AA paid TWU almost $4.5 million between 8/31/11 and 11/15/11

[BigMac]

$4.5 mill = a lot of bj's.
So who's giving and who's taking.?
Unprofessional answer I suppose, but the blunt truth is what it is.

 

[eolesen]

Time to end compulsory union membership... if the TWU had to work for their money instead of just knowing the check is in the mail, maybe you'd have better representation.

 

[737823]

That's a separate entry from the one I'm talking about. The insurance premiums totaled just $8,900 for the period. The entry I'm talking about is on page 1352 of the .pdf and equals almost $4.5 million.

I think 700UW hit it on the head; the TWU is an effective dues collection machine, and with about 25,000 employees at AA, looks like the TWU pulls in more than $1 million per month in dues. Gotta pay for that ineffective representation and industry-lagging hourly pay.

The IAM isn't much better, you posted several weeks back that IAM represented mechanics at USAir top out a mere 16 cents higher than their AA TWU represented counterparts.

Josh

 

[Kev3188]

Time to end compulsory union membership... if the TWU had to work for their money instead of just knowing the check is in the mail, maybe you'd have better representation.

Ending the no-raid clause would reach a similar end...

 

[eolesen]

All that would do is make it easier to change the name on the check -- they'd still have guaranteed dues income.

Taken to an extreme, the RLA is a violation of Article 20 of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the US signed in 1948.

Article 20.2 states "No one may be compelled to belong to an association."

Article 23.4 states "Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests."

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

 

[700UW]

The IAM isn't much better, you posted several weeks back that IAM represented mechanics at USAir top out a mere 16 cents higher than their AA TWU represented counterparts.

Josh

You just dont get it and you love to spread misinformation.

Do you not understand that US filed chapter 11 twice, once in 2002 with two rounds of concessions and once again in 2004 with one round of concessions.

US Airways and the IAM are in Section 6 negotiations for the first time since chapter 11.

And AA and the TWU gave concessions in 2003 without being in chapter 11.

When are you going to grow up and actually post the truth and the facts instead of your usual anti-iam misinformation?

 

[700UW]

E,

The RLA permits a closed shop, but it has to be negotiated or agreed to by both the union and the company.

And when a perspective employee applies for a job in a closed shop, they are made aware that it is a condition of employment.

Employees do not have to be members but they have to pay whats germane to the contract, Beck vs CWA and Whirpool vs IAM.

Do you think it should be like the NLRA covered employees, where you dont have to be a member yet the union has to represent a non-member and use their money, their time and resources without the person paying whats germane to the CBA?

 

[eolesen]

I've advocated putting unions under NRLA for years.

If you don't belong to the union, you shouldn't have access to the union's resources for grievances.

 

[700UW]

But under the NLRA a union must represent a non-member, is that fair?

 

[737823]

You just dont get it and you love to spread misinformation.

Do you not understand that US filed chapter 11 twice, once in 2002 with two rounds of concessions and once again in 2004 with one round of concessions.

US Airways and the IAM are in Section 6 negotiations for the first time since chapter 11.

And AA and the TWU gave concessions in 2003 without being in chapter 11.

When are you going to grow up and actually post the truth and the facts instead of your usual anti-iam misinformation?

I'm in agreement that USAir went through two bankruptcies and three rounds of concessions by the IAM which lead the industry into the push for concessions in the early-mid concessions beginning in 2002. We can agree on that.

Are you saying you disagree that USAir mechanics do not top off at $33.44, a mere 16 cents higher than their AA TWU represented counterparts?

http://www.aanegotia...hanicsWages.asp

Not sure what misinformation and anti-IAM propaganda you think I'm spreading, the AANegotation link supports what I posted and we're in agreement on the two bankruptcies and three rounds of concessions at USAir-leading the industy concessions train in the early-mid 2000s.

Josh

 

[737823]

Time to end compulsory union membership... if the TWU had to work for their money instead of just knowing the check is in the mail, maybe you'd have better representation.

I couldn't imagine having union representation imposed on me. As we saw in Wisconsin, the public is serious about getting union members to pay their fair share and work hard like everyone else. Perhaps we'll see a national right to work law someday in the future to restore democracy and accountability. At any rate, labor feels threatened right now as their influence and membership continues to decline.

Josh

 

[700UW]

Movement conservatives at all levels echo these types of claims and use the army of talking points from the NRTWC and the Republican Party. The problem is that the talking points are just plain false. Here's the reality about right-to-work (for less) laws:

• Federal law already prohibits any American from being forced to join a union. Since this is almost the only argument that conservatives put forth in supporting right-to-work laws, and it's 100 percent false, what is the real motivation for these laws?
• Right-to-work laws don't grant any rights, they simply weaken unions
• Federal law also prohibits unions from using member or non-member fees from paying for activities that might violate the political or religious beliefs of the worker
• These laws allow workers who do not pay union dues to obtain the same benefits, including legal representation from unions, as union members without paying for them
• Workers (union and non-union) in right-to-work states make more than $5,000 a year less, on average, than in other states.
• States without right-to-work laws have healthier tax bases, which leads to better government programs and educational systems
• Because unions lead in the fight to ensure safety and health standards for all workers, laws that weaken unions also weaken these standards. The workplace death rate is 51 percent higher in right-to-work states
• Without strong unions to fight for benefits for workers, right-to-work states have 21 percent more people without health insurance
• The infant mortality rate in right-to-work states is 16 percent higher
• Without strong unions to fight for better wages for all workers, the poverty rate in right-to-work states is 2.3 percent higher
• Right-to-work states offer a maximum weekly worker compensation benefit $30 less than other states
• Right-to-work laws disproportionately harm women. Union women, on average, earn $149 more per week than non-union women
• The wage gap between men and women in the United States is 32 percent. it is only 5 percent between union men and women
• Right-to-work laws disproportionately harm people of color. Hispanic and Latino union members earn 45 percent more and African-Americans who are in unions see salaries 30 percent higher than African-Americans that are not in unions
• The more workers that are unionized, the higher the wages that employers will offer, even to non-union workers, since workers are less willing to accept substandard wages
• Higher wages mean more money is spent by working families, boosting the economy and leading to lower uneployment numbers
• Higher rates of unionism lead to increases in productivity in both union jobs and non-union jobs, as employers must bring in new technology, new techniques and better training in order to attract better workers
• Employers frequently offer higher wages to workers in order to prevent them from organizing a union, meaning that even the presence of unions and the possibility of their existence in a workplace increases wages
• • Right-to-work laws undercut unionized businesses in the states where they exist because non-union businesses can offer cheaper goods and services by exploiting their workers
  • Right-to-work laws interfere with empoyer-worker contracts by limiting what the two sides can engage in. These laws don't encourage freedom, they restrain it for all involved, placing the 'wisdom' of conservative politicians over that of both empoyers and workers

 

[xUT]

I couldn't imagine having union representation imposed on me. As we saw in Wisconsin, the public is serious about getting union members to pay their fair share and work hard like everyone else. Perhaps we'll see a national right to work law someday in the future to restore democracy and accountability. At any rate, labor feels threatened right now as their influence and membership continues to decline.

Josh

Union representation is never imposed,
If you don't want representation then don't take the job, quite simple.
The problem 'was/more so than is' people wanted the union scale but not the union.
People believe your bull hockey while corporate screws the workers.
Wish I could deduct my tax payment from the financial bailout and watch you bloodsuckers cut grass...
B) xUT

 

[737823]

Union representation is never imposed,
If you don't want representation then don't take the job, quite simple.
The problem 'was/more so than is' people wanted the union scale but not the union.
People believe your bull hockey while corporate screws the workers.
Wish I could deduct my tax payment from the financial bailout and watch you bloodsuckers cut grass...
B) xUT

What about bloodsucking organizers like the CWA that show up at workplaces and see workers solely as an opportunity collect dues, rather than represent them?

My comp was down last year but do far my business unit is doing better, it's looking up for bonuses this year. We should know more in the coming weeks but so far it's looking good!

Don't have grass to cut, I live in a condo! Besides were my position to be eliminated I have a severance package in place and plenty of other job opportunities and references.

Josh

Josh

 

[737823]

Movement conservatives at all levels echo these types of claims and use the army of talking points from the NRTWC and the Republican Party. The problem is that the talking points are just plain false. Here's the reality about right-to-work (for less) laws:

• Federal law already prohibits any American from being forced to join a union. Since this is almost the only argument that conservatives put forth in supporting right-to-work laws, and it's 100 percent false, what is the real motivation for these laws?
• Right-to-work laws don't grant any rights, they simply weaken unions
• Federal law also prohibits unions from using member or non-member fees from paying for activities that might violate the political or religious beliefs of the worker
• These laws allow workers who do not pay union dues to obtain the same benefits, including legal representation from unions, as union members without paying for them
• Workers (union and non-union) in right-to-work states make more than $5,000 a year less, on average, than in other states.
• States without right-to-work laws have healthier tax bases, which leads to better government programs and educational systems
• Because unions lead in the fight to ensure safety and health standards for all workers, laws that weaken unions also weaken these standards. The workplace death rate is 51 percent higher in right-to-work states
• Without strong unions to fight for benefits for workers, right-to-work states have 21 percent more people without health insurance
• The infant mortality rate in right-to-work states is 16 percent higher
• Without strong unions to fight for better wages for all workers, the poverty rate in right-to-work states is 2.3 percent higher
• Right-to-work states offer a maximum weekly worker compensation benefit $30 less than other states
• Right-to-work laws disproportionately harm women. Union women, on average, earn $149 more per week than non-union women
• The wage gap between men and women in the United States is 32 percent. it is only 5 percent between union men and women
• Right-to-work laws disproportionately harm people of color. Hispanic and Latino union members earn 45 percent more and African-Americans who are in unions see salaries 30 percent higher than African-Americans that are not in unions
• The more workers that are unionized, the higher the wages that employers will offer, even to non-union workers, since workers are less willing to accept substandard wages
• Higher wages mean more money is spent by working families, boosting the economy and leading to lower uneployment numbers
• Higher rates of unionism lead to increases in productivity in both union jobs and non-union jobs, as employers must bring in new technology, new techniques and better training in order to attract better workers
• Employers frequently offer higher wages to workers in order to prevent them from organizing a union, meaning that even the presence of unions and the possibility of their existence in a workplace increases wages
• • Right-to-work laws undercut unionized businesses in the states where they exist because non-union businesses can offer cheaper goods and services by exploiting their workers
  • Right-to-work laws interfere with empoyer-worker contracts by limiting what the two sides can engage in. These laws don't encourage freedom, they restrain it for all involved, placing the 'wisdom' of conservative politicians over that of both empoyers and workers

Way to copy/paste and circumvent your charge that I'm making things up. I provided a link to a legitimate, authentic source and you don't like that I not only proved you wrong, but have also shown once again you go after people claiming they are wrong when in fact you are the one who is wrong. I'm glad I don't have you or another union official representing me and influencing things like my terms of employment and compensation.

Josh