IAM FILES AT DELTA FOR UNION REPRESENTATION

[tech2101]

and of course with others, its more than cookies and peanuts..

I am well aware of the duties of the F/A. (it has nothing to do with making sure I have my full can of soda)

Don't put me in that club. I am on your side.

oh that makes it was their decision..

That was decided by the NMB long ago. That is where the MCC (Mechanic, Cleaner, Custodian) class and craft came from.

And you are correct. The AMFA fought to only have mechanics (Just as ALPA is only pilots and the AFA is only Flight Attendants).

 

[Dignity]

I am well aware of the duties of the F/A. (it has nothing to do with making sure I have my full can of soda)

interesting enough at the time during bankruptcy, it was alleged by some of our leader(s) referred to us as "vending machines" a lot of people were upset about that because of how hard we had worked since their arrival making the airline ontime, putting up with their BS and still doing a good job, ext.

Don't put me in that club. I am on your side.

I have actually read many of your comments and it is clear you are very supportive of Flight Attendant overall.

please understand basically I use general terms and never take words on script personally.

That was decided by the NMB long ago. That is where the MCC (Mechanic, Cleaner, Custodian) class and craft came from.

so were they still cleaning engines in 2005? or the aircraft during checks? it would seem someone would still be required to perform that job function outside of cleaning the cabin between flights?

And you are correct. The AMFA fought to only have mechanics (Just as ALPA is only pilots and the AFA is only Flight Attendants).

I guess that is why some questioned why they were brought into AMFA and subsequently all released from their jobs..(cleaners) if indeed they were attempting to make the union solely dedicated to one job craft. I sort of recall the cleaners were able to secure unemployment compensation prior to the mechanics, so it just seemed odd that one group would receive unemployement while another in the same union did not initially. that is why sometimes questions are brought up for further understanding.

 

[tech2101]

I sort of recall the cleaners were able to secure unemployment compensation prior to the mechanics, so it just seemed odd that one group would receive unemployment while another in the same union did not initially. that is why sometimes questions are brought up for further understanding.

That was because the judge ruled that the pay cuts proposed for their group (I think it was about 48%) were so draconian that it was considered loss of a job. So the unemployment judge awarded theirs without to much of a fight. The rest of the group (in Minnesota) had to wait much longer before winning the case.

Of course, in my state (Texas), they fought the 12 of us who filed and won. They had the Chief Counsel of NWA sit through our hearing (2.5 hours) to fight the unemployment claims of 12 of us. All of us were only claiming about two weeks worth of pay because we had all found jobs.

It was personal for them against AMFA. You should have heard them at that hearing. It would open the eyes of many a Delta employee if they knew who was running that operation, and the depths of which they will go to get what they want.

They are rotten to the core.

 

[Dignity]

to fight the unemployment claims of 12 of us. A

what is needed by some to understand regarding the issue of Flight Attendant was simply our union did not..

repeat

did not authorize a sympathy strike..

we did not know the results as mentioned.. that was one of the main concerns some of the Flight Attendants if walking off the job they would receive anything in unemployment or be fought tooth and nail if they tried to claim it.

our union had also unsuccessfully been able to transfer the dues check off clause, even though they had made a lot of promises to us it would not be a problem, it was a problem when PFAA was certified as Teamsters had negotiated language that made the dues check off unique to their group.

that was up for negotiation as well..(dues check off) and the union suffered financially for it..and we would not have been paid a strike benefit if that was even an option.

it was just a huge mess, and very bad timing in my opinion to change unions at all.

to sum it all up, a lot of people simply did not trust PFAA with their careers.

on top of it all we had just been forced to train our replacements on the aircraft and those replacement Flight Attendants were just waiting for us to walk.. as they were positioned all over the country and Im sure Internationally as well..(that alone pissed off a lot of people and they were not going to give their jobs to those replacements after that had been thrown up in their face..on the aircraft)

I dont know of any other group, other than the mechanics they had lined up replacements.

to us, or at least to me, it seemed we were totally screwed.. (they wanted us to walk)

with the combination of no income, unemployment compensation basically not going to happen, no sympathy strike pay, trained replacements and a company that wanted half of us gone regardless it seemed like a no-win situation either way.

were mistakes made, I absolutely agree, but going forward I can only hope that some at least take into consideration that outsourcing scheme appeared to be a bluff... not one Flight Attendant position was eliminated involuntarily..or through an outsource.. as a matter of fact, after paying all those replacement Flight Attendants thousands each.. even though some were activated onto our seniority list.. Flight Attendants still supported the mechanics and were taken off line without pay and benefits.. our third TA had quite a substantial buyout for 600 Flight Attendants..I believe they received over 1000 requests along with the language to reinstate those who were taken off line for honoring the strike.

I wondered afterwards, how anyone would have been able to go back on line after making the reinstatement a part of a TA..if no one could vote on that if everyone walked and replaced with Foreign Nationals and Replacements, because it seems.. it would not have been an option at that point.

 

[2BlacknBlue]

It would open the eyes of many a Delta employee if they knew who was running that operation, and the depths of which they will go to get what they want.

They are rotten to the core.

tech,
At DL, anything that's bad always happens to somebody else.

 

[Dignity]

anything that's bad always happens to somebody else.

well during the NW bankruptcy I had a friend of mine calling me up crying on the phone...

"they are pulling an Eastern Airlines on us all over again"

so these things dont just happen to somebody else..

 

[tech2101]

well during the NW bankruptcy I had a friend of mine calling me up crying on the phone...

"they are pulling an Eastern Airlines on us all over again"

so these things dont just happen to somebody else..

That is because your CEO, Richard Anderson, who was with NWA at the time of the planning stages of the dual Delta/NWA BK, was one of the top legal counsel's of Frank Larenzo during the Eastern Airlines gutting.

 

[HottootrotNyc]

Not to mention Boeing had put in an offer and Carl tried to buy the airline back and one other airline which I don't remember. We were NOT in BK AA wanted us to file Chapt:11 to get rid of the leases and the Caribou <sp?> agreement with Carl. AWA survived 9/11 and they were in BK and survived. The myth was TWA was out of cash and that was simply not true.

The IAM simply signed our scope away without asking the membership. If our f/a's were able to vote on this, it would had been a resounding NO. We were also promised a facilitator to assist in the seniority issue and the APFA said no. Why? Because they probably would have suggested something fair. We were the only Union at TWA that got stapled. Other TWA work groups did get something except the f/a's. I would say if it happens to you, you would be fighting the same battle. Walk 23+ years in my shoes and see how it feels.

Well I don't know where TWA was hiding the money, but I guess they were doing a damn good job at doing it. If they weren't broke, what the hell were they doing shopping themselves around?Should you had the ability to vote on giving away scope, sure of course. Then again I think you would of been on the street with no fight at all to have. If you google your former companies finances, you will see the airline was cash strapped and had no liquid or cash assets left. TWA would of had to file for chapter 11, no matter what and AWA was able to survive because the airline wasn't in the same situation as TWA. TWA just had it worse.

As for walking 23 years in your shoes, TWA over a decade ago began being sold off and hadn't made money in many years before that. The last semi-profitable year they had was around when TWA 800 happened. Those facts you can't lie about, and as a employee of the company I would have left and took my 10 years of seniority at the time as a loss. If Continental was in the shape TWA was in, I would have left the company. Continental itself got lucky and a lot of people left the company because of the poor shape it was in. I still till this day don't understand how TWA flew for as long as it did, they really never were a money making company, almost ever.

In no way shape or form would I personally expect to come into a new company with years of seniority and bump people down or off to the street. If it was a merger, different story. So to those bashing the IAM, have all the facts before you make a solid decision. I again feel the union did what they were told to do, to allow for the asset purchase. I also think the APFA did the best job protecting the members seniority and I only hope if something like this were to happen at Continental the IAM would do as good of a job as APFA. It's harsh but we can't expect others to lose there own career so others can step in, JMO.

 

[galleyguy4u2]

The IAM is AFL-CIO and they would never completely staple f/a's coming from another AFL-CIO Union such as AFA. Pat Friend, President of AFA publicly said that she did not agree with the TWA staple job.

 

[Dignity]

completely staple

that is not going to be forced on any group outside of arbitration in the future, there will be a process not the flat out denial of seniority by *any* union or company.

arbitration.

(at least there is an option going forward)


in the situation.. someone was willing to forfeit all their seniority (including the entire group)...

I would only hope someone would step in and intervene.. because that type of decision comes across as being very careless with not only the individiual but including other's careers.

on the issue of denying seniority during an integration,

if a union expects to treat all their members fairly.. why would they deny and condone such a travesty..to the same people who will eventually become members in that same union?

(and then require them to pay dues)

that is how unnecessary problems are created and no amount of money would fix it.

The idea is to treat all with a sense of fairness during these integrations, if that cannot happen or someone makes the decision they feel it wont..

then..

someone needs to step aside.

 

[signals]

I just love to see both sides of the coins, and I wish you all the best in your decisions.

In my 30+ years in the workforce I have been unemployed about three and union 26 years. In my case I couldn't see working without a union. Strangely enough, if I owned a business, I would be against unions.

In this case, both of the arguments make interesting points. I argue this with a former NWA employee, that since we have been union most of our work lives, we can't see working non-union. He believes the IAM(jam) will prevail. I say you are outnumbered!

Since my intro about the IAM was when NWA employees earned top dollars, let's not forget there low-wage replacements, or the IAM Air Welfare employees. Is this the good IAM or the NEW IAM?

Something to remember is that voting down union representation today, may change the playing field tomorrow. Are you being sold a lemon and a pipe-dream? How do you know for sure?

What about seniority? That would be my main concern. When changing, or joining a union, the rules are well defined, even in already established seniorities. Although it may not apply to you, let me give you an example of a concern I face.

In my line of work we are facing a possible take-over. In my case I will be given an option to stay with my current employer by transferring to another department, or joining my new employer.

My new employer would offer a higher pay and better benefits and I'll be in the same retirement system. Sounds great doesn't it? But wait! My new employer is union I've got 15+ years with my current employer. I'll have to start new with my new employer. Seniority determines shifts and jobs. My last name starts with "Z" so I'm staying with my current employer.

I am also concerned because established members from any other departments can now bump me to a trash detail type job! :down:

Most of the stories are pure rumor and speculation and may not even apply to anybody. But make sure you read your contract closely because nothing is 'FAIR' in life h34r:

 

[HottootrotNyc]

that is not going to be forced on any group outside of arbitration in the future, there will be a process not the flat out denial of seniority by *any* union or company.

arbitration.

(at least there is an option going forward)


in the situation.. someone was willing to forfeit all their seniority (including the entire group)...

I would only hope someone would step in and intervene.. because that type of decision comes across as being very careless with not only the individiual but including other's careers.

on the issue of denying seniority during an integration,

if a union expects to treat all their members fairly.. why would they deny and condone such a travesty..to the same people who will eventually become members in that same union?

(and then require them to pay dues)

that is how unnecessary problems are created and no amount of money would fix it.

The idea is to treat all with a sense of fairness during these integrations, if that cannot happen or someone makes the decision they feel it wont..

then..

someone needs to step aside.

We will never agree but in the end, I would hope my union would worry about those that have been members since hired by the original company. If my union was out trying to offer full pay, seniority, vacation, to a new group of employees brought in through an asset purchase. I would be looking for a new union. No airline employee, or anyone in any industry union or not, should have to lose seniority and possibly a job because of a purchase made by top management. I think the best solution would do exactly what APFA did and have a no furlough clause placed in the contract like we have. If this situation came about, it would be the only solution I would be willing to agree to.

 

[Delta Technician]

Funny how you can remember something I posted once months ago, but can't figure out that I'm in ACS, even though I mention it all the time. We had a great benefits package, and competed just fine. That package also allowed us to retain high quality employees it what was then a competitive labor market. DL should take a lesson.




The main factors that control profitability are out of labor's hands. If I ran the place I'd do things like roll all the hubs, increase A/C utilization (as much as possible in the current environment), etc. I'd also figure out exactly what kind of airline we want to be, and stick with it. No more schizophrenia.

It's also not unreasonable to ask labor to work hard for what they get in return. The problem is that the masses are always a convenient target instead of tackling tougher issues. It's an easy shot when people adopt the "I'm just lucky to have a job" mindset you love to promote.

Tell me; what would you propose we all make in both wages & benefits (both Tech Ops & ACS)?




Nancy, our entire CBA(s) are available online, and we have been actively encouraging DL folks to read them.




White ballots suck. I agree 100% on that. I've spent a lot of time trying to change that.




Well, DL has no scope, so that's a moot issue here. Our LLP provisions were gutted in CH11, but are still better than the alternative.




At least we were able to vote; I'm sorry you couldn't. No over ride either...

Your reply to me is so full of rubish you had to mix it it with several other replies. Answer the question. Or do you have to check with your union representative on that one?

 

[Kev3188]

Your reply to me is so full of rubish you had to mix it it with several other replies. Answer the question. Or do you have to check with your union representative on that one?

Are you serious?

What part of my response went over your head?

The main factors that control profitability are out of labor's hands. If I ran the place I'd do things like roll all the hubs, increase A/C utilization (as much as possible in the current environment), etc. I'd also figure out exactly what kind of airline we want to be, and stick with it. No more schizophrenia.

It's also not unreasonable to ask labor to work hard for what they get in return. The problem is that the masses are always a convenient target instead of tackling tougher issues. It's an easy shot when people adopt the "I'm just lucky to have a job" mindset you love to promote.

Tell me; what would you propose we all make in both wages & benefits (both Tech Ops & ACS)?

Seems pretty clear to me. Just because you can't comprehend it doesn't make it "rubbish."

Since you failed to answer my question to you, I'll ask again; what would you propose we all make in both wages & benefits (both Tech Ops & ACS)?

 

[Dignity]

We will never agree but in the end

you know, I can actually sit here and think about what you have posted and see where you are coming from..yes, its difficult to think about working so many years for a company and then they decide to merger and all these new people are coming in ahead of me.. yeah it seems like its not fair... but its quite one thing to actually think about how unfair it may be and then..

actually doing it, like..stapling someone to the bottom of a list!

I would hope my union would worry about those that have been members since hired by the original company.

unless they have the ability to build a time machine and go back to the Roaring 1920's.. none of us are working for the "original company" the airline industry is a series of mergers and acquisitions since way back then to present day.

(know what Im saying)

If my union was out trying to offer full pay, seniority, vacation, to a new group of employees brought in through an asset purchase. I would be looking for a new union. No airline employee, or anyone in any industry union or not, should have to lose seniority and possibly a job because of a purchase made by top management.

and no one deserves to lose all their seniority because of the decision of top management either.

(you know since when do they ever ask us if its ok to merge?)

usually you find out they have merged on the six-o-clock news!

I think the best solution would do exactly what APFA did and have a no furlough clause placed in the contract like we have. If this situation came about, it would be the only solution I would be willing to agree to.

this sort of how I look at it, if they are looking out for the interest of all the union members, that would also include those from the other group who will also become a member of that union when all is said and done. they are not to be two separate groups if both groups are to be integrated.. so if a line is used, we are protecting the members, they need to do just that..

all of them, current and those who will be joining the fold as well..

(especially if they are requiring the new people to pay dues)

you know..

Life is not fair, that is why you always want to try to be fair, when you absolutely have the ability to make it that way.

(for everyone)