Bad Form, MiLB umpires should have more Class

[Kaliix]

WWTB stated "By the way, how come the AMLU guys are calling the recent pro school graduates 'scabs'?"

I believe the term recent to subjective and could mean any pro-school grads from 2005 or 2004. You might be able to stretch it to 2003 depending on how one defines recent.

A couple of questions:
1) How can you guys (you being AMLU members) be on strike? You don't have a contract. Therefore, you don't have a job. You were offered a contract and refused it. It seems to me like you guys quit...

2) If you don't have a contract, refused the last contract you were offered, and essentially quit, how are the umpires who are filling the positions you left open scabs?

Originally Posted by JIGGY

The more you post, the more it becomes apparent that you don't have a clue what you are talking about and are simply speaking from emotion and ill will towards the AMLU umpires.

The whole point of creating the union, the whole point of going on strike, is to improve conditions for Minor League Umpires. You seem to think that because conditions are bad when they started, the AMLU umpires should just expect and deal with things being bad forever. There is no chance of the union being broken, the level of umpiring brought by the Scab umpires IS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO ANYONE IN MINOR LEAGUE BASEBALL. Not the players, coaches, managers, GM's, Farm Directors, nobody! There are "gag" orders and instructions to not argue in effect across the board for that very reason. If everything were really OK, Minor League Baseball wouldn't have to handcuff the clubs that way. Only you and Fitz would really believe that a lower number of ejections directly equals better umpiring. The opposite is actually true in this case. The players and managers have commented to the fact that they are "getting away with" far more nonsense than usual.

PBUC simply does not have the means, long term, to staff the Minor League fields without the AMLU 220. Contrary to what Minor League Baseball has attempted to convey in the press, it has not been easy for many leagues to line up umpires at all, not to mention the lack of competency across the board with Scab umpires. Do you really not understand the basic business principals at work here? A union strike is exactly what is happening now. What makes you think this isn't what the AMLU intended? How is it that you see the AMLU as in a lesser bargaining position now than before the season started? As far as your statement about going to work without a contract...? You must not understand the basics here. The point of a union is to collectively bargain, not individually act. It is each individual putting the whole before himself to reap the benefits of what can be accomplished together that is so much greater than what can be accomplished individually. What happens when a scab gets a concussion? Breaks an ankle? PBUC does not (and will never) provide them even the meager benefits given the AMLU under the previous contract.

How long do you think the novelty of "I'm working pro baseball" will last before the reality of "I'm in over my head, and with nothing to show for it" kicks in? Those that are going to scab are doing it, and not necessarily to the detriment of the AMLU. If you wish to cross, do it, but your attempts at justifying why its OK to do so are misinformed and illogical. Bottom line, every man makes a decision, but what do you really stand to gain by getting in the middle of a fight that isn't yours? You can't say money. You can't say prestige or glory; you would be a scab, regardless of how you try to spin it. It boils down to stabbing another guy in the back because you want to prove you are just as good as he is. Fine. ALL UMPIRES ARE EXACTLY EQUAL. Does that remove the feeling of "I'm gonna show them!" ? What if you were just as good as any professional umpire? So what? You still just jumped in the middle of something that didn't involve you and stabbed another man in the back for having done it. No scab deserves to be on those fields. They didn't earn those positions. That is the disgusting part of the whole thing. The Scabs are making fools of themselves and acting important while doing it. Minor League Baseball didn't call any of them last season. There is a reason for that. You should be ashamed at the possibility of your words influencing another to act so foolishly.

[JIGGY]

Originally Posted by Kaliix

WWTB stated "By the way, how come the AMLU guys are calling the recent pro school graduates 'scabs'?"

I believe the term recent to subjective and could mean any pro-school grads from 2005 or 2004. You might be able to stretch it to 2003 depending on how one defines recent.

A couple of questions:
1) How can you guys (you being AMLU members) be on strike? You don't have a contract. Therefore, you don't have a job. You were offered a contract and refused it. It seems to me like you guys quit...

2) If you don't have a contract, refused the last contract you were offered, and essentially quit, how are the umpires who are filling the positions you left open scabs?

This really isn't worth responding to. Nonetheless...

It is becoming more and more appear ant that most people don't understand the way collective bargaining as a union takes place. The whole point is that the union will choose to strike vs. work without an acceptable contract. This is, essentially the point of the union, as unions may strike and are afforded certain legal protections in doing so. Each AMLU umpire DID NOT "walk out" or "refuse" a job in the minor leagues. Umpires, like players are contracted, both as individuals and as a union. Without a working contract, they don't work. The jobs are still theirs (they haven't been locked out or fired) there simply isn't an agreement in place to allow them to work.

p.s. "stretching" the definition of recent to even 2003 doesn't change any of the facts in this situation.

[Kaliix]

Jiggy, AMLU was offered a contract. AMLU didn't like said contract so they didn't sign it and didn't go to work. All your union speak mumbo jumbo aside, you quit. Period. I might feel different if games hadn't started and other people weren't doing your jobs, but that ain't so. And if a new contract is signed, those replacements will be fired/let go/terminated and you will be rehired.

WWTB didn't say that no 2006 grads were working, he said recent. If there are 2005 or 2004 grads working then what he said is true. That most certainly does change the situation. From false to true.

Originally Posted by JIGGY

This really isn't worth responding to. Nonetheless...

It is becoming more and more appear ant that most people don't understand the way collective bargaining as a union takes place. The whole point is that the union will choose to strike vs. work without an acceptable contract. This is, essentially the point of the union, as unions may strike and are afforded certain legal protections in doing so. Each AMLU umpire DID NOT "walk out" or "refuse" a job in the minor leagues. Umpires, like players are contracted, both as individuals and as a union. Without a working contract, they don't work. The jobs are still theirs (they haven't been locked out or fired) there simply isn't an agreement in place to allow them to work.

p.s. "stretching" the definition of recent to even 2003 doesn't change any of the facts in this situation.

[JIGGY]

Originally Posted by Kaliix

Jiggy, AMLU was offered a contract. AMLU didn't like said contract so they didn't sign it and didn't go to work. All your union speak mumbo jumbo aside, you quit. Period. I might feel different if games hadn't started and other people weren't doing your jobs, but that ain't so. And if a new contract is signed, those replacements will be fired/let go/terminated and you will be rehired.

WWTB didn't say that no 2006 grads were working, he said recent. If there are 2005 or 2004 grads working then what he said is true. That most certainly does change the situation. From false to true.

WRONG AND WRONG. You don't get it.