to me, it does seem like a more democratic process.. but the bottom line is simply, either the numbers are there or they are not.
:blink:
Did AfA get the Votes
- Thread starter BajaBabe
- Start date
when "the powers that be" finally decide how to handle the election...
I only hope that everyone who is eligible to vote will participate, especially if it is a YES/NO with such a significant voter turn out.. so we can finally determine what the majority wishes for representation once and for all...
(instead of a thousand here or there just not bothering)
if everyone participates then it will be crystal clear (either way)
*everyone needs to participate.
after the conclusion of all required training and election results determined with an SOC in place..
I believe cross fleeting will continue until...
1. with representation, at the point the negotiated tentative agreement has
been ratified.
(both groups would more than likely remain separate due to the fence clause in our contract)
definition:
TA - Tentative Agreement
they fly their aircraft, we fly our aircraft, the union would send out a survey..the union would begin to negotiate the "industry leading contract" once that has been finalized..
(that timeline is undetermined as it can be as short as a few months or several years)
the TA would be sent to each base on a "road show"(basically they present what has been negotiated..the highlights/lowlights of the TA and answer questions to the group, ext.) then the voting process and then.. if that TA is ratified.. then cross fleeting more than likely would come to a conclusion..
(of course the seniority list would need to be finalized)
if the TA is not ratified, they start the process of negotiations all over, by sending out a survey again, restarting negotiations and come to another TA, another road show and another vote, this would be considered the TA 2 and then the voting process again, if that TA 2 is ratified cross fleeting more than likely will come to a conclusion.
if that TA is not ratified..well, you get the idea.
2. without representation, at the point/after the SOC has been issued.
cross fleeting more than likely would come to a conclusion because all Flight Attendants are trained on each others respective aircraft.. however a seniority list would need to be finalized for bidding purposes.
to my understanding that is how it may happen, and there is a process and that process needs to be fully explained during the vote...so people are making informed decisions.
Kev3188
Veteran
From Bloomberg:
Delta May Face Stronger Unions as Board Weighs Change
By John Hughes
Sept. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Delta Air Lines Inc. may have a tougher time blocking union organizing under a request labor made this month to a U.S. mediation board, where President Barack Obama’s appointees have gained a majority.
Delta workers could unionize with majority approval of those voting, under a change sought by the AFL-CIO, the largest U.S. labor federation. Currently a majority of all workers in a class, not just those voting, must approve, according to the National Mediation Board.
The vote standard is important for organized labor because unions are taking steps to hold elections at Delta, the least unionized U.S. passenger airline. More than 50,000 workers at Delta could join should organized labor succeed in getting enough votes once elections are scheduled.
“Nowhere in American democracy, other than during a union election in the airline and railroad industry, does an eligible voter wishing to sit out an election have his or her silence tabulated as a no vote,†Edward Wytkind, head of the AFL- CIO’s transportation trades department, said in a Sept. 2 letter to the board requesting the change.
Labor activists who helped sweep Obama into office have said they want to see more action on their priorities, including making it easier for workers to form unions.
The 12,300 pilots are the only major work group at Delta to be completely unionized. The group includes pilots at Northwest, which Atlanta-based Delta acquired in October 2008. The company has more than 75,000 employees.
The National Mediation Board is a government agency that helps resolve labor disputes and oversees elections for airlines and railways under the Railway Labor Act.
‘Ain’t Fair’
The board said it has received the request, and declined further comment. Wytkind asked the board to change its representation manual and take public comments before making the change. He said he hasn’t received a response.
There is a “fundamental question†whether the board has authority to make the modifications the AFL-CIO is seeking, said Mike Campbell, Delta’s executive vice president of human resources and labor relations.
“In this country, changing the rules in the middle of an election, most people stepping back would say that ain’t fair,†Campbell said in an interview.
The Air Transport Association, a Washington-based trade group that represents Delta and other carriers, wrote the board in opposition.
“A certified union must have the support of the majority to be effective,†James May, the group’s president, said in a statement. “There is no legal or policy justification to change this well-established voting process.â€
‘Not the Time’
“Now is not the time for change,†the Airline Industrial Relations Conference, a nonprofit group that represents carriers on labor issues, wrote the board on Sept. 16.
The three-member National Mediation Board, criticized by labor for its actions under Republican George W. Bush’s administration, now has a Democratic majority with Obama in office.
“It’s well-understood that the president himself is a strong supporter of the right to collectively bargain and unionize,†Wytkind said of Obama in an interview. Wytkind said he believes his request “will get a fair hearing†from the board.
The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA in July, and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers a month later, asked the board to declare Delta and Northwest a single entity. The requests were procedural moves before union organizing elections can be held.
Failed Vote
Labor leaders want to hold an election to organize the combined 20,500 flight attendants, including the non-union workers at Delta and those who had been organized at Northwest.
Delta attendants fell short in May 2008 in their second election in six years to join a union. Then, 40 percent of the 13,380 eligible attendants voted, and the turnout needed for certification was 50 percent plus one. Of those who voted, the “vast majority†supported a union, the flight attendants union said that month.
The machinists union is seeking to hold a Delta vote for about 14,000 baggage and ramp workers, flight-simulator technicians and security guards. The former Northwest employees in this group had been in unions while Delta’s workers weren’t.
Passenger-Service Workers
The machinists later plan to seek “single-carrier†designation that would move the airline toward an election for 20,000 other passenger-service workers, stock clerks and office and clerical workers, the union said in a statement last month.
Labor groups succeeded last year in getting the mediation board under Bush to drop proposed changes that they said would have made it harder to organize Delta workers. The groups said the change would have barred one organizing tactic, the submission of signature cards supporting a union.
The board withdrew the plan due to “concerns and confusion†of outside parties about the changes, the mediation board’s attorney said in a notice in September 2008.
Delta May Face Stronger Unions as Board Weighs Change
By John Hughes
Sept. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Delta Air Lines Inc. may have a tougher time blocking union organizing under a request labor made this month to a U.S. mediation board, where President Barack Obama’s appointees have gained a majority.
Delta workers could unionize with majority approval of those voting, under a change sought by the AFL-CIO, the largest U.S. labor federation. Currently a majority of all workers in a class, not just those voting, must approve, according to the National Mediation Board.
The vote standard is important for organized labor because unions are taking steps to hold elections at Delta, the least unionized U.S. passenger airline. More than 50,000 workers at Delta could join should organized labor succeed in getting enough votes once elections are scheduled.
“Nowhere in American democracy, other than during a union election in the airline and railroad industry, does an eligible voter wishing to sit out an election have his or her silence tabulated as a no vote,†Edward Wytkind, head of the AFL- CIO’s transportation trades department, said in a Sept. 2 letter to the board requesting the change.
Labor activists who helped sweep Obama into office have said they want to see more action on their priorities, including making it easier for workers to form unions.
The 12,300 pilots are the only major work group at Delta to be completely unionized. The group includes pilots at Northwest, which Atlanta-based Delta acquired in October 2008. The company has more than 75,000 employees.
The National Mediation Board is a government agency that helps resolve labor disputes and oversees elections for airlines and railways under the Railway Labor Act.
‘Ain’t Fair’
The board said it has received the request, and declined further comment. Wytkind asked the board to change its representation manual and take public comments before making the change. He said he hasn’t received a response.
There is a “fundamental question†whether the board has authority to make the modifications the AFL-CIO is seeking, said Mike Campbell, Delta’s executive vice president of human resources and labor relations.
“In this country, changing the rules in the middle of an election, most people stepping back would say that ain’t fair,†Campbell said in an interview.
The Air Transport Association, a Washington-based trade group that represents Delta and other carriers, wrote the board in opposition.
“A certified union must have the support of the majority to be effective,†James May, the group’s president, said in a statement. “There is no legal or policy justification to change this well-established voting process.â€
‘Not the Time’
“Now is not the time for change,†the Airline Industrial Relations Conference, a nonprofit group that represents carriers on labor issues, wrote the board on Sept. 16.
The three-member National Mediation Board, criticized by labor for its actions under Republican George W. Bush’s administration, now has a Democratic majority with Obama in office.
“It’s well-understood that the president himself is a strong supporter of the right to collectively bargain and unionize,†Wytkind said of Obama in an interview. Wytkind said he believes his request “will get a fair hearing†from the board.
The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA in July, and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers a month later, asked the board to declare Delta and Northwest a single entity. The requests were procedural moves before union organizing elections can be held.
Failed Vote
Labor leaders want to hold an election to organize the combined 20,500 flight attendants, including the non-union workers at Delta and those who had been organized at Northwest.
Delta attendants fell short in May 2008 in their second election in six years to join a union. Then, 40 percent of the 13,380 eligible attendants voted, and the turnout needed for certification was 50 percent plus one. Of those who voted, the “vast majority†supported a union, the flight attendants union said that month.
The machinists union is seeking to hold a Delta vote for about 14,000 baggage and ramp workers, flight-simulator technicians and security guards. The former Northwest employees in this group had been in unions while Delta’s workers weren’t.
Passenger-Service Workers
The machinists later plan to seek “single-carrier†designation that would move the airline toward an election for 20,000 other passenger-service workers, stock clerks and office and clerical workers, the union said in a statement last month.
Labor groups succeeded last year in getting the mediation board under Bush to drop proposed changes that they said would have made it harder to organize Delta workers. The groups said the change would have barred one organizing tactic, the submission of signature cards supporting a union.
The board withdrew the plan due to “concerns and confusion†of outside parties about the changes, the mediation board’s attorney said in a notice in September 2008.
I hope they make up their minds before an SOC is issued, because if we have to wait for Congress to change how union elections are to be handled going forward..(and if that is what we are waiting for now) we should expect to wait a while longer..
to me, these are the reasons why issues should have been addressed timely..
even if they had determined single carrier status months ago
(like the other groups)
and had called for an election, the politics that always get in the way..more than likely still..would not have prompted an election at this point. JMO
it just seems the whole process is being pushed further ahead into the future for whatever reasons.
surely people have made up their minds at this point regardless of an election format.
personally think a YES/NO ballot should be in place going forward and to legislate those changes absolutely, but I do not agree with having to put our entire election on hold in order to fall under that type of change.. especially after a SOC has been issued and it keeps both groups separate or delays a negotiation process for an undetermined amount of time..
if thats happening now..
if the reason our election is being placed on hold at this point.. is simply to change a ballot, I do not agree with that at all..unless it can be addressed in the very immediate future so we can all move forward and call for an election/actually in the voting process.. prior to the issuance of the SOC.
(I have a little more faith in people that they would participate either way regardless)
life in general...issues always needs to be addressed timely and you cannot always put something off or on hold.. because of an idea not necessarily agreeing or being pleased with the final results..because it may be the other way around in a positive light.
be strong, be a leader.
to me, these are the reasons why issues should have been addressed timely..
even if they had determined single carrier status months ago
(like the other groups)
and had called for an election, the politics that always get in the way..more than likely still..would not have prompted an election at this point. JMO
it just seems the whole process is being pushed further ahead into the future for whatever reasons.
surely people have made up their minds at this point regardless of an election format.
personally think a YES/NO ballot should be in place going forward and to legislate those changes absolutely, but I do not agree with having to put our entire election on hold in order to fall under that type of change.. especially after a SOC has been issued and it keeps both groups separate or delays a negotiation process for an undetermined amount of time..
if thats happening now..
if the reason our election is being placed on hold at this point.. is simply to change a ballot, I do not agree with that at all..unless it can be addressed in the very immediate future so we can all move forward and call for an election/actually in the voting process.. prior to the issuance of the SOC.
(I have a little more faith in people that they would participate either way regardless)
life in general...issues always needs to be addressed timely and you cannot always put something off or on hold.. because of an idea not necessarily agreeing or being pleased with the final results..because it may be the other way around in a positive light.
be strong, be a leader.
In a recent meeting with the NMB, Richard Anderson and Mike Campbell said they expect a Sinlge Operating Certificate by spring 2010. We will have a vote before then!
that is a projection, they expect to have it in place by the Spring of 2010 that does not necessarily mean that is the actual time period it will happen.. it could be in place by the end of 2009, it could be in place February 2010 but it is expected to be in place by the spring.
I really hope so.. because
I hope a lot of time is not being wasted that could have been utilized negotiating a contract,
(if that is how the majority wishes to proceed)
because it will take at minimum a good six months to negotiate and finalize a TA/contract..
and
if "industry leading" is the goal, probably a while longer.
it would have been beneficial for the group to address these issues sooner.. so we could have a TA in place at the time the SOC has been issued.. IMO.
You are assuming that 50%+1 of everyone on the eligibility list voted yes. The same eligibility list that included flight attendants that were dead, or that have been out on medical leave for 20 years etc...
I would rather wait a little longer and get a fair shake.
I would rather wait a little longer and get a fair shake.
Dapoes,
I totally agree. If it's a Yes/No, I for one will breathe a sigh of relief whichever way the vote turns out, knowing that it was a truly democratic vote. I would think if the No votes outweigh the Yes votes, AFA would get the hint...unless it's really close.
(Btw, I don't consider 40% going down in "epic flames". 29% maybe but not 40%)
You see, this way we will really know, of those who care (not the ones on extended leave living in Tazmania, flying for another airline somewhere, or living it up off the coast of France with their rich boyfriend, yet still on the seniority list in case he grows weary of them or they start to sag) what their clear intentions are. It's fantastic! No more second-guessing whether the automatic "no's" are truly NOs.
my personal opinion is every Flight Attendant on a seniority list..a current seniority list should be able to vote in an election, that would include those who are furloughed, on medical leave and convenience leaves, or voluntary leaves that offset a furlough ext.
*I would not agree with managers, deceased individuals, retired, people in other departments, neighbors, pets, imaginary friends.. being included on a seniority list for voting purposes.
I have heard a lot of this person was on the list, this person was on the list...
(it can be considered hearsay and rumor)
but!
A Flight Attendant is the only individual who should be on a list for a vote.. IMO
and it should be accurate.
issues need to be addressed timely to ensure accuracy.
A seniority list is serious, I just have to believe they have been and are taking it seriously.
(as they should be doing at all times)
*I would not agree with managers, deceased individuals, retired, people in other departments, neighbors, pets, imaginary friends.. being included on a seniority list for voting purposes.
I have heard a lot of this person was on the list, this person was on the list...
(it can be considered hearsay and rumor)
but!
A Flight Attendant is the only individual who should be on a list for a vote.. IMO
and it should be accurate.
issues need to be addressed timely to ensure accuracy.
A seniority list is serious, I just have to believe they have been and are taking it seriously.
(as they should be doing at all times)
dapoes
Veteran
- May 17, 2008
- 3,543
- 2,716
The argument of yes/no is true democracy is pure crap-ola and being misused. It is undemocratic to disallow or exclude people to participate in the voting process. By not voting, one is not being apathetic as some claim. They are showing that they do not believe their best interest is served by a union and is therefore not voting.
Be that as it may, who do you think will get the message out better to the employee's? AFA or DAL?
DAL can say vote no with much more (repetitive) employee saturation then AFA ever could. And it would be withing legal rights (via past legal precedents). The only part that would be illegal is if they said to vote no or you will lose your job.
I sort of disagree with that comment, as I believe it is important for everyone to participate in an election and those who are not interested in the process and choose not to vote should not have their vote considered an automatic no.
as you see people who do not care, do not care either way (be it yes or no)
and I believe it should change going forward and exclude those automatic No and no one is being excluded in an election..
if they are eligible to vote yet choose not to participate by not casting their vote in a YES/NO ballot.
as you see everything changes, nothing stays the same.
however..in the meantime,
I do not think having an election 50 percent plus 1 is totally unfair either.
if a union cannot garner 50 percent plus 1 of a group to support the idea of representation there is an issue and its not a ballot.
if a ballot can change to YES/NO for all future and including our election (timely) I think that is great, but I do not think its necessary to significantly delay our election if that is now the new roadblock.
sometimes you just have to work with what you have in the present and then continue to fight to make changes in the future.
a ballot format should not change an individual's view or idea of representation.
what bothers me to a degree.. is the perception or what appears.. some see a potential change that may happen and are willing to put an entire election on hold because that change seems a little better, so in essence everyone else's life and ability to move forward and address pertinent and important issues is put on hold to accommodate an idea that may or may not happen in an appropriate timeframe..
(while nothing else is being addressed at all in the meantime)
it comes across in a way..everyone just has to wait until someone else feels comfortable moving forward and finally makes a decision.. not necessarily that is the case but it can appear that way..
*make a decision, it displays Leadership ability.
dapoes
Veteran
- May 17, 2008
- 3,543
- 2,716
Thats a valid disagreement.
Thats the 800lb Gorilla that they (AFA) choose to ignore.
Thats a huge understatement.
Yes and thats how its been all along, stalling till Obama won, stalling until a new NMB member, stalling to change the rules, etc., hoping to somehow game the process in their favor. It reeks of desperation and insecurity.
The stalling will only hurt them in the long run. More and more people are aware of an AFA pending vote (to the point it makes people wanna puke) and like I said before, there will be no way that AFA can match the penetration and saturation of the entire FA base like the company will have.
Kev3188
Veteran
For once we agree 100% (I know, I'm scared too). You could extend that argument across all groups, really.
Speaking of which, if you want to test your gag reflex, check out today's top story on DLnet. I understand why DL manufactures their news items the way they do, but it runs counter to their pledge to stay neutral, and crosses into the realm of carrier interference, IMO.
They should stick to taking the high road and winning on their own merit.
