Let’s not kid ourselves. Selecting June 1st as the deadline for instigating arbitration is not accidental; neither is it incidental or lacking of political consequence. The UA Constitution obligates us to hold our General Election of Officers once every three years. Our Union elections are presently scheduled for the first Monday in June. We have a National Convention Delegate election scheduled for Monday, June 6, 2011. We have a General Election of Officers scheduled for Monday, June 4, 2012.
I shot a flare into the air about the MCA 2009 Strategic Plan in a blog post on May 27, 2009. I believed then that the contractors were sneaking into the back door of our 2009 election with ill intent. This is what was posted then on the MCA website:
B. Through management’s legal counsel, we will clarify "management rights" during negotiations and union elections:
1. What can we communicate to workers during contract ratifications?
2. Can contractors give incentives to union employees to encourage them to vote in an election?
3. What can contractors do to encourage participation in union elections?
C. During 2008 –2009… At the end of the June 2009 election, suggest that the newly elected officers of 602 go to dinner with the 2009 Board of Directors and invite Local 5 officers to attend.
By the way, your officers were never invited to sit down and break bread. Maybe the MCA didn’t get what they wanted in 2009. However, to their credit, they have kept on target and now have the CAUSE to achieve their desired AFFECT. Maybe they will get what they want in 2011 and 2012. What would be more pleasing for their side than to have a new set of officers elected to pull together our case for arbitration? Green, unseasoned, how good of an arbitration case could they make?
Mark my words. There is little incentive for the contractors to reach an agreement with our Local Union prior to June 1st. When have they ever done that in the past?
Brothers and Sisters if you accept the proposed contract you will likely surrender your right to ratify a contract in year two and year three. Further you will politicize our negotiations beyond anything we ever found acceptable in the past. And further you could assist in presenting the weakest arguments in front of the arbitrators.
This is a train wreck in the making and you have your hand on the switch-gear. I suggest that you might want to put this proposal on a sidetrack.