Monday, May 23, 2005

This effort has been ongoing for at least two years

UPTE@Los Alamos worked hard to get some of the language changed from the draft RFP to the present language in the final RFP. This effort has been ongoing for at least two years. UPTE visited D.C. several times and met with many different representatives to tell them the concerns of UPTE members in the contract competition. Our CWA colleagues spoke on our behalf to their congressional members when we could not do it ourselves. We developed a respectful relationship with the SEB to ensure that the interests of our members were heard. We don't hide what the members want. Read our letter to the SEB at http://www.upte.org/LosAlamos/uc_contract/UPTEcommentsLANLdraftRFP.pdf
Regardless of what many think, a unified, but reasoned voice for employees does matter. UPTE stepped up to the plate and if we didn't hit a home run, we at least got on base. In June we plan to hold an open forum. We hope many LANL employees will attend (details will come out later). We will be watching the RFP process unfold and adding our input as developed by UPTE members.
Theresa Connaughton



Comments:
This might be a good time and place for UPTE to tell us how many dues-paying LANL members UPTE has.

Why is this such a hugh secret?
 
I attended several RFP meetings and UPTE was quite supportive. Thanks. For example, UPTE funds paid a lawyer to look over the draft RFP for any irregularities. I feel the efforts those who wrote letters and contacted their representatives did change the RFP for the better.
 
The question of how many dues-paying LANL employees UPTE has signed up is becoming very interesting.
Can somebody explain the secrecy on this?
This question being stonewalled says a lot about how UPTE would operate if UPTEE were to become the bargaining unit for LANL.
 
Hello UPTE! We are still waiting!
 
UPTE does a quite but basically positive work on the RFP and the bidding issues. Its silence about the number of members is not excusable though. It might show though that even small organization has something to say, and imagine what it might have to say if it were a big organization. On the other hand, there are still many contradictory accounts for the total number of employees at LANL. Can't somebody find all the numbers (I mean with division to UC-non-UC, TSM, admin, techs, etc). This numbers should be known, but when published differ significantly.
 
Kinda makes one wonder what else UPTE has to hide. Clearly UPTE is no more forthright with us than Nanos and Foley.
 
UPTE: We are still waiting!
 
What is the problem that UPTE is having with disclosing the actual level of support that they have?

Let me guess?
 
It's been a few days. I guess that the UPTE officers are busy counting the dues-paying members.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?