When I first wrote about the public hearing about the Teamsters Union impasse, someone asked me what the public hearing was about. I said that it was about the impasse in negotiating the contract. When I blogged about the hearing, he asked me again, what was it about? What was the question? What was it that the public was being summoned to comment on? Forget that the TB wasn’t particularly interested in what the public had to say about any of it, what was it that they were being asked? When there is a public hearing, there is a law to be commented on, or some issue. But what was this issue? The documents about the mediation and fact finding weren’t entered into the record until the public hearing. How then was the public to be informed about the contract for comment? Were they being asked to comment on the contract? They haven’t seen it. Were they being asked to choose among the issues raised? They weren’t informed about them to be able to choose among them. Were they being asked to resolve the impasse, or to tell the board that they should resolve the impasse, or to accept Bob-O proposal made at the end of the hearing, or to tell that to accept the fact finding, or the mediation, or to tell them that in a small town, two years of unresolved contract negotiations can be really damaging? No posted documents. No prior information. What were they being asked? What was the point?
What is the question?