5TH week vacation coming back?

[WorldTraveler]

...the Force Majuere clause.. is only used to get around a union protection clause, which Delta did not have at the time (except for the ALPA pilots).

Force Majeure defined:

"Standard clause found in construction and supply contracts, it exempts the contracting parties from fulfilling their contractual obligations for causes that could not be anticipated and/or are beyond their control. These causes usually include act of God, act of man, act of parliament, and other impersonal events or occurrences. French for, superior force. Also called irresistible force."

Note the word "contracts" used throughout. Only Delta employees covered by a CBA would have needed a declaration of Force Majuere to lay off outside of the scope.

Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/force-majeure.html#ixzz2f5R3JB1j

thank you for bringing the conversation to a point of agrément.

I haven't been arguing about what a FM is or that DL didn't or could use it.

I have argued that just because an FM doesn't exist isn't proof that employees will be laid off. In contrast, DL's philosophy - and far less contentious relationship with labor - allowed it to achieve what it needed post 9/11 with less pain, if that can be measured by reduced wages and lost jobs.

Richard Anderson, either running NW or DL, wasn't and isn't running for sainthood - and I don't think there is a DL employee who would nominate him for it.
He was and is running a business. IN the case of NW, he was determined to get NW's costs down, something they achieved in the aftermath of the AMFA strike. At DL, he obtains costs that are better than many of his network peers through efficiency and labor flexibility, including the use of RR and PT employees which unions have little to no interest in supporting.
Richard didn't invent those concepts because they have been part of the fiber of DL for decades, long before deregulation.

I'm not sure if you ever struck NW or any other company before, but these boards are full of accounts of what happened before and leading up to the AMFA strike and lockout, or whatever term you want to use. The AMFA affair was nasty and it was obvious from the beginning that it would not end well for labor.

In the aftermath of 9/11, it is hard to imagine that any labor leader could have honestly believed they could expect to be exempt from the impact of the enormous financial impact of 9/11, but AMFA leaders apparently doubted the reality of the drop in revenues on the industry.

Once again, DL and NW had identical labor CASMs on the day the two merged - but NW had gained it via painful labor-mgmt relations including during the AMFA incident while DL's labor-mgmt. relations have featured far less drama and animosity.
Richard Anderson is capable of putting on whichever hat he needs to run the type of business he is leading.

DL people will always have that choice and if Mr. Anderson or any other DL leader - or groups of them - screw up, then DL people could and should choose unions if that option makes the best sense for them. There is absolutely nothing wrong in my mind with DL employees keeping DL mgmt. on their toes in order to extract the maximum benefit that DL employees can achieve. But DL has shown that it is capable of answering dissatisfaction with the answers that employees want better than labor has been able to.

This thread started as a discussion about DL non-contract employees regaining the 5th week of vacation above a certain seniority level. DL employees have repeatedly lambasted DL mgmt. for taking the benefit away 8 years ago and their persistence in bringing up the issue has resulted in its restoration, even if no one here can quantify the number of people who will qualify for it.

The vast majority of DL employees have repeatedly said they do not want to increase the level of unionization which means they do not see value in what labor can provide compared to what they can get directly from DL mgmt. They have also repeatedly indicated they don't want the painful labor relations which are common in the airline industry and which have almost always ended up with mgmt. getting what they want regardless of what labor does or thinks.

If there is an argument that DL people have ridden the coattails of labor on the upside, then the fact that DL people have fared better than their network carrier peers on the downside would seem to indicate that DL has been a source of restraint to the cuts that other airline managers would like to implement.


Considering that DL is on track to have one of the best years in the history of US aviation and DL employees are reaping benefits as good as or better than their peers elsewhere because of DL's profitability, there is little reason to believe anything will change WRT DL employees desire to unionize.

 

[Kev3188]

thank you for bringing the conversation to a point of agrément.

I haven't been arguing about what a FM is or that DL didn't or could use it.

That's exactly what you've been arguing with 700 about. He said that in a SARS type case, a company like DL wouldn't need to (and couldn't, really) invoke FM, since with at will employees, they could just furlough them anyway...

Under the at will employment doctrine, they can terminate an employee "at any time, for any reason." They certainly don't need a history-changing event like SARS or 9/11 to do that.

I have argued that just because an FM doesn't exist isn't proof that employees will be laid off.

...And you've been arguing that with yourself, since NO ONE has said definitely that DL employees will be laid off; only that there would be no need (or ability) to invoke an FM clause with unrepresented groups.

"Can" =/= "Will," or "are likely to be."

 

[WorldTraveler]

He said that in a SARS type case, a company like DL wouldn't need to (and couldn't, really) invoke FM, since with at will employees, they could just furlough them anyway...

Under the at will employment doctrine, they can terminate an employee "at any time, for any reason." They certainly don't need a history-changing event like SARS or 9/11 to do that.



...And you've been arguing that with yourself, since NO ONE has said definitely that DL employees will be laid off; only that there would be no need (or ability) to invoke an FM clause with unrepresented groups.

"Can" =/= "Will," or "are likely to be."

I agree with the wording you have used, Kev.
Check the verbs that 700 used and you come up with a different meaning.

If he had used the conditional or compound verbs "could..." or "can" we wouldn't have spent several pages arguing.

But he didn't.

here's what he said:

It was at NW, and you cant have a FM when you are non-union with no contract, they just lay you off.

His wording is as inaccurate as trying to argue that outsourcing only consists of mainframe overhauls.

IN reality, DL COULD HAVE but DIDN'T.... repeatedly.

And it is precisely my point that the "at will" ability which DL has had the freedom to use has in fact resulted in less layoffs than has occurred with carriers that have had CBAs.

It is precisely the difference between COULD HAVE and DID that allows DL employees to view the worth of labor unions as being much less than the labor movement wants those employees to believe.

My challenge to you and the labor movement is to close the gap between what labor unions obtain for its people at represented companies and at DL. If you (collectively) succeed at doing that, DL people might see value in labor representation.

 

[southwind]

That sounds like an endorsement of freeloading. Why would you say that?

Sounds to me like people who didn't want representation , but forced to, in order to secure a job, then being blacklisted by the union they didn't want representing them in the first place !

I could use the old, "Well, no ones forcing you to work for said union" but I know how you feel when I state, "No ones forcing you to work for a company that doesn't have union representation"!

 

[737823]

Sounds to me like people who didn't want representation , but forced to, in order to secure a job, then being blacklisted by the union they didn't want representing them in the first place !

I could use the old, "Well, no ones forcing you to work for said union" but I know how you feel when I state, "No ones forcing you to work for a company that doesn't have union representation"!

Yep those words fall in deaf ears-if you don't like the union find another place to work. Ridiculous, no one should be forced to join a union or pay an agency fee as a dues objector. If unions delivered for their membership people would join and pay dues, organized labor shouldn't impose their presence on people who desire not to be represented.

It is an injustice if even one worker is forced to pay dues (or an agency fee) just to keep a job. The newer NMB rules make the process less democratic than before since a union can be certified simply based on a majority of respondents not eligible voters. Apatheic workers are more likely to be content with the status quo and no representation. A recent example is the UA PCE vote, the IAM won based on the new rules but had they been subject to the new rules they wouldn't have had a majority of support among all eligible voters.

Josh

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

If he had used the conditional or compound verbs "could..." or "can" we wouldn't have spent several pages arguing.

Really?
Just admit that there is no force majuere in a non union situation. I know you have it in you.

Verbs, nouns, etc. You have the art of being verbose mastered.

 

[737823]

Really?
Just admit that there is no force majuere in a non union situation. I know you have it in you.

And Josh is just troll following 700.

Nope, I enjoy participating in the discussions and 700 keeps replying to my posts so he must derive enjoyment/satisfaction at some level or he wouldn't keep engaging.

Josh

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

Nope, I enjoy participating in the discussions and 700 keeps replying to my posts so he must derive enjoyment/satisfaction at some level or he wouldn't keep engaging.

Josh

You guys should get a room (or a boxing ring).

 

[WorldTraveler]

Really?
Just admit that there is no force majuere in a non union situation. I know you have it in you.

Verbs, nouns, etc. You have the art of being verbose mastered.

I have the art of being accurate... whether with words or numbers. They matter. whether it is with a decimal here or there or a conditional or subjunctive or imperative someplace else.

Surely, as a mechanic you learned the importance of accurately reading and recording with accuracy. IN fact, I know you did.

I said a long time ago that I agree that there is no force majeure for non-contract employees.

700 emphatically said that employees without FM are cut - except that might or might not be true. That's why we've had this little discussion.

For the twentieth time (and you wonder why I have to be so repetitive), the issue is that DL employees fared better without FM than did airline employees which supposedly had "protection" that should have ONLY allowed cuts under FM.

It is the sparring matches that keep the crowds coming to this website. Public spectacles are the only way to go.

 

[737823]

Kev and/or WT please weight in...

Doesn't DL have an employee advocacy support/network that works with EIG's to resolve disputes with management? Obviously it does not the same process an employee covered under a CBA would face with their union and employer but it is an avenue of support nonetheless.

Of course Kev keeps chalking up how great union protection is and how excellent the orderly process of an RIF is but at the end of the day union or no union, if the company needs to cut staff they will cut staff. Similarly he insists no union can delay or prevent an employee from being justly terminated, so what real value does the union process bring?

Josh

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

Surely, as a mechanic you learned...

I learned that my skills with my hands will carry me far into my retirement years. I really enjoy working on things I own and maintain.

I long gave that up as a means of employment. I saw the writing on the wall and completed my advanced degrees and joined the ranks of those who lead rather than follow.

 

[700UW]

Yep those words fall in deaf ears-if you don't like the union find another place to work. Ridiculous, no one should be forced to join a union or pay an agency fee as a dues objector. If unions delivered for their membership people would join and pay dues, organized labor shouldn't impose their presence on people who desire not to be represented.

It is an injustice if even one worker is forced to pay dues (or an agency fee) just to keep a job. The newer NMB rules make the process less democratic than before since a union can be certified simply based on a majority of respondents not eligible voters. Apatheic workers are more likely to be content with the status quo and no representation. A recent example is the UA PCE vote, the IAM won based on the new rules but had they been subject to the new rules they wouldn't have had a majority of support among all eligible voters.

Josh

So is it ok they get the pay and benefits that the union spent its money and resources?

I dont think so, no free loaders.

And if they dont want to be in a union job, then dont work for a company that has a union.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Kev and/or WT please weight in...

Doesn't DL have an employee advocacy support/network that works with EIG's to resolve disputes with management? Obviously it does not the same process an employee covered under a CBA would face with their union and employer but it is an avenue of support nonetheless.

Of course Kev keeps chalking up how great union protection is and how excellent the orderly process of an RIF is but at the end of the day union or no union, if the company needs to cut staff they will cut staff. Similarly he insists no union can delay or prevent an employee from being justly terminated, so what real value does the union process bring?

Josh

DL has employee engagement at a number of levels, including in policy formation and performance and disciplinary appeals.

I learned that my skills with my hands will carry me far into my retirement years. I really enjoy working on things I own and maintain.

I long gave that up as a means of employment. I saw the writing on the wall and completed my advanced degrees and joined the ranks of those who lead rather than follow.

and it is precisely your ability to understand the trends and adapt to them that has allowed you to succeed in the same way that winning organizations thrive in spite of adversity.

Leadership means making tough assessments of the world including of oneself. It also means listening to the criticism that comes from others and being able to filter out what applies - and there is almost always some bit of truth in anything that we encounter - and throw out that which is irrelevant.

The most damning position in life to be in is unwilling or unable to honestly examine oneself and ones world or being unable to see the changes that take place and unable to them.

Those that can do these things are leaders; those that cannot react and follow.

 

[Kev3188]

Kev and/or WT please weight in...

Doesn't DL have an employee advocacy support/network that works with EIG's to resolve disputes with management? Obviously it does not the same process an employee covered under a CBA would face with their union and employer but it is an avenue of support nonetheless.

Yes they do. And just like at most other places where these paper tiger structures exist, it's main purpose is to provide employees with a false sense of empowerment. They are in no way an equal substitute for a collective bargaining agreement- all the more so, since they are explicitly told they will not deal with any pay/benefit/workrule items.

BTW, one's elected FIT reps can be removed- and replaced- by mgmt. at any time w/o recourse.

FIT & EIG teams do NOT handle discipline issues, either- that's a separate committee (not at the local level) that one needs to apply to. management can override that group's decisions as well, rendering them more or less useless.

These teams are a time honored union avoidance move. DL isn't the first to have them, and won't be the last...

... Similarly he insists no union can delay or prevent an employee from being justly terminated, so what real value does the union process bring?

Consistency, due process, and recourse for an employee for starters...

The alternative is the current structure, who can't deal with any true economic issue, can't advocate for a coworker in a discipline issue, is unable to enforce policy/procedure, and can be removed and/or appointed by mgmt. at will.

What real value does that bring?

 

[WorldTraveler]

fixed it for you.... X 1000

All that jabberwocky, and my statement still stands.

You can throw as much in as you want to muddy the water, but in the end, it's still "yes, DL has employee engagement teams."

c'mon... you can say it. The vast majority of DL employees are satisfied with them and the relationship that have with DL mgmt. Remember that is how mgmt. heard how important the 5th week was.

how was it? Good goes around.

Happy day to you, Kev.

How is it? Good goes around.