Why is it when I read this...
[quote]Guaranteed not made up....[/quote]
I immediately visualized this...
[quote]I did not have sexual relations with that woman....Monica Lewinski.[/quote]
Naran, I'm not going to advertise for AGEM but I'll see what I can do....
Excuse me? If you're going to make allegations, I think you have an obligation to back them up with facts. It's not advertising - it's supporting your own assertions that something improper is occurring.
From: Danah Graham [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:16 AM
To: New opportunity for Supervisors
And? Where's the rest of the email text?
[quote="Al Greenlaw"]I see a lot of similarity with what she is posting and what unionman posted.[/quote]
Is it possible that Deb is also unionman? Or, maybe Deb is married to unionman?
Deb, are you willing to answer those questions?
8) You wouldn't be trying to "out" me on here now would you Luv2Travel???
Since unionman is anonymous, I see no issue with Luv2Travel asking the question. It's not as if anybody knows who unionman is.
Lucky and Kennebec are married, for instance. We don't know who they are, but we know they're married. I don't think that violates AMG's anonymity policy.
You can be sure Luv2Travel knows who Unionman is Naran......he is on one of his "fishing trips" as you call it.
Deb - where's the remainder of the email you started posting above?
Here's part of it...I won't add all of the garbage:
Dear fellow state employee,
As we enter the final two weeks of our campaign to decertify MSEA-SEIU,
(and on it goes with their letter).
Deb, you may have missed it, (most AMGers did) but unionman actually "outed" himself with one of his posts. He did go back later and edit out the name, but by that time there were a least a few who saw his unedited post and know his identity. You should take note that no one has used that information publicly. Given his public chiding of Luv regarding Vermont, I would say that he was given a bit more respect in return.
Deb, I gotta tell ya, that is sum inflamatory language.
[quote]Dear fellow state employee,
As we enter the final two weeks of our campaign to decertify MSEA-SEIU, [/quote]
I say we git a rope. We can't let this insult go unpunished. The nerve of them people.
Maine's Public Sector workers overpaid.
Maine's public sector employees are literally the rich taking from the poor.
Compared to the national average of public sector employees Maine's are paid 22% more than the national average and almost 33% more than New Hampshire's public sector employee's.
Maine's public sector employees make an average of $43,487 (@$22.00 per hour) including benefits; private sector employee average salary and benefit is $28,819 (@$14.00 per hour), according to a study released by the Maine Heritage Policy Center.
Scott Moody, Senior Economist for the Maine Heritage Policy Center, points out in the newly released 'The Government â€˜Gravy Trainâ€™ An Analysis of Private versus Public Sector Compensation':
"There was once a time when government employment was considered a â€œpublic service.â€ In accepting a position of public
service, individuals were expected to accept a pay rate lower than a comparable task in the private sector. In return for this
salary sacrifice, government workers were rewarded with rich fringe benefits and job security.
While the public service mentality continues as an aspect of government employment, the notion that these government jobsare to be performed at a lower level of compensation than private sector jobs has evaporated. In examining compensation between the private and public sectors, a large disparity exists between their respective compensation levels and that disparity is in direct opposition to the aforementioned tradition. The disparity is a national trend, but the difference in Maine is dramatically greater."
See full report here: http://www.mainepolicy.org/
[quote]I understand there are some illegal things going on....[/quote]
[quote]NOW they have gone one further..... Real grown up of them to send their de-cert info. letter to state employees.....[/quote]
In the first instance you present your "understanding" as an accepted fact.
In the second instance, you assume that an email that could have been fabricated by anyone originated from an organization you don't like.
Your statements would be more credible, and this discussion more pertinent, if you were willing to support your assertions with credible evidence.
This is Deb's evidence so far:
[quote]From: Danah Graham [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:16 AM [/quote]
It can be assumed that someone opened a free [b]Yahoo[/b] email account using danahgraham. This can be anyone, even Dana Graham himself.
It was sent a 4:16am, so one can legitimately assume that it was done on a private home computer and sent to a list that could easily be obtained from (note that state employees email addresses are not confidential - the public is encouraged to contact emmployees electronically if possible) online sources.
This is hardly some smoking gun to indict the entire AGEM organization.
It appears to me that MSEA may be getting a little paranoid.
I have a couple of questions for you Deb. How could an organization attempting a decertification of MSEA succeed if it didn't contact the members of that organization? Is it your opinion that AGEM be prohibited from trying to contact members of bargaining units to seek support?
[quote="Deb"]You can be sure Luv2Travel knows who Unionman is Naran......he is on one of his "fishing trips" as you call it.[/quote]
Although I have some ideas for who unionman might be, I am not on a fishing trip. If you don't want to answer my questions I'll understand.
MSEA paranoid Al?? I think not! LOL They aren't the ones trying every dirty little trick in the book to get people to sign those decert cards. AGEM is, and I think they are having trouble with their numbers and are getting frustrated.
To answer your questions..#1-. They probably couldn't succeed if they couldn't contact the members, but they need to do it in a way that is allowed and follow the rules.
#2- I'm not sure of what you mean by "contacting members of bargaining units for support".
Being an MSEA member, I can verify Deb, that MSEA is using every "dirty little trick" to stop people from signing those decert cards, including slander.
If it doesn't endanger you in any way, and For the benefit of AMG'ers, could you cite examples of those 'dirty little tricks'? Are these things you've perceived, or are they sanctioned by MSEA?
From [url=http://www.asmainegoes.com/node/6868]AMG's FAQ Page[/url]
[quote]AMG is not a place to bore the socks off people, [b]baffle with b.s., [/b]or to be a pest in search of free publicity. [/quote]
Could you please post the public, questionable email that AGEM supposedly put into circulation? I asked 18 people today from 3 agencies if they got it and no one knew what I was talking about.
I call shenanigans. Seems like you're "Baffling with B.S."
Sh*t or get off the pot, as they say. Otherwise, I think you're full of it.
Pay attention Punk, read page 3 again. I showed you the address and part of the content. I'm not about to put the whole sickening thing on here.
Punk, Ask a supervisor, I would assume that that letter went to them.
I will post my evidence when Deb posts hers. :evil:
Cigar, Deb is just posting more unfounded allegations. She has no proof of any wrong doing or she would have posted it.
Deb, I'm going to post this part of an earlier post for you to carefully read and try to digest what I am saying.
[quote]I am not directly effected by fair share, it is not my fight (although I support the dissenters), rather [b]it is the refusal of MSEA to recognize that a sizeable number of members have become alientated because of the blatent partisanship of MSEA[/b] since the affiliation with SEIU. Unionman's response(s) (or lack thereof) to AMG members makes crystal clear what the problem is. [b]Fair share or not, that problem is not going away soon. It will continue to fester[/b].
Think about that for a minute. I am not a lone wolf. This is the feeling of a fairly large group of people within MSEA. Until MSEA recognizes this problem and addresses it, MSEA will be defending itself against one de-cert after another. AGEM/unfairshare is not the biggest problem for MSEA. The revolt within MSEA will continue until #1 there is a successful de-cert, or #2 MSEA finally acknowledges the problem and makes a [b]legitimate[/b] effort to resolve it.
Al, I can't comment on what Unioman says or does, that is his business. But as far as I see it if you are concerned about the support of Democrats by the union, that has been explained to you over and over. You just don't seem to want to accept the fact that they would be backing more Republicans if more Republicans would back State Workers! It's as simple as that.
The problem Deb is how do you define "support for state workers"? If Republicans want to lower taxes couldn't that be considered as support for state workers? If Republicans wanted to streamline government by merging areas of duplicated effort and reducing the state workforce by attrition rather than layoff, couldn't that be considered supporting state workers? If government cost less to operate, wouldn't there be (perhaps) more money available for contracts? The most generous governor for state employees was a Republican, John McKernan. Just a few questions for you to ponder. More later.
You know Deb, you make a perfect argument why fair share is unfair. You seem to be saying that any state employee who happens to be Republican should have no voice within MSEA. It doesn't matter what, or who, I support I should just happily pay my dues and bow to the alter of MSEA. Gee it all makes sense to me now. Funny though, I don't remember agreeing to give up my political beliefs when I was hired by the state. I guess that I should not have any expectation that an organization to which I have paid dues for 28 years would ever consider anything I have to say simply because I am a Republican. How unenlightened of me. It is all my fault because I happen to be a Republican. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
I can't believe that you would actually make such a statement.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: