Medic Kevorkian

I think YOU are the one who doesn't get it... If I need to explain in small words, I will... BOTH PARTIES WERE NOT IN THE ROOM. Management left the room to caucus (discuss) over the latest set of negotiating points. If you have never been in a negotiating session, it goes like this... One side presents their proposal, the other side counter offers, the first side counters etc. until an agreement is reached... When they are caucusing, they are discussing private strategy that they will use in the face to face meetings. To have that private caucus being watched/listened to is against the law (CT. Statute 31-48b(d))

Ahhh... See that's where you are WRONG... One side DID secretly view and listen the other WITHOUT disclosure... Our negotiations are being run by 6 well trusted members of our own workplace with the SUPPORT of the union leadership and attorney, and not just at the whim of union leadership. Again, before you make generalizations, know the facts.

WOW! Please know the facts before you speak... Otherwise you look like a moron... Fact #1: AMR refused to negotiate outside the confines of it's office Fact #2: AMR Chose the room without informing the union of the presence of a device. Fact #3: The room was checked 6 weeks prior, and 2 days prior to the discovery of the device, and there was no device present in the shell of the smoke detector it was found in Fact #4: The room that the device was found is LOCKED under normal circumstances and only used for training purposes. Fact #5: It is against CT. State Statutes 31-48b: (d) No employer or his agent or representative and no employee or his agent or representative shall intentionally overhear or record a conversation or discussion pertaining to employment contract negotiations between the two parties, by means of any instrument, device or equipment, unless such party has the consent of all parties to such conversation or discussion. Fact #6: NLRB Elections were held in this room, and I'm sure it's against NLRB regulations to have a device such as that present without their knowledge. This being the case... Don't make a judgement just because the union is NEMSA...

I work in Hartford CT., and we are presently looking to replace our present lackadaisical representation with NEMSA. The reps that I have spoken with about this issues have also furnished me with a copy of the Tentative Agreement (TA) that was reached with NEMSA and AMR in Portland OR. I must say, being in one of the states with high taxes and COL, the agreement they reached wasn't bad. Two contracts ago AMR told us that NO AMR division across the country had 100% paid insurance, and in reviewing the Portland TA, they did. AMR has been aggressively working to make employees pay for sub-standard health insurance for many years by telling that same lie all over the country. We have been paying 25% for 4 years now. It's a sad statement when healthcare workers can't even get decent health coverage. I was also furnished with side by side comparisons from the previous CBA to the proposed TA. They had MANY gains. I don't want to get into specifics on this post, but believe me when I say it was pretty good TA. The Portland work force was already in the process of decertification from NEMSA and moving to the Teamsters. Anyone know what the results of that CBA were? I'm wondering if they got any more or less than they would have with NEMSA. Did they get the pet bereavement leave and 42" Plasmas??? Maybe we will try for that too!!!