Just read the letter from Dan Kimutis to the "team members". Funny how we are "team members" and that's ok - but UNION MEMBERS isn't - Hey Dan - we're going to be both!
Nice try with the letter Dan but the canned responses are lame. Looks like Dan is either confused himself or wants to confuse the people. Who's on first Dan?
Of course he didn't give the union the addresses - we don't need him for that. This isn't about how people got addresses its about a contract.
Dan was right on ONE THING in his letter - forming a union at the plant is the biggest work-life decision you will ever make. You are deciding, once and for all if you would like to have a fair and legitimate voice at your workplace with a fair remedy to address concerns with your employer......OR NOT.
Lets face it, after that, Dan is just another company hack trying to fool the people into believing that being against themselves is the right thing to do.
Can't we all just get along Dan? The union is not a monster. We are fair! A vast MAJORITY OF THE WORKING PEOPLE AT THE PLANT WANT A UNION AND WE HAVE THE PROOF. .
Want the proof first? In order to protect the identity of the employees who signed cards - Let's get our Congressman or County Executive to compare a list of the employees you give him with the cards we have to confirm it. It's a landslide amount we have already.
WHY DOESN'T THE COMPANY JUST RECOGNIZE THE UNION? Let's sit and TALK for the good of everyone in a fair setting.
The people want a voice Dan - it's REAL THIS TIME.
Back to the letter: Dan shouldn't worry about tapes or video hats - if he isn't worried about getting caught on one breaking federal Law by violating the employees rights. Will we bring him to "court" if he does that? You bet your ass we will Dan. You or any other of you management guys reading this everyday thinking you are slick. You had better school up.
That brings us to the part about the union bringing lawyers in. Here's another union promise - we don't NEED a lawyer. But I bet the company will be hiring one though.
So Daniel, who is the COMPANY LAWYER going to be fighting against? It can only be the workers. The workers that have authorized IBEW Local 363 to represent them.
Spend money on the workers not against them.
Dan said in the letter to ask him any questions.
You say "Fact 1" is the union cannot guarantee that if given the chance they will be able to negotiate a better deal than you have now.
WHO will stand in the way of that happening Dan? You say it as though it cannot happen. It could. Right now - with no contract - we have no guarantee and no chance.
YOU say...since the union is not willing to strike, I am not sure what they intend to use as leverage to force the company to agree to something it does not want to agree to."
WHAT would be the list of certain things that the union would be trying to force you to agree to that you would not want to agree to? Please tell us the ones that would force US to use leverage.
YOU say...."FACT 2" Neither this union or any other union can guarantee that a company cannot make changes.
WHERE you miss the point Dan: The employees cannot guarantee a company cannot make changes without a contract.
In FACT without a contract, the employer can make unilateral changes at any time, can do so without notification, switch the rules back and forth to meet the company needs at the time and no employee can say anything or question it.
In FACT, with a contract the company CANNOT make unilateral changes, they must discuss, negotiate and fairly bargain over the affect on the employees and both parties must agree.
I notice a slight unintentional hint in your words Dan - "CHANGE IS and WAS INEVITABLE"
You're right on that too Dan.