Chicago Dispatchers

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Some Folks Just Don't Get It

Blogmaster is once again saddened, but not truly surprised, about the level of vitriol aimed at a fellow pcoII and union steward all over the B clause referred to in the previous post. Please people, stop and consider the facts of this case and if one cares to re read said post, it becomes clear that alot--many many pcos--are missing the point here: management, and no one else, is to blame for the majority of the strife and discord surrounding the implementation of the b clause.

It is management, not the union, who decided to move forward with enforcement of an existing provision in the contract despite assurances to the contrary. It is management who failed to inform the union of their intent, despite repeated assurances that this provision was on hold pending further discussion. It is management, under cover of a holiday weekend when all the suits are conveniently out of the building, that decided to simply post said notice of enforcment in the co book with no explanation. It was management who did not give watch managers, spcos, or pcos any advance warning of how this provision would actually operate. And it is management who must bear the brunt of the failure of these action if and when they prove to be complicated, unweildy, and unduly cumbersome.

Blogmaster is no shill for the union and in fact has big problems with alot of the unions tactical and practical stragegies (or lack thereof)--see previous posts. But it hardly seems fair to give the stewards the blame on this one, considering that more than one pco stands to benefit from this provision and Blogmaster has heard personally from several employees who actually support this provision--yes they are out there. But let us please, please focus on the real issues and those are managements continued intent to divide and conquer pcos via actions exactly like these so that we turn on one another. Be smarter and dont fall for this crap.

14 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well blogmaster and fellow co workers, I'm glad to see that someone gets it. After the last union meeting at the O.E.M.C. our business agent J.R. as well as all of the stewards (airports included) met in Downers Grove and we all put our own personal opinions to the side and went with what the majority of the membership wanted. After tallying the surveys it was deemed that the majority did not want the "b" clause enforced. At that time our BA sent a letter to O.E.M.C. management and it was agreed that this clause would not be enforced. Also during this time the stewards started working on a proposal to take this language out of the contract. As a union rep I realize that I don't just represent myself but the junior and senior members as well. I became a union rep because I wanted to make a difference. I don't expect everyone to agree with me or like me but the personal attacks on me are very disheartening. I've worked hard to be a good union rep and I know there are some that don't see that, but one thing that is true about me and my character is that I have never tried to lie or cover up anything i've done or said. I've kept my word and even when it wasn't popular, i've tried to do the right thing. This enforcement of the "b" clause took all of us by surprise. No one had advance warning and we were all under the impression that the "b" clause would not be enforced and by the time the next contract is presented to be signed that clause would no longer exist. What management at the O.E.M.C. as well as from city hall have effectively done is to keep us divided. As long as they keep us at odds they win. We will never get anywhere because we can't get along. I put my personal opinion to the side and supported taking the "b" clause out of the contract. Yet still instead of seeing this tactic for what it really is I am the one that gets slandered and takes the blame. Do you people really think I have that much power that I could actually sway management to do something just because I want it? One grievance didn't bring about this change. If one grievance really made a difference would we still have a backlog of over 100 grievances, some over 2 years old? Thank you for allowing me to say some of what needed to be said. Is it possible now that we as a group get together and support each other rather than tear each other down?
PCO2/Union Steward Michelle Driver

23 January, 2008 09:06  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

dont get me wrong i dont support management however they do have to right to enforce what was agreed upon in the contract, the union didnt seem to care then but since members with the highest seniority can no longer make 60 to 100 thousand in ot this year, this is the issue of the highest priority to the union. How about spending this time and energy on getting a new and better contract. instead of pacifying the sixty to hundred thousand dollar club

23 January, 2008 09:20  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry to say but the union did know this was going to happen & they didnt say a thing to us.

23 January, 2008 18:21  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey just when I almost make the
60g club you're taking away my pacifier!? waaaaaaaaaaaa it figures
can't even let the dog enjoy the bone for a day damn.

24 January, 2008 00:51  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is nothing wrong with a person making as much in OT as they want, AS LONG AS THEY WORK. To often some of the poeple who work OT are just walking around complaining that they are tierd or there voice is going out because they have had to talk so much, but yet they have the voice to pull out their cell phone and talk to their posse. The biggest joke is the city deciding that those people are making too much money and the ot needs to be spread around. The easist solution is to just hire more people and bring the staffing up to full manpower.

24 January, 2008 07:23  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

PEOPLE JUST DONT SIGN UP FOR OVERTIME SINCE MANAGEMENT OPERATES ON STAFFING FROM THE OVERTIME! AND TAKE THE CI # FOR REFUSING TO BE MANDATED! THAT'LL SHOW 'EM. SOLIDARITY IS THE NAME OF THE GAME! IF 20 PEOPLE REFUSE AND GET 20 CI #'S THEN PERHAPS THEY WILL TAKE THE HARDEST WORKING FIRST RESPONDERS SERIOUSLY!!!! LETS LAY OFF THE NAME CALLING AND PUT THE POWER IN OUR HANDS AND NOT MANAGEMENTS! SOLIDARITY SOLIDARITY SOLIDARITY!!!

24 January, 2008 07:32  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

hey, if that overtime fiasco that withheld all the overtime on 16 jan's check was city wide, then doncha think the police blog wouldve been ranting & raving about their money as well?! that was an oemc problem people, why are we the only ones to consistently get screwed?

24 January, 2008 07:43  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

it was a city wide problem, but as is always the case, niether police or fire were affected by the city's fuck up. daley always takes care of the people with guns and hoses

24 January, 2008 21:49  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A TIP FROM A BOY IN BLUE.

OVER TIME IS USED LIKE A CARROT.
DICK IN AREA 1 ARE ROUTINELY TOLD NO OVER TIME ON MAJOR CASES. MANAGEMENT THEN TRIES TO TO HAND CASE OVER TO THE NEXT WATCH. THE TRICK THE DICK USE IS THEY DONT HAND OVER THEIR NOTE ON THE CASE. THE CASE IS NOW ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO SOLVE BECAUSE ALL THE INFO IS GONE.

YOU NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE WEAKNESS IS AND USE IT. IF YOU CAN REFUSE OVERTIME DO IT. IF THEY FORCE YOU TO WORK CALL IN SICK ON THE WEEKENDS. IF YOU HAVE TO GENERATE SAFETY COMPLAINTS DO SO.
A BUSY SUPERVISOR KEEPS HIM FOCUSED ON REAL PROBLEMS NOT SCREWING WITH YOU.

THE ISSUE WILL NOT BE SOLVED BY WHINING AND POUTING. WORK SLOW DOWN AND BLUE FLU ARE A POWERFUL TOOL.

25 January, 2008 09:33  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If EVERYONE would stop signing up for overtime that would be an excellent idea and show of solidarity. But the fact remains, IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. There will always be people who won't put their greed aside for the better good. Before anyone makes comments about paying their bills, you have a base salary. THAT IS ALL YOU SHOULD EXPECT. Everyone cease signing up for overtime and EVERYONE refuse to stay when they attempt to mandate people.

25 January, 2008 15:39  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes the slowdown ummm follow the rules, and the no ot would be a great idea. If I knew just 3 regular overtimers who would be willing to do it. Regular being someone who worked at least 40 hrs a paycheck. I would support it and scratch my name from the sheets. I don't work to pay bills, I work to help support someone in need. I cannot support or assist this person off my base salary to the full capacity that I would like. However I would be willing to take one for the team if there really was a team to take one for.
Have a great day and let's have fun today doing it.

26 January, 2008 11:32  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Seniority ios the best thing you have. Better dist, better watch.
Guard it with your lives.
If you have no time now, then you will eventually.
As for CPD seniority gets you the airport and tara side gigs.
Pay your dues and stop whining. We can barely get OT!

26 January, 2008 15:40  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

AND TAKE THE CI # FOR REFUSING TO BE MANDATED! THAT'LL SHOW 'EM. SOLIDARITY IS THE NAME OF THE GAME! IF 20 PEOPLE REFUSE AND GET 20 CI #'S THEN PERHAPS THEY WILL TAKE THE HARDEST WORKING FIRST RESPONDERS SERIOUSLY!!!!

You must be smoking rocks.

31 January, 2008 02:19  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

better idea!! everyone only sign up to work double time. break the bank. all watches are short and can only meet minimum staffing with ot. guaranteed 2x ot. this was the underlying cause of mandatory ot on 24-dec-07, nobody signed up for rdo or extensions. they dont have enough bodies to run the place. enjoy it while it lasts though cause city hall finally has some who can do math figuring things out.

05 February, 2008 21:49  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Chicago Dispatchers Blogarama - The Blog Directory
Law & Legal Blogs -  Blog Catalog Blog Directory