Metra Poll opinion
It was me, I emailed the president's office - specifically for constitutional clarification. I wanted to try to do things the right way. Separating the LCA into two distinct seniority districts is NOT required, however, it is a right afforded in the SMART TD Constitution (Article 21B section 81 lines 4 - 6 specifically). It reads in part: " Additional Local Committees of Adjustment may be formed to represent members on a separate seniority district...."
Paragraph 2 of the poll is factually accurate as far as I can tell. 291 active dues paying members (as reported by the treasurer in Julys meeting) and I believe 49 members in E49 status who all have the right to speak and be heard.
Paragraph 3
Sentence 1 I belive to be correct.
Sentence 2 is an opinion. The bulk of the LCA budget is the current LCA salary. It is not defined by the locals bylaws (according the the local secretary) As i understand it, the current Local Chairman recieves full conductor extra board guarantee PLUS BONUS DAY. Even if he isn't available. The local pays for a full vacation and personal days?
To "shoulder the burdon of the administrative costs" is fear mongering. I pose this question: if the membership declines , wouldn't the expenses also be reduced? Wouldn't it also allow the Local Chairman to focus more time on UP property issues and not split the attention between two very different companies? Basic economics would agree that less "burdon" equals less expenses.
Paragraph 4
Sentence 1 is misleading at best. The operating revenue isn't for the members as stated. The operating revenue is for operating the LCA, which as stated prior, consists of mostly the Local Chairman salary.
Let me make it clear:
I DO NOT oppose the salary in and of itself. I do question the perpetual bonus day even when not available. (Rules for thee and not for me).
Sentence 2 is again a fear mongering term. If the duties of the local Chairman are reduced why would the expenses stay flat? Our Local used to support a local Chairman and only two vice local chairman when our membership was at almost twice it's current numbers.
Sentence 3 is factual. The newly created LCA within Local 577 would have to figure it out. Part of that would be operating within a budget. The local already has bylaws in place that outline committee day pay.
Paragraph 5
Sentence 1 is an opinion. It's stated that the poll wishes you to make an informed decision yet use words like " could result" or " may increase" dues. It does not say anything about the benefits of the proposal. If you only hear 1 side of the story how can you be "informed".
I commend the fact the Local is taking a poll to see where the membership stands. Again, it is not up to the members wether or not this happens. It is the sole discretion of SMART TD President Ferguson. I can only hope the information gathered from this poll is presented in a less biased manner.
We all made our choice when Metra/UP split. Your decision is yours and I trust you made one that was beneficial to you and yours. All I'm asking is to allow the people who chose to stay at Metra to represent themselves. Let the current LCA focus on those who chose to stay UP.
Here's my number (815)762-9893.
Shoot me a text and I will happily discuss my viewpoint whichever side of the poll you feel is best.
Fraternally,
Chad Evenson
METRA Employee
Member SMART TD Local 577
Valid point on expenses. I would argue that we all work on budgets even in our personal lives. The focus seems to be going over budget. It's also possible that it would operate under budget. As far as the " no going back" I don't believe that to be accurate. We have dissolved an LCA prior to this. It can be done again. Mr Bakr is exceptional at investigations. I wouldn't ever discount that fact. That does not mean someone else wouldn't be. Mr Bakr does fight for us, I just want the ability to fight for Metra from within Metra.