News: IBEW Locals in 15 States and Provinces Have passed a Motion To Support The OMOV Proposal

  • December 04, 2020, 04:08:39 AM

Login with username, password and session length

*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 04, 2020, 04:08:39 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Shoutbox

Author Topic: NO LU 353 Employees On EBoard  (Read 1632 times)

Offline BuildingBrotherhoo

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 48
  • Proud Supporter of Fashion Administration
NO LU 353 Employees On EBoard
« on: February 12, 2008, 06:24:15 AM »
The slogan "no reps on the EBoard" needs to be modified.

Every election our members decide who they want on the EBoard.  They can vote for or reject a business representative who may serve in both capacities.

It really becomes a matter of choice for the electorate.  Let the members decide.

However, if Fashion does implement a policy of "no employee's on the EBoard" that leaves a brother from Tech Ed in an awkward spot.

In fairness, full time employees from Tech Ed should not cling to power when he already enjoy a power base and have plenty of work to do.  

We need the EBoard positions available for the next generation of leaders and activists who want to learn about the local and get involved.  Full time employees in the Tech Ed Dept can come next door and still do their mentoring with the EBoard.  There is no barrier to that type of mentoring which Tech Ed has done for years.  

Tech Ed should be congnizant of this clarion call.  Our next generation of leaders need to cut their teeth and have access to this vitally important executive post.   Now, some of you will jump in and say the same thing about Fashion.  However, he isn't hording two internal union posts.  Again, you will carp about the Financial Secretary.  

In my opinion, the more we limit our members access to the EBoard by cluttering the deck with folks who already hold down full-time key union positons, the equivalent to a Deputy Ministery in government, the more we do a disservice to the union.  

I say spread the leadership positions around.  Don't horde them like tiddly winks.

That's not to suggest Tech Ed employees are not worthy.  The reality is that seasoned old hands from Tech Ed should quit clinging to the power levers like another nicotene fix.  Tech Ed is already a nice crib and they don't need to expand their political sphere of influence any farther.  

What's my advice?  Relax, the Local will do just fine with the veterans on the outside whispering to the young up and comers who want to get involved in the union.

In some cases, the veterans will have to be lion tamers because there are a few tough characters in the leadership pipeline, but this has always been the way of IBEW, and more specifically, Local 353.

Again, I like, respect, Tech Ed employees.  But when their personal politics becomes their raison d'etre, they lose their effectiveness in representing all of us.  

As you often say.  Keep the politics out of the union adminstration.  

 
« Last Edit: February 13, 2008, 09:33:12 AM by BuildingBrotherhoo »

Offline irish2

  • YaBB God
  • *****
  • Posts: 609
NO LU 353 Employees On EBoard
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2008, 04:21:16 PM »
well does jojo think that no reps on the e-board will get him some votes this time i say no we cant trust him to keep his word so why would this time be any different jojo must go and you barry can go with him

Offline TheCritic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
NO LU 353 Employees On EBoard
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2008, 08:46:34 PM »
Barry

Your comments are pure s*%t and you know it.  It is propaganda from start to finish.  

Names aside, as it should be but you continue to be an ignorant dick, reps should not be on the L.U. 353 Executive Board.  ED IS NOT A REP you fool.  He is not being paid as a rep and does not get the same money as you do.  

The fact is the President's job in L.U. 353 is not a part time job and is a full time paid position as it use to be before JOE conspired with the First District office to make it a "salaried job ($100.00/mo.)"   Though the local union is wasting its precious money paying you a salary it is the position, not the person that is represented.  

For you to even suggest Fashion is considering not having E.BOARD members as reps is just another lie to mislead the voters.  Joe has the reps/E.B. so he can control their activities on the Board for his own benefit.  

Your comments and trying to distance yourself as the poster of the comments is a laugh to me and everyone else on this site.  Even your handle is a misnomer because we all know you are not a brother.  

The Business Manager/FINANCIAL SECRETARY, as Joe has the two positions, is a glaring example of your spin on the truth.  Doesn't fit in with your attack against Ed so you fabricate lies that made you happy.  I have quoted you full text and you will eat your words one day.

As for your claims you have a vision, you never have and never will be a true leader despite your claims.  You are far too big a suck hole.

I find your comments about the members being able to decide on choosing whether they want to elect a rep/E.B. member particularly hypocritical.  

Quote: Every election our members decide who they want on the EBoard.  They can vote for or reject a business representative who may serve in both capacities.

When the local union is spending $300,000.00 on any given election year by the Fashion machine for propaganda to get Joe and his band of followers re-elected he should be behind bars for the expenditure.  Add to that the near $90,000.00 he spent on the election and the run-off election in 2005 I guess your visits to this site may be an attempt to cut his costs.  But then you, like all the other reps, will, as with every election year, will be asked to contribute the standard $1000.00 towards his election campaign and to hell with the Presidents  or anyone else's expenses.  


Your Quote, for the record because you are prone to deleting and modifying:

The slogan "no reps on the EBoard" needs to be modified.

Every election our members decide who they want on the EBoard.  They can vote for or reject a business representative who may serve in both capacities.

It really becomes a matter of choice for the electorate.  Let the members decide.

However, if Fashion does implement a policy of "no employee's on the EBoard" that leaves brother Nott in an awkward spot.

In fairness, brother Nott should not cling to power when he already has a power base and plenty of work to do.  

We need the EBoard available for the next generation of leaders and activists who want to learn about the local and get involved.  Ed can come next door and still do his mentoring of the EBoard.  Not barrier to that type of mentoring.

Ed should be congnizant of this clarion call.  Our next generation of leaders need to cut their teeth and have access to this vitally important executive post.   Now, some of you will jump in and say the same thing about Fashion.  HHowever, he isn't hording two internal union posts.  Again, you will carp about the Financial Secretary.  Blah, blah, blah...

In my opinion, the more we limit our members access to the EBoard by cluttering the deck with folks who already hold down key union positons, the equivalent to a Deputy Ministery in government, the more we do a disservice to the union.  Spread the leadership bobbles around.  Don't horde them like tiddly winks.

That's not to suggest Ed is not worthy, put in his time, etc.  He has.  The reality is seasoned old hands like Ed need to quit clinging to the power levers like another nicotene fit.  He already has a nice crib and doesn't need to expand his political sphere of influence any farther.  

What's my advice?  Relax, the Local will do just fine with the old boys on the outside whispering to the young up and comers who want to get involved in the union.

In some cases, the old boys will have to be lion tamers because there are a few tough characters in the leadership pipeline, but this has always been the way of IBEW, and more specifically, Local 353.

Again, I like, respect, and love Ed.  But when his personal politics becomes his raison d'etre, he loses his political cache.

After 3 years on the EBoard, his leadership legacy is pretty thin.  I can't name one major bricks and mortar, policy, program or funding proposal he has sponsored.  Jacking up your hand and voting on which hockey team LU 353 is going to sponsor is not what I expected from this brother.  He has done very little but wax nostalgically with brother Lloyd.  Funny how those trips down memory lane become the prime mental exercise for the old guard types.  Remembering the 70's, just like the TV show.  

To bring this back to why I feel this way, consider the fact he fought tirelessy against the West-End Training Centre, and his supplicant(s) such has his pencil sharpener (W.L.) doing his bidding, brings this analysis into sharper focus.  Remember, at the special called meeting, W.L. was on the con mike when the issue of our training centre was up for debate.  Funny, I thought he worked for the Education Dept and he was speaking against the next big thing to happen to our local.  That was a shame, but a telling insight of what I am alluding to right now.  

Yes, that's the problem.  The brother in Tech Ed who rides on his education credentials from the 1980-90's has actually been an opponent of our recent education reforms.  That in a nutshell is the problem.  

He's too caught up in the internal politics and when confronted with another political animal, doesn't like it (ie., The Barry). :(

Maybe it's time for a change in policy.   Oh well, just 5 more months and the world will change in time for summer....

 

Good night Barry and I will see you at the fitness club.  You know, the place you frequent when you should be working!
« Last Edit: February 12, 2008, 08:56:10 PM by TheCritic »

Offline BuildingBrotherhoo

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 48
  • Proud Supporter of Fashion Administration
NO LU 353 Employees On EBoard
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2008, 08:26:10 AM »
Dear "the critic"

As the saying goes, a ton of theory is worth an ounce of action.

For a brother who was our former President and a Business Representative, it seems strange you didn't advocate these reforms earlier on -

NO REPS ON THE EBOARD

Leaving aside whether Joe is an open minded leader.  I find it utterly absurd that you couldn't bring any major reforms forward while you were on the inside and advance your vision of the future.  

From my perspective, Joe's door has always been open...and it sometimes takes a little effort to stick handle those special projects off his desk and into action, but meritorious programs always seem to get the green light.

What went so wrong that you couldn't bring to fruition your dreams and ideas after 6 years?

That's my only question.  I've never had a problem with Joe supporting progressive trade union oriented programs.  What was your agenda?

The problem, and it is one.  We have a number of guys, you included, that are not contemporary in their thinking.  Yes, you wear a nice cut of suit, but that's  rrelevant.  I'm talking about looking to the future.  Instead, you look in the rearview mirror to yesterday and stoke the nostalgic fires while remembering days gone by.  You might as well sit on a porch and whittle tooth picks.  

That's great patter while attending funerals for an earlier generation of brothers who pass on.  

Here's a reality check.  The marketplace is a very different place than it was in 1993, 1980s, or 70s.  That's the reality, and our contractors and members have to change with the times.  This doesn't mean abandoning our union principles, but it does mean the paradigm must shift, and has.  

I too recognize that some of our ICI members don't like change.  But with manufacturing jobs disappearing at record pace, so too the factories and our work, we all face a similar reality whether we want to or not.  

The world has changed and the business environment of our contractors has also been impacted.  We have tried very hard to work together with our contractors, even though that relationship gets strained.  But we always pull through.

I know you feel that I have been hard on Tech Ed, but my time as a leader is also limited.  We have to make changes and we need all hands on deck when we move forward on major education initiatives.  I have known Tech Ed as long as you and our personal differences are not so great, we both believe in Local 353, but have different agenda's.

Firstly, Tech Ed should not have stuck thier nose into the politics of the union.  Once Tech Ed decided to play politics, things changed.

Is our Egerton Ryerson of Local 353 dedicated?  Absolutely.  But Tech Ed was damn slow on the apprenticeship file (2005) so too you, and other recent initiatives.  

Politics is a messy business.  Remember, the President and Business Manager are the Trustee's of Tech Ed, and therefore, de facto boss of all that work there.  But you seem to have glossed over that fact.  

As I stated.  No Employee's On the EBoard captures your friend and mine.   A simple universal concept, don't you think!
« Last Edit: February 13, 2008, 09:39:52 AM by BuildingBrotherhoo »

Offline commguy353

  • JUST CALL ME KATHY!!!!!!!
  • YaBB God
  • *****
  • Posts: 895
NO LU 353 Employees On EBoard
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2008, 02:55:03 PM »
Long story short...............


Dig at Gullins....

NO REPS ON E_BOARD

Get some jojo licking in

No employee of the local can have any political thoughts

Get some contractor licking in

Get some self licking in by reminding everyone he is next under BM

Change mind to NO EMPLOYEES ON THE E_BOARD




Offline okimlistening

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 416
NO LU 353 Employees On EBoard
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2008, 04:44:30 PM »
Commguy,

From now on have Sybil (currently known as BrotherHoo) submit his posts to so you can condense them for the readership. ;D

Well done I believe you capture the true essence of how the mind of confused person works.  

Offline TheCritic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
NO LU 353 Employees On EBoard
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2008, 09:00:14 PM »
Barry

Your post is encouraging and I am glad you have finally realized things have changed.  It was not Gullins that was behind but the rest of the E. Board and as for your suggestion the Pre-Apprenticeship program was a progressive idea, you are sick.  

We are the only trade that has instituted it and it is all about cheap wages, total control of the pre-apprentice because they could work for 1750 hours then get chucked out if the contractor doesn't think they will make the grade, and the most important factor of all is it was Joe's motion, seconded by the Contractors that the program was instituted.  

You haven't worked in the field for years and haven't a clue what it is like today.  Call it what you want but there are many non-union jobs that have better conditions than many of ours.  

For posterity, I have again saved your quote for future reference and know the secret why you began posting again.  

Until Friday night.  




Dear "the critic"

As the saying goes, a ton of theory is worth an ounce of action.

For a brother who was our former President and a Business Representative, it seems strange you didn't advocate these reforms earlier on -

NO REPS ON THE EBOARD

Leaving aside whether Joe is an open minded leader.  I find it utterly absurd that you couldn't bring any major reforms forward while you were on the inside and advance your vision of the future.  

From my perspective, Joe's door has always been open...and it sometimes takes a little effort to stick handle those special projects off his desk and into action, but meritorious programs always seem to get the green light.

What went so wrong that you couldn't bring to fruition your dreams and ideas after 6 years?

That's my only question.  I've never had a problem with Joe supporting progressive trade union oriented programs.  What was your agenda?

The problem, and it is one.  We have a number of guys, you included, that are not contemporary in their thinking.  Yes, you wear a nice cut of suit, but that's  rrelevant.  I'm talking about looking to the future.  Instead, you look in the rearview mirror to yesterday and stoke the nostalgic fires while remembering days gone by.  You might as well sit on a porch and whittle tooth picks.  

That's great patter while attending funerals for an earlier generation of brothers who pass on.  

Here's a reality check.  The marketplace is a very different place than it was in 1993, 1980s, or 70s.  That's the reality, and our contractors and members have to change with the times.  This doesn't mean abandoning our union principles, but it does mean the paradigm must shift, and has.  

I too recognize that some of our ICI members don't like change.  But with manufacturing jobs disappearing at record pace, so too the factories and our work, we all face a similar reality whether we want to or not.  

The world has changed and the business environment of our contractors has also been impacted.  We have tried very hard to work together with our contractors, even though that relationship gets strained.  But we always pull through.

I know you feel that I have been hard on Tech Ed, but my time as a leader is also limited.  We have to make changes and we need all hands on deck when we move forward on major education initiatives.  I have known Tech Ed as long as you and our personal differences are not so great, we both believe in Local 353, but have different agenda's.

Firstly, Tech Ed should not have stuck thier nose into the politics of the union.  Once Tech Ed decided to play politics, things changed.

Is our Egerton Ryerson of Local 353 dedicated?  Absolutely.  But Tech Ed was damn slow on the apprenticeship file (2005) so too you, and other recent initiatives.  

Politics is a messy business.  Remember, the President and Business Manager are the Trustee's of Tech Ed, and therefore, de facto boss of all that work there.  But you seem to have glossed over that fact.  

As I stated.  No Employee's On the EBoard captures your friend and mine.   A simple universal concept, don't you think!

Offline TheCritic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
Re: NO LU 353 Employees On EBoard
« Reply #7 on: June 10, 2008, 04:38:27 PM »
Thought the topic deserved a second review.  Hope you agree since Acorn has spent a lot of local union money into his campaign.  He has a long way to go to convince all of the high-rise members because they have apparently seen right through is coat.   He also remined his co-workers at Nortown of his capabilities. 

We need our union back before it is beyond the point of no return.


Offline downtownbrown

  • Brownman
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 115
Re: NO LU 353 Employees On EBoard
« Reply #8 on: June 10, 2008, 06:15:21 PM »
  Our WSIB rep should stay in his owe sphere. Yet another example of you do as i say and we"ll do what we want 
« Last Edit: June 10, 2008, 06:27:55 PM by downtownbrown »