Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!dptg!rutgers!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!texsun!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway
From: ijk@violin.att.com (Ihor J Kinal)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: More About NJ Sabotage
Message-ID: 
Date: 8 Aug 89 21:45:30 GMT
Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 29
Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us
X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 283, message 3 of 6

In article , bzs@BU-CS.BU.EDU (Barry
Shein) writes:

> And no doubt some of it all will be true, but not much.
>
> Come back and report when charges are filed and the union is held
> responsible for this, not when some manager at NJ Bell calls the press
> to badmouth the union.

I've been scanning the news articles, but I HAVE NOT seen any BELL
MANAGER accuse the UNIONS of sabatoge.

 From the nature of Barry's article, though, it would appear, since
the UNION is not culpable, and that the UNION MEMBERS are not culpable,
that either the GENERAL PUBLIC or MANAGEMENT of the BELL CO are doing
this to make the UNIONS look bad.

It's possible - I'm sure that some COMPANIES have done that in the
past, but I suppose most people are unlikely to accept that as
the likelier of the possibilities in this particular case.

Ihor Kinal

STANDARD DISCLAIMER about my opinions being my own.

[Moderator's Note: It appears we here in Ameritech territory will get off
lucky this time around. Strike-talk was in the air at Illinois Bell, but
apparently they are very close to resolving the few minor difference
which remain. PT]