Equity or Parity?

    Equity Yes, Parity NO - not only NO, but hell NO!  Yes, Brothers and Sisters, if you read the "Special Edition" of the UTU News, then you read this apparently wonderful statement: "Together, unified and in solidarity, we can achieve one of our foremost objectives: Wage and benefit equity and parity between pre- and post- 1985 employees!"

    Bullshit!  I am in favor of "Equity" for the the post 1985 employees (indeed, read all this site and you will know I was one of few who criticised Fred in 1984 for the Halloween Agreement that instituted the "dual wage scale"!). I was always against it as it was always wrong!  Since it was always wrong, it is also my number one goal for the current National Handling. I support "equity" for all those currently receiving a reduced wage scale and for those yet to be hired.  As an "alleged" union leader, I will personally forego wage increases in the current National Agreement in order to achieve this equity!  Why? Because equity is defined as "the condition of being equal" and as I have always said, once released for full duty, the new hire does the exact same work, bleeds the same, and dies the same as any other employee! Obviously, they and those who hire in the future are entitled to 100% wages!!!  No debate necessay!!!

    Parity implies more than just equity.  "The state or quality of being  like or   equal,  as in rank, value, or position; equivalence."  Yes, we can give equity to the post 1985 and all new hires by raising their wages to 100% immediately. Can we give parity?  I can't, but maybe Sac-C can? "u" decide?

    I can't give it because many post 85 employees and those that will be hired in the future aren't entitled to it; i.e., they were not the "terms and condition" of your employement when you hire out!  I hired in 1974 and worked the Road with an Engineer, Fireman, head brakeman, Condutor, and rear brakeman.  As the got rid of the Fireman and both brakemen, we (The UNION) agreed to take a small percentage (my best guess is 15 to 20%) of the employees wages to get rid of him and share his job responsibilities). Accordingly, we were given "productivity payments" based upon the positions we would have been entitled to but were no longer there.  If you hired into an environment wherein the job only entailed a Engineer and Conductor, you have no entitlement to "productivity" because you never worked with full crews. You accepted the terms and agreements in place at the time of your hire. I would note that they (General Chairman Bailey) sold our productivity for pennies on the dollar also!

    So tell my brothers and sisters, How Does SAC-C Give You Parity?  Is he going to give you arbitraries?  Is he going to give you productivity? Is he going to give you "Parity"?  He won't and he can't!!!! But he can take arbitraries and productivity from pre 85 employees if he can get the majority of post 85 employees to vote for it!  Yes, OUR UNION can repeat the mistake of 1985 by now fucking the pre 85 employees who are now the minority!  So what do we end up with? The Amageddon Agreement - another sellout that rewards the Carriers and the expense of union members, I.E, YOU DON'T GET YOUR FAIR SHARE OF THE PIE,  you get what we have gotten since 1985, a majority sell out of the minority to benefit the Carriers!  Kinda like the current RRB situation, give the Carrier the majority of the surplus and you got a deal. Give them an agreement wherein they make money and shift payout from pre 85 employees to post 85 employees and never have to put up a dime - YOU GOT A DEAL, MR. LITTLE!

    TO BE CONTINUED:   Sorry, I must take my father out for his 85th birthday.  Accordingly,

Happy Birthday, Dad, I Love You!