backlash from speaking their true feelings on the issue ? They might even think that you would tell their TL what they told you and didn't want retaliation ? Yes that bull shit does go on in here big time. I see it on different teams everyday as a loan out. Open your eyes dude to the real picture. Also people voted the contract down because they were so pissed that the national passed that this is the only way they can retaliate. Plain and simple. my point exactly..why to you ask TL's to ask the teams on a issue involving the guy who holds the position now...makes no sense. Some TL's are good but alot are not...some think they are bosses so why as the boss what they want changed in the local to pass it?
|
|
|
Post by ScottR@KTP on Mar 14, 2012 3:05:06 GMT -5
But they are still not gonna change it for our next vote...
|
|
|
Post by merepeasant on Mar 14, 2012 9:21:57 GMT -5
If the senior guy is the "best man for the job" Why the hell are they (senior folks) not being voted in? Oh I see having the job bid out will solve everything because it is a flawless procedure asswell.
|
|
|
Post by ScottR@KTP on Mar 14, 2012 11:14:35 GMT -5
No perfect system...but utilizing seniority in a union shop is the ONLY option. You will have horrible leaders regardless of bid/elect...and you will have great leaders...it really is that simple.
|
|