Cutting costs (outsourcing ground personnel) and cutting service(flights AND employees)--especially, eliminating service--are two entirely different issues. But, of course because it's a red herring to say that DL eliminating service and AA outsourcing labor positions are the same thing. Any SANE person would immediately see that the two are not the same.
Delta is removing more flights
- Thread starter swamt
- Start date
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
of course it isn't the same thing... but DL IS growing its network faster than any other carrier - so DL is NOT eliminating service. it is transferring it.
You might argue that AA is just transferring employees from one station to another... but that is supposedly what scope is supposed to stop.
Labor could care less whether DL or any airline cuts flights in one city. All they care about is that employees don't have to chase planes all over the country.
In fact, DL transferred employees at MEM while transferring flights elsewhere.
MEM is NOT a station for AA anymore - not sure if that is AW and BW but at least for BW. AA has eliminated a half dozen or more cities that do not have AA or US BW personnel anymore.
You can't make the argument that is irrelevant what AA has done while acting like DL's cutting flights matters.
Labor's interest is and should be solely in the employee aspect of how the airline is run.
You might argue that AA is just transferring employees from one station to another... but that is supposedly what scope is supposed to stop.
Labor could care less whether DL or any airline cuts flights in one city. All they care about is that employees don't have to chase planes all over the country.
In fact, DL transferred employees at MEM while transferring flights elsewhere.
MEM is NOT a station for AA anymore - not sure if that is AW and BW but at least for BW. AA has eliminated a half dozen or more cities that do not have AA or US BW personnel anymore.
You can't make the argument that is irrelevant what AA has done while acting like DL's cutting flights matters.
Labor's interest is and should be solely in the employee aspect of how the airline is run.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
yes, winning.
unlike the former AA station of MEM.
and HNL.
and ABQ.
and SAT.
maybe you can help me out with the list.
unlike the former AA station of MEM.
and HNL.
and ABQ.
and SAT.
maybe you can help me out with the list.
Explain that "transferring service" BS to business people in Memphis who need to get to Chicago. I don't care.WorldTraveler said:
We are still providing service to MEM that we always have provided--at least during my career--service to/from DFW. I guess you have now redefined the word station to accommodate your psycho desire to run down AA. Is the term, station, only supposed to mean destinations where there are AA employees? And, just to be sure we don't offend you somewhere down the road, is DL also limited to this definition? For instance DL still serves BHM, but all the employees are contract and have been for some years now as far as I know. Is BHM no longer a DL station, just a place where you drop several airplanes on to the runway everyday?
I had to both bold and italicize that last loony statement of yours. So, as I understand it, you have decreed that those lowly of us who are deemed labor may only be concerned and talk about employee issues. Do you not think that's just a bit too much hubris even for you? Considering that over the past week or so you have expanded your areas of expertise from questioning diverted flights to advising JP Morgan of how it should do its job, it seems a bit much to start restricting the areas of interest of other people. Especially since you have decreed on multiple occasions that you have the right to comment on everything and anything because it is a public bulletin board. I gather that freedom applies only to you. Pompous blowhard seems inadequate now.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
explain the power of a union to the thousands of AA employees who were told their cities - and lots of them - were outsourced and their union could do nothing about it.
as usual, in your desire to be the martyr for the cause, you get the rest of the message all wrong.
as usual, in your desire to be the martyr for the cause, you get the rest of the message all wrong.
- Thread Starter
- #23
As you already know, it is OK for Delta to "transfer services" to other locations, but not OK for ANY other airline to do the very same thing. He has argued and argued this with me about SWA at ATL. Funny how he always spins things around when it involves dear ole Delta, LOL typical of him for the past many many years...jimntx said:
Kev3188
Veteran
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
No, I got the message correctly. Only you are permitted to comment on subjects for which you have no knowledge or contact with reality. Thousands of AA employees? You should not exaggerate. You do it too much and people begin to call it lying. Besides, if cities were outsourced that would be the union's fault, and we all know what a POS the TWU is when it comes to protecting jobs and wages at AA. TWU exists because the majority of their voters are in Tulsa maintenance, and all they care about is their jobs--none of their fellow members in other cities.WorldTraveler said:
Oh, and let's remember that the gate/ticket agents repeatedly voted down union membership and job protection. They got what they asked for.
They all still have frequent service. And I don't know about below the wing, but IAH has the same gate agents its had for years. I was just there yesterday. But, until you answer my previous question about your new definition of station and your restrictions on others ability to comment, there will be no further response to your deliberate misstatements of the truth. (In some circles it's called lying.).WorldTraveler said:
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
there are and never have been any restrictions about who can answer.
maybe it isn't thousands..... maybe it is just hundreds. tell us the number and then you have the right to call it exaggeration.
tell me also about the number of bumps that took place because of those people who had to leave stations or become Envoy employees, AKA subcontractors.
and, I totally agree that if you want to include above wing personnel, the numbers look differently.
I have long pointed out that DL has far more stations staffed with above wing personnel than either it has below wing or what other carriers have above wing.
most people on here want to point to BW while failing to recognize that DL and perhaps now AA also sees that there are different reasons to staff some stations with its own personnel above wing than below wing.
ps. instead of using personal attacks, how about you use facts and then simply have the ability to point out that your facts are right and then move on?
but first you have to show me the number of people who were affected by AA's outsourcing of BW along with the bumps that it included.
and if the TWU is so bad, then why is it still there? The fact that so many people speak so badly about what the TWU has done and yet nothing changes is a powerful incentive for DL people to not get roped into ANY union since it is clear that the process of getting rid of them is near impossible.
There is little incentive to produce if a union knows it won't get replaced.
even if you look at the IAM, 700 repeatedly points to the outsourcing of jobs as evidence of what the members wanted. if the workplace turns into "Lord of the Flies" then the power of a union is not what a lot of people make it out to be.
Kev3188
Veteran
