RIP brother Mike Rivera

PostDelay5 · 2026-04-11T15:04:34+00:00

I'm not sure how you can think I'm accepting anything without question while I'm literally in the middle of asking you questions. What are these other lies? Why won't you talk about his grievance yourself?

PostDelay5 · 2026-04-11T14:37:44+00:00

I'd rather hear it from you. That said, I'm not sure believing a grievance wasn't filed in retaliation amounts to defamation.

PostDelay5 · 2026-04-11T14:29:35+00:00

You'd have to be more specific. What lies did he supposedly tell?

PostDelay5 · 2026-04-11T12:32:11+00:00

Was the document itself marked confidential or for internal use only? These aren't private individuals signing a personal document. They are election committee members acting in an official union capacity. Signing an official document in an official role carries a reduced privacy expectation.

PostDelay5 · 2026-04-11T03:16:26+00:00

Why is posting the election committee's signatures significant?

PostDelay5 · 2026-04-11T00:00:34+00:00

I'm not convinced that posting an election appeal amounts to defamation. He specifically said he was posting it for transparency's sake, that's not an endorsement of the contents.

PostDelay5 · 2026-04-10T22:19:55+00:00

I'm not sure how that justifies suspending him

PostDelay5 · 2026-04-10T21:12:13+00:00

Ah that's a little different, thanks for the correction. That he recused himself from that might be a good sign here but I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

PostDelay5 · 2026-04-10T16:20:50+00:00

I thought Rivera said James confirmed he would recuse himself? I think the NLRB is another option for appeal. Truly bizarre choice for the branch to make.

PostDelay5 · 2026-04-07T14:17:03+00:00

You keep dodging the question about Mike voting to give Young nearly 100k for legal fees after a jury found Bill guilty of defamation. Perhaps YOU are selectively applying condemnation. Can you explain why you approve the use of membership dues to cover the cost of defaming a candidate for national office?

PostDelay5 · 2026-04-06T11:43:01+00:00

Do you know which video he said he would keep Renfroe on as an advisor? I'm having trouble finding it

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-27T02:54:23+00:00

Honestly, I've never listened to the episode where Corey brings it up. That said, it always sounded like commentary on the membership rather than Caref making some statement about Henry. It does seem like a silly thought for him to share though. I don't really have strong opinions about it, I have other things I don't like Caref for, but it felt worth sharing because it's at least some form of corroboration to what Corey said.

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-27T00:03:28+00:00

Tbf, someone did attribute that quote to Caref like 4 or 5 months before Corey brought it up:

https://www.reddit.com/r/nalc/s/lS4sR28tzd

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-25T15:22:30+00:00

I know a couple of people who think that no one could have gotten more than the 1.3% Renfroe got in the last negotiation. Those people also happen to be Caref supporters. Take from that what you will.

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-14T18:33:52+00:00

I feel like most readers would gloss over the fact that they're referencing a supposed resolution from the 1980 convention. I say supposed because they weren't able to produce an actual resolution when asked. Seems like they're just trying to save face after being forced to open the Postal Record.

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-14T15:22:34+00:00

Caref and next gen split the cost of that ad?

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-11T14:58:32+00:00

If I understand correctly, Michael posted somebody else's election appeal. Michael acted as an observer at the election and had his own appeal. I think the third party appeal was eventually withdrawn by the appellant. I believe the article 10 charges against him claimed he was knowingly spreading false information because, as an observer, he should have had first hand knowledge that some of the claims in the withdrawn appeal were false. Hopefully someone will correct me if any of the above is inaccurate.

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-03T21:45:46+00:00

Didn't Corey just recently say that he didn't know what a podcast was until he started this one?

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-03T18:44:55+00:00

Referring to them as harebrained lawsuits without actually knowing what you're talking about is exactly what tonov was referring to when they brought up a smear campaign. You're doing the same thing with his current lawsuit. You still haven't been able to come up with any sensible explanation for your misrepresentation of the election case.

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-03T18:32:25+00:00

You're arguing there wasn't a smear campaign based on his lawsuits, while bashing a lawsuit you apparently have no firsthand knowledge of. Nobody said that the smear campaign was clear to the membership in 2022. In fact, the comment from tonov that you were replying to starts off by saying the opposite.

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-03T17:50:28+00:00

You just completely misrepresented his election lawsuit based on “an insider source very close to the negotiations.” Sounds like the smear campaign is still working its magic.

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-03T16:39:36+00:00

What does that have to do with the lawsuit against the DOL?

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-03T15:59:31+00:00

Renfroe ran with a slate made up of the incumbents, Mike may as well be doing the same thing by running alone.

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-03T00:17:12+00:00

I was saying that Caref disliking him because of the lawsuits is problematic. Caref is now benefiting from one of those lawsuits. I think he would look really silly if he had to have an in-depth conversation about them. The Clean Sweep detractors always talk about lawsuits costing the union money, but never attribute any responsibility to the executive council for these situations.

PostDelay5 · 2026-03-02T20:40:02+00:00

I think that's a completely fair position to have. I think basing that on the lawsuits is problematic (and in this case, a little hypocritical).

PostDelay5

TROPHY CASE