The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 02, 2006, 09:09am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thump
and NOT ONE AMLU UMPIRE has stepped foot on a Minor League field this year. NOT ONE! That's strength.
But there are rumblings across this great nation that there will, indeed, be MiLB umps who willingly return to the field, but no one wants to be the first to go. Will it happen? Yes, if several do it. Expect more to quickly follow.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 02, 2006, 11:15am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 760
Apparently one third of the membership (about 75 guys) haven't bought into the charade and are ready to work now.

While none of the current union has worked this three and a half week old season, it won't be long before dissent works its way into the fray. PBUC has already said that no further negotiations will take place. Does the union brass really believe that they are awaiting a sweeter offer? The one they just received was eerily similar to the one presented in January and again, just before the strike. A few little adjustments were made but MiLB refuses to make concessions.

Like I wrote earlier, the D1 guys will be wrapping up their seasons shortly. Even the guys who will work the NCAA playoffs will be done in another thirty days. The season won't be half over and a new batch of elite umpires will be a callin'. The good news is that there will be plenty of summer rec ball to be had by those guys who can't find a decent landscaping job. I'll work an American Legion game with a couple of them and I'll even let him show me his stuff on the dish. I'm only too happy to have them join the ranks of those they've been bashing. Maybe I'll even treat them to a local MiLB game. They can tell me how inconsistent the crew is and we can ponder the consistency of the union decision makers. Hell, I'll even spring for dogs and suds.
__________________
"You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers.
You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions.
~Naguib Mahfouz
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 01, 2006, 11:01am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 46
mediation

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrB
DIV2ump,

It is my understanding that the negotiation team had to recommend the deal for ratification so the group could vote on it. The team didn't like a deal that gave $2 extra per diem instead of $1, but they had to put it forth to the group as part of the federal mediation.
Mediation is non-binding. If they didn't like the deal they simply don't have to recommend it for a vote. The idea that they would go for a bad deal just to have a deal to put in front of the membership is silly. The fact that they recommended it and it went down shows the bargaining committee has no control.

How is management/PBUC supposed to make a deal when the bargaining committee has no credibility when it comes to the committee's ability to sell the deal? This is a serious problem for the AMLU.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 01, 2006, 11:55am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
http://www.latimes.com/sports/

There's the details of the offer voted down.

EDIT: they keep changing the # of the story. Look for the story on the right hand side of the page at the top under AP News.

Last edited by Jurassic Referee; Mon May 01, 2006 at 12:14pm.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 01, 2006, 12:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by DIV2ump
Mediation is non-binding. If they didn't like the deal they simply don't have to recommend it for a vote. The idea that they would go for a bad deal just to have a deal to put in front of the membership is silly. The fact that they recommended it and it went down shows the bargaining committee has no control.

How is management/PBUC supposed to make a deal when the bargaining committee has no credibility when it comes to the committee's ability to sell the deal? This is a serious problem for the AMLU.
The bargaining committee isn't supposed to have control of the union. That memebers should. It's the committes job to get a proposal to the union so they can vote on it. That's what the memebers asked them to do, so they did. I don't see this being a problem for the AMLU. Looks like the problem is for MiLB. What are the umpires losing? A 2,000/month job. Big deal. If you think of it like a business man, the umpires are probably saving money too.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 01, 2006, 12:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,577
If this is such a terrible deal for the AMLU, why did its members 'buy into' the system in the first place? To my simple mind, THAT was the real mistake, a long time ago......

They knew YEARS ago that it was poor pay, lots of travel, no home life, almost no shot at the bigs, etc.

What changed between when they signed up with PBUC outta pro school and now?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AMLU negotiators, MiLB officials and a federal mediator meet in Cincinnati! MrB Baseball 59 Tue May 02, 2006 06:38pm
A Modest Proposal GarthB Baseball 7 Sun Jul 31, 2005 07:39pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:38pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1