IBT 1108 Attempts to take NJASAP funds

[Options_SLAVE]

Selfish? Hardly. He's basically traded his own life for ours these past few years -- that's how "selfish" he is.



Tell us, what exactly did he plan to do last week? What exactly do you think was "stopped" by trying to steal these funds under false pretenses from the leadership that was in place at the time?

I already answered this question with my speculation. I have however asked numerous times what the NJASAP pilots would have done with the money had the control not changed hands when it did, and no one's answered. Why don't you ask them that same question?

 

[TORCH67]

The only thing that got Hoffa and his thugs attention was the fact they were losing $90K per month in revenue for doing nothing in return!

The $377k was from Netjets, collected from Netjets pilots in an agreement for a loan back to Netjets pilots. You really under estimate the intelligence of the NJA Eboard members.

Why would a bookeeper hold expenses for NJA and pay Flight Options expenses?

Why did the Flt Ops MEC go behind the backs of the other elected and current EBoard members from NJA if they thought they were doing something legal?

I have asked alot of questions but you don't have answers!

Kiss Kiss

 

[Options_SLAVE]

Uh, no. Unlike you, I've answered your questions. Here they are again:

The AGREEMENT states the $377 loan to be from the IBT Local 1108 to NJASAP, NOT from Net Jets to NJASAP. Go read it again. This was the basis of the dispute over that said check. That money belongs to the Local, not NJASAP, including a portion that belongs to national. NJASAP had no rights to that check, the "check" that NJASAP was to receive was from the Local, as per the agreement as a loan.

The bookkeeper did not withhold any NJA expenses for flight options expenses. Careful, slander is illegal and could get you in a lot of trouble.

The Flight Options MEC did as they were directed by the GP regarding the 1108 bank accounts due to a suspected impropriety found. If you have reason to suspect such impropriety, you act to protect your interests. That's what was done. No "control" was taken from the e-board who was in place at the time, merely who signs the checks, and those members who now have authority to sign such checks were ALSO on the e-board at the time. All of this was done in accordance with the powers of the GP as per the constitution. Got a problem with it, take it to Washington. Nothing was done improper from FO.

 

[IDEtoNJA]

I've already answered most of your questions in this thread. I do not have specific details because there is an investigation going on, and even if I did have the specific details, unlike others from your side of the fence, I certainly wouldn't air other peoples' dirty laundry on this public forum.

If there are improprieties found, there will be charges made or a law suit filed. As I said, I hope that doesn't happen. If it does, I'm sure you'll hear about it. All I will say, is that the suspicions were strong enough for IBT National to move on it, who then made the FO MEC (Local 1108 eBoard members) take control of the bank accounts, and a discrepancie that got the banks to sit on a $377k check, which is what got castaway's and the NJASAP's panties all up in a wad because it got sniffed out.

If there were any such improprieties, my money is that it isn't on the FO side of the fence and I leave it there.

Options_SLAVE,

You might have answered questions; however, I do not feel that my questions have been cleared up. I might be slower then others.

A. What are the allegations made against the current and outgoing leaderships of the NetJets pilot group? And, what proof does anyone posses to backup such allegations?

You have alluded to the misappropriation of funds, would you mind detailing those?

B. When did the suspicion of misappropriation and improprieties arise? Who raised those suspicions -- I.e. was it a professional and accredited accountant, or, a politician?

C. What threshold is needed in order to place a local in emergency trusteeship? Does purely the allegation of suspicion of improprieties trigger such threshold?

D. In case an emergency trusteeship is invoked, who has to be officially informed and how? What is the timeline for such action?

E. Is Local 1108 currently under the control of a trustee due to the emergency trusteeship supposedly invoked last week?

F. Does a trustee of a Local that has been put under emergency trusteeship have control over the finances of the Local or not? In case the answer is yes, why did the trustee need the signatures of two future interim e-board members?

Thanks,
IDEtoNJA

 

[TORCH67]

I'm proud of what Strong Union and the Netjets pilots did to get our contract in 2005. I'm not rubbing our success in your face at all! You know what we did and how we got there. If you can't even get 50% of your pilots to pay dues then the writting is on the wall. I sure hope the freeloaders that aren't paying dues can step up now and do their part. Money is only part of the equation. Motivation and a "fire in the belly" attitude is what it will take! Do the other 50 percent have that? I hope so, but doubt it from past performance!

 

[TORCH67]

It will take strong, transparent, open, and honest leadership to take you to a contract! Can you say you have that now? The answer is not for me, it's for you and all of the Flight Options Pilots!

 

[Options_SLAVE]

Options_SLAVE,

You might have answered questions; however, I do not feel that my questions have been cleared up. I might be slower then others.

A. What are the allegations made against the current and outgoing leaderships of the NetJets pilot group? And, what proof does anyone posses to backup such allegations?

You have alluded to the misappropriation of funds, would you mind detailing those?

B. When did the suspicion of misappropriation and improprieties arise? Who raised those suspicions -- I.e. was it a professional and accredited accountant, or, a politician?

C. What threshold is needed in order to place a local in emergency trusteeship? Does purely the allegation of suspicion of improprieties trigger such threshold?

D. In case an emergency trusteeship is invoked, who has to be officially informed and how? What is the timeline for such action?

E. Is Local 1108 currently under the control of a trustee due to the emergency trusteeship supposedly invoked last week?

F. Does a trustee of a Local that has been put under emergency trusteeship have control over the finances of the Local or not? In case the answer is yes, why did the trustee need the signatures of two future interim e-board members?

Thanks,
IDEtoNJA

I think your questions specifically would require answers from the FO MEC, which I am not a part of. I know of no official allegations against any member of the Net Jets pilot groups, however there are suspicions, and that's all I will say because I have no authority to state anything else at this time. An investigation is in progress is what I am told.

I personally believe the answer to question "C" is yes, it states right in the constitution that suspicion is a reason for the GP to institute an emergency trusteeship.

I can't officially answer D,E, or F. I'm not a lawyer and I do not care to speculate on those questions. Those questions are for the lawyers.

I can say this. With ANY union, I would hope that if there is a HINT of impropriety that the Union would take steps to ensure they don't happen. The IBT Constitution empowers the GP appropriately to handle any such improprieties. From what I am told, there is more than a hint in this case, however innocent until proven guilty. I will not accuse. That's what the investigation will reveal.

I am appauled and ashamed at the accusations, name calling, blatant slandering that took place here in this thread, however. None of this needed to bear the light of day on this message board and the fact that some felt it necessary were for what I can only perceive as evil and vindictive reasons. The accusations are plain false and only served to try to hurt people who were only doing what those who did the accusations would have done.

At NO time did the FO pilot group try to attempt to keep any entitlements from NJA, merely that proper control of IBT 1108 assets be properly secured. Nothing more. Now, an investigation will take place, and it will find whether there were any such improprieties, and if there were, then obviously Washington was correct in their actions. And if there weren't, well the control of the money was still in the IBT Local 1108 e-Board's control the entire time and at no time were those funds not available to the e-Board.

 

[Options_SLAVE]

It will take strong, transparent, open, and honest leadership to take you to a contract! Can you say you have that now? The answer is not for me, it's for you and all of the Flight Options Pilots!

Yes, I can say I have that, now. And if improprieties are proven then you will NOT be able to say the same about your own leadership, can you?

 

[Phoenix]

Olson you are still the same lying POS

I am concerned with what you aren't being told now.

To summarize your point: The Flight Options leadership NEVER stayed on budget. They were costing over $100,000 a month above Flight Options dues revenues for 2008. And, like the IBT the NetJets cashflow was the "solidarity."

Ironically, all this while a [former] Flight Options MEC Chairman and a Negotiating Committee member wan't paying dues. But, the Flight Options leadership group refused to address the issue until the NetJets Sec/Treas refused to "keep it all under the radar."

I'm having flashbacks of all the sweeping under the rug "solidarity."

The only way to get your contract is to lay down the heat and have solidarity within your pilot group. You can blame whoever you want - but that's the bottom line - it's up to your pilot group; not NetJets and not Hoffa. It's up to the Flight Options pilot group and nobody else.

Getting at least 50% of the Flight Options pilot group to pay dues per the Local 1108 Bylaws would be a great improvement in "solidarity." Otherwise, having the International fund the effort would be another great demonstration of solidarity as well. But, being chickensh!t and deflecting it the NetJets pilot group is truly sad and not very Strong Union.

Olson you are still the same lying POS that you were when I had to deal with you, distorting the facts to fit what ever you are trying to sell. I don't know what Mat and AJ did but I'm sure that it was legal other wise you would have already had the feds involved, bank fraud is a federal crime. You lied to me so many times in the past there is no reason to believe there is any truth to this story as well.

KMA

 

[NJAPLT]

First of all, my understanding is that the NJASAP never had control of Ibt1108 money. The officers who moved to the NJASAP from the IBT1108 had to resign their position. Those NETJETS pilots who held down the fort the last few months were still members of the IBT1108.

Next, those members of the IBT1108 who left as the agreement was executed did nothing with the money other than what was agreed upon, even though they had full control of the 1108 for months. Those 1108 NetJets officers did nothing other than what was stated in the transition document when they left.

No need to speculate what the NJASAP would do with IBT money, it never happened. No need to speculate what the outgoing Netjets 1108 officers did either, it is public record.

I can speculate what the National IBT and incoming 2 members wanted to do with the money, but it serves no point.

The facts are such: The IBT National, a bookkeeper who worked for the 1108, and 2 1108 officers-elect did manufacture a bogus trusteeship documents, and then attempted to drain some IBT1108 bank accounts. They represented themselves as the current president and tresurer of the 1108, while they were only the president and tresurer-elect.

Were their motives to embezzle the money for themselves? Were they trying to destroy the IBT/NJASAP transition agreement? Were they only seizing the money in case the NJ 1108 members tried to take more than agreed upon when they left?

I don't know, that's speculation, and as I said above it doesn't really matter what I think they would have done had the IBT and the Flops senior union management managed to steal the money. We took precautions to prevent the the kind of actions that were attempted, and they worked.

This has damaged any future working relationship between the two unions, but you are allowed to do what you want now that we are no longer part of your local. If you want to commend these people for the fraud they attempted to commit, so be it.

I hope your pilot group can survive this situation, and I hope at some point in the future both unions can work together toward our common goals. It will take awhile for our trust level to be restored in your leadership at the 1108.

Good luck on the negotiation and getting you 70 hostages freed.

 

[TORCH67]

Actions speak louder than words here slave! It wasn't NJA Eboard members that did anything behind the backs of Elected and current Eboard members! Who was it that contacted the authorities? Who was it that stopped payment on a stolen check? You keep glossing over the facts and spinning it like NJA Eboard members were doing things behind the scenes. If you are going to try and steal money do you call the authorities???? hhhhmmmm makes you think doesn't it?

 

[CA1900]

At NO time did the FO pilot group try to attempt to keep any entitlements from NJA, merely that proper control of IBT 1108 assets be properly secured.

The E-board in place when this "transaction" took place should have been in the loop and in control. If there were suspicion of the E-board to warrant an emergency trusteeship, answer this simple question:

Why was no paperwork for this trusteeship filed?

Without trusteeship, Bill Moore, our ex-bookkeeper, and your two MEC members did not have the authority to remove that check from the premises. By doing so under the guise of trusteeship without proper paperwork to back it up, they did so under false pretenses, and presented falsified documents to the banks to that end.

And if there weren't [improprieties], well the control of the money was still in the IBT Local 1108 e-Board's control the entire time and at no time were those funds not available to the e-Board.

That's incorrect. By removing the check from the 1108 offices, control of those funds was taken from the E-board in power at that time. In doing this, those that participated broke the law.

 

[CastofThousands]

Olson you are still the same lying POS that you were when I had to deal with you, distorting the facts to fit what ever you are trying to sell. I don't know what Mat and AJ did but I'm sure that it was legal other wise you would have already had the feds involved, bank fraud is a federal crime. You lied to me so many times in the past there is no reason to believe there is any truth to this story as well.

KMA

Ah, must be the MEC Chairman that didn't pay his dues. Concealed it from his membership, and, said his dog ate his dues checks.

Brutally honest I understand - Lies? That one doesn't hold water. The brutally honest part tends to get people to react emotionally...

It is what it is...

 

[TORCH67]

An MEC member that won't even pay his dues! Now that is a person worth following! What say you Slave?

 

[IDEtoNJA]

I think your questions specifically would require answers from the FO MEC, which I am not a part of. I know of no official allegations against any member of the Net Jets pilot groups, however there are suspicions, and that's all I will say because I have no authority to state anything else at this time. An investigation is in progress is what I am told.

I personally believe the answer to question "C" is yes, it states right in the constitution that suspicion is a reason for the GP to institute an emergency trusteeship.

I can't officially answer D,E, or F. I'm not a lawyer and I do not care to speculate on those questions. Those questions are for the lawyers.

I can say this. With ANY union, I would hope that if there is a HINT of impropriety that the Union would take steps to ensure they don't happen. The IBT Constitution empowers the GP appropriately to handle any such improprieties. From what I am told, there is more than a hint in this case, however innocent until proven guilty. I will not accuse. That's what the investigation will reveal.

I am appauled and ashamed at the accusations, name calling, blatant slandering that took place here in this thread, however. None of this needed to bear the light of day on this message board and the fact that some felt it necessary were for what I can only perceive as evil and vindictive reasons. The accusations are plain false and only served to try to hurt people who were only doing what those who did the accusations would have done.

At NO time did the FO pilot group try to attempt to keep any entitlements from NJA, merely that proper control of IBT 1108 assets be properly secured. Nothing more. Now, an investigation will take place, and it will find whether there were any such improprieties, and if there were, then obviously Washington was correct in their actions. And if there weren't, well the control of the money was still in the IBT Local 1108 e-Board's control the entire time and at no time were those funds not available to the e-Board.

Options_SLAVE,

I would sincererly hope that the FLOPS pilot group leadership team are giving you the answers to all these questions!

Questions D and F may or may not require the advise of a legal professional. However, question E has only one of two very simple answers: Yes or No.

In the last sentence, you are alluding that the answer is NO -- I.e. the Local 1108 eboard had full control over its finances throughout. Therefore, I have a number of follow on questions:

1. What powers did the "trustee" invoke? Under what legal standing did the "trustee" invoke those powers?

2. Which positions have rights to the control of the Local's finances? Was any person holding such positions consulted and/or informed in an open matter?

3. Was the change of control done in an open and orderly manner?

4. Was the "missing" NetJets dues moneys check under the control of the appropriate persons throughout?

Furthermore, question B is a very important, yet, simple question to answer. Again, the answer would not involve interpretation of a legal or financial document; but rather, a statement of facts.

I do not believe that anyone is alleging and/or blaming the FLOPS pilot group as a whole. I hope you understand that.

IDEtoNJA