I read with great interest your so-called "major news
release" posted on the UTU website entitled "STATEMENT OF UTU INTERNATIONAL
PRESIDENT BYRON A. BOYD, JR." As I do not believe your efforts were
"diligent" but rather were the quickly drawn up plans of a few International
Officers and staff members, ostensively under the guise of the former 28 points, I think
it only appropriate to present an opposition opinion.
Of course, it goes without saying no one in UTU will be
able to post any oppostion views on the UTU website other than one required by some
Federal Judge (Didn't Mr. Fox represent member Rucchio (?) the last time you had to
advise the members of your violation of federal labor law?). Indeed, unlike BLE, UTU
obviously knows how to handle dissidents like "EXCEPT ONE" (Roger
Griffeth), i.e., use any and all Union communications and venues to launch personal
attacks that humiliate anyone who isn't on board with the UTU hierarchy.
On Monday, Sept. 17, 2001, four dissidents (3 of whom were
officers of the BLE and the cur dogs were actually at odds with their own national
leaders) thwarted the Power of One! They will live in infamy as "EXCEPT
FOUR" and they have been identified as Morris, Karakian, Smith, and Aldrich!
So if you believe the majority of the voting members voted
to approve the merger, why the "A card" scam? I mean, don't you have any
faith that a jury trial on the lawsuit (the "parallel" action) has merit?
Don't have faith in justice when you get a judge who actually views the facts, reason, and
law? One who isn't swayed by specious cases from Clint that have nothing to do with
the matters before the Court? Isn't Clint's "Declaration" devoid of any law
adressed by Mr. Fox concerning the subject matter of the action, opting rather to place
citations of UTU/BLE actions against each other and NMB cases dealing with
"train and engine service" representation on various shortlines?
I notice you didn't mention the UP Panel decision. Not
surprising given it is the only one on a class I and it determined there was no
significant "cross utilization" on Class I's! Even when Clint mentioned it, he
infers it was erroneous by immediately going to the short line cases. Byron, lets
get one thing straight, you didn't seek and win any "winner-take-all"
representation on TEX/MEX but rather got a decision to make everyone a "train and
engine service employee" without a vote. Everyone knows if you had a vote, BLE
would have won on the TEX/MEX and will when the two years are up and they actually have an
election.
Of course, I also think you have the cart before the horse
as you seem to be talking like your fake dispute amongt your own employees to do away with
craft autonomy in violation of Article 80 is a done deal and NMB is going to automatically
ignore the wisdom of the UP panel. I see no reason they should based upon fact,
reason, and law.
You can spare me the "will of the membership"
speeches as I don't doubt that the majority of members could
be better served by a merger. But certainly not one whose Unification Agreement and
Constitution are an insult to the membership and certainly not with leaders who can't tell
right from wrong!
While I appreciate your recent interest in Diversity and
Patriotism, it cannot overcome the lack of integrity you have shown in the Smoot matters
or my recent charges! Hang in there, have a nice day, and I look forward to seeing
you in Washington, New Orleans, and Reno this summer! In England they are called
the "loyal opposition"; in UTU they are called "dissidents".
Have we given up on Paul Thompson's wonderful theory that "We can Agree to
Disagree"?
Inquiring Minds Want To
Know?
