New Officers Sworn In

GCC/IBT Local 140-N newly elected (white ballot) Officers were officially sworn in today assuming their positions.
(L to R) Shop Steward, Richard Olmeda, Secretary Treasurer, Timothy Robinson, Sgt. At Arms, Jesse DeGeytere, President, Cesar Calderon, Vice President, John Martin and Board Member, Gerald Leavenworth.

GOOD LUCK.

Nomination Meeting Results

I regret to say, with great disappointment, that the turn out for today's Nomination Meeting was typical for this shop,                                    PATHETIC! 
                     You get out, what you put in!
With that said, here are the results of the nominations cast by the ONLY 6 people that showed interest in your future at the Los Angeles Times by attending today's nomination meeting.

OFFICERS

 PRESIDENT ~ CESAR CALDERON

EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT~ JOHN MARTIN

SECRETARY TREASURER ~ TIMOTHY ROBINSON

EXECUTIVE BOARD

SGT. AT ARMS ~ JESSE DEGEYTERE

RECORDING SECRETARY ~VACANT

BOARD MEMBER ~ GERALD LEAVENWORTH

SHOP STEWARDS

MORNINGS ~ VACANT

AFTERNOON ~ VACANT

NIGHTS ~ RICHARD OLMEDA

The new Officers, Executive Board and Shop Steward(s) will be sworn in and assume their positions at the next General Meeting to be held in May. 

NOMINATION MEETING REMINDER

Nomination Meeting Bulletin Board Posting.

Whats Next? The Arbitrator is being asked to exercise his Authority.

  Burstein Jurisdiction Authority

This is out of the Goss manuel .There has been alot of this going on ...maintenance ?

Arbitrator, Mark Burstein's Seniority Grievance Decision

  Gciu 140-n and La Times

This Decision and Award, along with Arbitrator, John McClean's Operator Seniority Decision and Award, both of which, clearly states that "ALL" meaning EVERYONE/EVERYBODY, is to pick their Crew BY SENIORITY, no exceptions, no exclusions, ALL!
(Does not apply to Roller Crew, Reelroom Coordinator positions, or positions without seniority as described in the C.B.A.)
Seniority will continue to prevail when picking within each of those voucher positions.

Arbitrator McClean's decision can also be viewed by clinking on the Scribd link. Thank you to all the Members for your patience and diligence in waiting for this decision. Although your officers and legal counsel, Adam Stern, defended the Contract in a timely manner, Arbitrator, Burstein unfortunately fell ill, resulting in the delay.

The Union's position is that the Company immediately create new Crew Schedules for picking by Seniority in compliance with Arbitrator, Burstein's "Cease and Desist" Order.

Congratulations Brothers and Sisters!
Fraternally,
Ronnie Pineda
President 

This is the law

Long-standing questions over California employers' responsibilities to provide meal and rest breaks, including frequency and timing, are resolved.

On April 12, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Brinker Restaurant Corp., et al. v. Superior Court (Brinker). Clarifying a number of issues that have been the subject of much litigation in California for many years, the court ruled that employers satisfy their California Labor Code section 512 obligation to "provide" meal periods to nonexempt employees by (1) relieving employees of all duty; (2) relinquishing control over their activities and permitting them a reasonable opportunity to take an uninterrupted 30-minute break; and (3) not impeding or discouraging them from doing so. Importantly, the court agreed that employers are not obliged to "police" meal breaks to ensure that no work is performed. Even if an employee chooses to work during a properly provided meal period, an employer will not be liable for any premium pay, and will only be liable to pay for the time worked during a meal period so long as the employer knew or reasonably should have known that the employee was working during the meal period. The court also clarified the law with respect to the number and timing of rest periods that must be authorized and permitted for employees.

why are we stil fighting this ?

1. Under California law, most nonexempt employees are entitled to a 10-minute rest break for every 4 hours worked (or major fraction thereof), and a 30-minute meal break if you work over 5 hours in a day. If your employer is denying you a rest and/or meal break, that is a violation of the law.

Thank you

Well is this what its coming to ?

Sound familiar

August 21st Union Election ~ VOTE YES!

  VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES 

                                                                         (Brothers Dave Rascon and Jack Strickler)

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

You are once again being forced into an election that a majority of you don’t want to begin with. How do I know this, because the petitioner struggled to obtain the 30% of signatures necessary to be granted an election by the NLRB? How were those signatures obtained? Lies? YES, LIES! How many of you were told that management would change things for the better if the Union were voted out? How many of you were solicited during working hours, in the work areas? Or, were you one of the apprentices that were told how it would look good if management were to see your signature on his illegal petition?

You may have been one of the people that got tired of being relentlessly hounded for your signature that led you to realize that the only way for the badgering to stop was to sign, even though you have no intention of voting to give up anything management hasn’t already stolen from us! You should all know by now that the petitioner and management have conspired together from the very beginning, all the way back to our Organizing Campaign in 2006 and it continues to this day. 

The petitioner and other company supporters have chosen to side with the company and do their dirty work from the inside because the company CANNOT file for elections to decertify your union representation, only employees can make such a request of the NLRB.

FOR THE RECORD: THE PETITIONER HAS FAILED IN HIS 4 ATTEMPTS, YES 4, FAILED ATTEMPTS TO HAVE YOU VOTE IN FAVOR OF A COMPANY THAT HAS DONE NOTHING BUT CRAP ON YOU AND DISRESPECT YOUR RIGHTS FOR YOUR DECISION TO LEGALLY FORM A UNION OVER 6 YEARS AGO!

Why anyone would sign these petitions after all that has transpired still leaves me bewildered! The petitioner and others have self-serving ulterior motives and they are continually rewarded for their loyalty. They also avoid the tyrannical treatment and scrutiny all of you face on a daily basis. Would they get fired for transposing plates like Brother Timothy Robinson did? If they were to become ill or injured, would they have a job after 6 months or drown in the so called “JOB POOL” like so many of our colleagues have since unionizing? If the Union were to be voted out, who do you think will be the first to benefit from such a disastrous decision? And more importantly, who would suffer?

Why do these Company Supporters do these things that work against everything positive we attempt to accomplish on behalf of the membership? We all know the answer, because they have no dignity, no shame and have absolutely no concern for any of you or your families. How many of you have seen the petitioner camped out in the front office with their anti-union leader? They won’t admit what they are talking about because it is illegal for management to be involved in the upcoming election, BUT THEY ARE! With all the time the petitioner spends in the front office, would you believe they aren’t involved?

Don’t allow these anti-union puppets to remove your voice from the bargaining table! Let’s show management that we are serious about the changes we are proposing in Collective Bargaining and strengthen your committee by overwhelming winning this upcoming election in landslide fashion!

In Solidarity!

Ronnie

  VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES VOTE YES

Get Fair stay Union !

who else cares ?

now who's being unreasonable?

The union has been accused of being unreasonable a large amount of supposedly frivolous grievances. Now the company says they will not extend the contract during negotiations.I was taught a picture paints 1000 words what I see here is a lack of cooperation to provide some kind of harmonious relationship between the company and the union.