I've stopped posting messages to this board because I was tired of the insults and mud slinging going on. I know many people are discouraged with how this board has become a bickering ground between NEMSA supporters and IAEP. However, I believe this message board provides a great opportunity for us to stay in contact with each other and therefore remain united. In an effort to bring this message board back to it's initial purpose, I suggest we stop replying to those whose sole purpose is to undermine the IAEP. I know it is difficult to remain from responding when being called names. But I think it is important to get this message board back on track as a productive tool for us to use. I for one will not respond to those who insult me, my peers, or my union.
I have also reached that point. I only plan on using this board to disseminate information as I receive it. The never-ending "debates" are going nowhere.
You guy's are just so warm and fuzzy, now your board has become smattered with the same trash that was being vomited by your buddies on the NEMSA board.
What did you guy's do to bay back your vermin on the NEMSA board?........ NOTHING. You probably enjoyed it, encouraged it and participated in it. NOW.... oh lets just be productive here............ FU. It's the SAME story with you guy's. You talk from both side of your mouth ( or ass)
ROD, ROWLAND and the rest of you screw balls.
You want to change the crap, YOU ENCOURAGE, to something productive then close the F*ing board. Start a real union, with real leaders and have a real message of hope for the masses.
Not just transparent motives, from mushrooms, that strung from 250 crap, overnight. (that's you ROD).
Myself, and alot of other REAL leaders in this unit can't stand you freaks and think YOU, LOCAL 250 and IAEP, have no REAL information to disseminate except LIES, LIES and more LIES.
SOOOOO once again........ idiots
The service agreement is NOT legal
The vote is not official
and you are not our leaders, never have been, never will be
I am particularily disturbed by the degrading or even misogynistic statements toward women that have been cruelly displayed on this forum. I don't think we should censor them though as they openly show us all the distorted credibility of those people that are continuily posting the trash. We all know who the offenders are.
Ignore the trash.....YES.
Stop posting pertinent info....NO.
BTW, I've have seen many topics of perhaps some legitimate concerns raised by the IAEP critics including the service agreement legality and IAEP legitimacy , the election ballot voting problems, the lack of participation by members (I am guilty, I havn't been to a bylaw meeting either..) and of course the degeneration of this message board.
Solutions:
1. The election/service agreement issue will be decided by the NLRB. I hope that we have a quick resolution. In the meantime, IAEP is it.......like it or not.
2. If you want to participate in the union either in person or here, come up with realistic, workable ideas for solutions to our problems.
3. Do not participate in the degenerate postings but let's not censor anything here either. AND PLEASE be respectful with your language towards your union brothers and sisters.
The meeting in Sac. went very well. You are correct in regards to who attended. Marc Pinkas from the IAEP was also there. Actually, Alis came up with one of the best suggestions. In previous meetings, we had talked about how to become a shop steward. Initially, the number of signatures required was going to be 50% of full-time employees in your job classification in your county. For instance, if you are an EMT, and there are 100 'Full-Time' EMT's in your county, than you would need 50 signatures. The signatures could come from anyone; EMT, Paramedic, RN, VST, dispatcher, full-time or part-time.
Alis pointed out that some people would have an unfair advantage. For instance, with me being an RN, there are only 5 or 6 full-time RN's in my county. So I would only need 3 signatures.
Alis came up with the idea of requiring 25 signatures across the board. In county's with less than 75 employees, the required number would be 1/3 of the full time employees. So, if there are only 30 employees in your county, then you would need 10 signatures to become a shop steward.
During the meeting, we also talked about the funding of the IAEP and exactly what our local is responsible for. Torren, Aaron, and Alis had very specific questions regarding the financial responsibilities of our local. Out of our dues, a large chunk goes to the IAEP, SEIU, and the AFL-CIO. Our local receives approximately $3.00 per month per employee. It appears the national will pay the lions share of the bills. What I gathered, is that we are primarily responsible 1/2 of the cost of arbitration. And then, only if we loose. The national will pay the other half, and if AMR loses, they pay. If we decide to pay our locally elected union officials any reimbursment or stipend, then we would have to pay that as well. During our by-laws meetings we have talked about reimbursing our union officials for gas milage at the IRS accepted rates. We thought this was reasonable due to the large geographic area we cover.
These are not the official minutes of the meeting. But it is the gist of what I recall.
It was good to see NEMSA supporters show up at the Sac by-laws meeting.
I am glad that things went well in Sac. It is great to see the NEMSA supporters getting involved.
My trip was great! We flyfished the Upper Sac and on the McCloud conservancy. This morning we awakened to snow covering our campsite. The trip was great, although the fishing was really slow. I love this time of the year to camp.
Anyway, I'll get caught up tomorrow. We are meeting with management in the evening. Hopefully they will be prepared for us. I also got your message from Melinda - she wants to know when we can visit your ranch!!
