If this is all about DL employee's "overwhelming desire" to unionize...

Most of the time when there is this much giving, it's because there is a plan "B" in the making that no one knows about.

The pilots will be so exhausted from fighting amoungst themselves that when the company attacks there will be no more fight left in them...LOL :jerry:

As for the rest of the employees, I'm not so sure it is going to matter if your union or not.
I think there is a plan for you, and it's called outsourcing.

Good luck and may the force be with you. ;)
True, that may happen, but I would rather be with a union and at least have one leg to stand instead of none at all..!
 
Is in it amazing how management just a few years ago blamed the pilots contract for the high cost before going into bankruptcy. Now our new management are giving up the panties again just to keep them happy. I guess you don't learn from history.
When are they supposed to count the F/A ballots after the vote?
 
Perhaps management will be able to afford the new pilots' contract by outsourcing flight attendant positions ....

NWA management has continued to try and get our union to agree to outsourcing (as recent as December '07).

Without a union after the merger is approved - there will be no stopping DAL from doing just that.

Let's hope that the Delta FAs are willing to protect the combined group from something like this by voting for AFA-CWA.

The concept of the "Delta Family" is gone and those FAs who refuse to read the writing on the wall are putting all of our careers in jeopardy.

Even as a FA with almost thirty years seniority - the outsourcing issue concerns me greatly. I would think that the junior FAs at Delta would be even more concerned.

Please - put aside the emotions and look at the reality of this potential merger. Vote for AFA and finally have a "say" in what happens to the direction of your careers!


For the poster who asked when the ballots will be counted - voting ends at 1400 ET on Wednesday, May 28th.
 
Perhaps management will be able to afford the new pilots' contract by outsourcing flight attendant positions ....

NWA management has continued to try and get our union to agree to outsourcing (as recent as December '07).

Without a union after the merger is approved - there will be no stopping DAL from doing just that.

Let's hope that the Delta FAs are willing to protect the combined group from something like this by voting for AFA-CWA.

The concept of the "Delta Family" is gone and those FAs who refuse to read the writing on the wall are putting all of our careers in jeopardy.

Even as a FA with almost thirty years seniority - the outsourcing issue concerns me greatly. I would think that the junior FAs at Delta would be even more concerned.

Please - put aside the emotions and look at the reality of this potential merger. Vote for AFA and finally have a "say" in what happens to the direction of your careers!


For the poster who asked when the ballots will be counted - voting ends at 1400 ET on Wednesday, May 28th.
Having a say is what is all going to be about. I can't believe that DL employees have been living like this for so long. Having higher than industry pay is not what job security is all about !
 
Yes , pardon me. Having a bad day.....lol
If anyone that works at Delta has any doubts about a union, watch this video and decide..http://www.deltaramp.blogspot.com/....I have had lunch with this man and several meetings with him and a Hub Director, and let me tell you. He will eat you for breakfast and spit you out. If you think you can stand alone , one on one with him and his management team, you are seriously mistaken and deserve everything you get. Unionize now and show them that we won't be stomped on. Use your acrued sick leave like a human being, take your hard earned vacation with dignity ! Demand some of that CEO pay back so you can provide a decent living for your family. For your own sake, don't turm into a puddle of pudding ! ! Fight for your jobs ! And look your fellow worker in the face and tell them you fought for what you have !!
 
My turn -- tell me about your motives. Who are you? What makes you tick? And, why the burning desire to deny Delta FAs the opportunity to have a legal contract and voice at work? Does it have to do with money -- or did a labor union do something terrible to your mother?

Danny

Hmmmm....let's see. Maybe I'm one of those management-hired-anti-union lawyers that you seem to call anyone with a differing view than yours. Just like anyone that could see through the Iraq War leadup lies was labeled a terrorist or unpatriotic. Or maybe...as is the truth with the latter as well...I can see real motives and where real issues are and I do NOT agree with current union platforms. This ain't the day of unions truly protecting employees. Now the term "protection" has been widely redefined to mean everyone keeping high wages for choosing to make careers out of service industry positions or for nobody to be able to lose their job b/c of an economic downturn. "Protection" means that the lazy get the same treatment as the exceptional workers. "Protection" means that the longer you have a heartbeat, the "better" you are as an employee. "Protection" means whining about the wrong things and not tieing the whining to any kind of business sense. "Protection" means AA's unions are heading to the table demanding 60%+ pay increases at a time that any idiot can see that the industry is ailing b/c of a recession and tripling fuel prices...not "mgmt decisions". And "protection" means propaganda and lies.

Unions have not harmed my mother. They haven't "protected" anyone, either. I would love if unions would get back to their roots rather than a grab-bag loot-the-store approach that they have now. Your biggest voices are often those that work the least but make out well on the "free-loader" syndrome. I like to earn and achieve based on my merit and not how many years I sit idle. I like to look for work to do rather than ways to limit what is required of me. And I understand that there are forces affecting businesses that make my stability not always guaranteed...especially in this industry. I am not so feable-minded as to believe that any downturn for a company is due to the mgmt but can grasp the bigger picture. But I love this industry. I left it and went where I had much more stability and earned alot more but came back b/c I love the industry. That's what makes me tick. And my motives are purely that I can see through the propaganda BS and actually have insight as to what DL is like. You don't know the culture and rather than try to find out about it, you try to crap all over it with poor attitude and sensational fear-mongering. Perhaps if you spend as much time trying to see what you're coming into rather than "predicting the future based on what NWA mgmt did in the past", you might see a little more. But you already have it figured out and now the evils of mgmt so I guess there's no sense trying to be open-minded. Fear-preaching only works with a closed-mind.
 
Ch. 12:

Because you drew a correlation to the Iraq war (several times) above, let me explain to you how your "anti-union" opinions are entirely consistent with the ideology that actually got us INTO that war.

Unlike the Bush adminsitration, which openly and admittedly favors 'corporate' power over that of 'the people', labor unions are founded on the principle that MANY MANY heads think better than a few. Unions (at least the 'good ones') are controlled by democratic decision-making. Instead of a single "leader" calling the shots, the membership calls the shots. Whether in the analysis (polling) of issues or in the ratification (voting) of issues, THOUSANDS of heads make better decisions than ONE.

What is ironic about your condemnation against unions, is that if the Bush administration actually "worked more like a union", we may not have invaded Iraq in the first place. Bush and neoconservatives that he surrounds himself with suppressed good intelligence, put a chilling effect on 'free speech" and "dissenting opinons" and with the full funding and support of corporations (read; a handful of filthy rich white men from Texas who stood to gain billions in profit) pushed us into the biggest foreign policy fiasco in our history. So, the isolation of power (and decision-making) involved a small number of people (in governement, as well as in corporations like Blackwater and Halliburton, to name a few) and that small handful, driving by PROFIT, impacted the lives and the wallets of MILLIONS. Who benefited - I might ask you? Did working people (with collective bargaining rights) benefit? Did working people with labor unions have a voice -- hell no. Gee, sounds a lot like what the men who run our airlines have also done (ie., personal wealth, while bankrupting our airlines and causing people to lose their pensions, wages and thousands are out of work today). Meanwhile, they isolate power and tell workers they are better off "trusting them" with their lives, discouraging them from having a legal voice and spending millions to KEEP them from organizing on the job.

So, what's the difference? It's all about money and power, isn't it? Have any of these airlines executives proven they can be trusted with our career (anymore than Bush has been trusted with telling us the truth or improving our economy or standing in the world?). Why do you blindly put your trust in corporate executives at an airline, while scorning the same power and profit tactics from the governement. Do you actually think there is much difference today between government and corporate power? They are practically one in the same. You should read this book; http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine
as it illustrates how the two work together to place fear in the minds of people in order to profit from tragedy. You can't blame one without the other. On the other hand, our warnings of outsourcing are sincere concerns for our "jobs", not for profit.

So, if you think we (AFA) are putting fear in people without merit, quite frankly you are barking up the wrong tree. Our concerns about airline executives are based on FACTS and based on THEIR SPECIFIC ACTIONS - they are not rooted in 'fear mongering' and pure 'speculation'. In fact, had people listen to 'reasonable' voices that WERE looking out for the 'people' (like Richard Clarke, former counter-terrorism czar), perhaps the war you correlate above wouldn't have happened in the first place. A lesson you apparently are missing.
 
Ch. 12:

Because you drew a correlation to the Iraq war (several times) above, let me explain to you how your "anti-union" opinions are entirely consistent with the ideology that actually got us INTO that war.

Unlike the Bush administration, which openly and admittedly favors 'corporate' power over that of 'the people', labor unions are founded on the principle that MANY MANY heads think better than a few. Unions (at least the 'good ones') are controlled by democratic decision-making. Instead of a single "leader" calling the shots, the membership calls the shots. Whether in the analysis (polling) of issues or in the ratification (voting) of issues, THOUSANDS of heads make better decisions than ONE.

What is ironic about your condemnation against unions, is that if the Bush administration actually "worked more like a union", we may not have invaded Iraq in the first place. Bush and neoconservatives that he surrounds himself with suppressed good intelligence, put a chilling effect on 'free speech" and "dissenting opinions" and with the full funding and support of corporations (read; a handful of filthy rich white men from Texas who stood to gain billions in profit) pushed us into the biggest foreign policy fiasco in our history. So, the isolation of power (and decision-making) involved a small number of people (in government, as well as in corporations like Black water and Halliburton, to name a few) and that small handful, driving by PROFIT, impacted the lives and the wallets of MILLIONS. Who benefited - I might ask you? Did working people (with collective bargaining rights) benefit? Did working people with labor unions have a voice -- hell no. Gee, sounds a lot like what the men who run our airlines have also done (ie., personal wealth, while bankrupting our airlines and causing people to lose their pensions, wages and thousands are out of work today). Meanwhile, they isolate power and tell workers they are better off "trusting them" with their lives, discouraging them from having a legal voice and spending millions to KEEP them from organizing on the job.

So, what's the difference? It's all about money and power, isn't it? Have any of these airlines executives proven they can be trusted with our career (anymore than Bush has been trusted with telling us the truth or improving our economy or standing in the world?). Why do you blindly put your trust in corporate executives at an airline, while scorning the same power and profit tactics from the governement. Do you actually think there is much difference today between government and corporate power? They are practically one in the same. You should read this book; http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine
as it illustrates how the two work together to place fear in the minds of people in order to profit from tragedy. You can't blame one without the other. On the other hand, our warnings of outsourcing are sincere concerns for our "jobs", not for profit.

So, if you think we (AFA) are putting fear in people without merit, quite frankly you are barking up the wrong tree. Our concerns about airline executives are based on FACTS and based on THEIR SPECIFIC ACTIONS - they are not rooted in 'fear mongering' and pure 'speculation'. In fact, had people listen to 'reasonable' voices that WERE looking out for the 'people' (like Richard Clarke, former counter-terrorism czar), perhaps the war you correlate above wouldn't have happened in the first place. A lesson you apparently are missing.
:up: Danny, I have to agree with you whole heartedly !. I have 30 years with 3 different carriers and have seen what Ch12 is saying about the union protecting "some" laziness" but overall, the people I have worked with in my career , worked their butts off for the customer!. And why Ch12 would come back to a job where they make less money and non-union doesn't make much since to me. And I don't wish anything bad to anyone, but it's nice to know if I have a major illness and need some time off, I can depend on my union negotiated sick leave accrual of over 154 days and keep my chin up. I can also sit on a beach somewhere and enjoy the extra 2 week I get because a union bargained on behalf to secure this option. I will also be able to enjoy my retirement pension thx to the union keeping it in motion , even after bankruptcy ! Ch12 may have a good point or 2 , but I would rather have my union benefits and enjoy the life I have come to know........
 
:up: Danny, I have to agree with you whole heartedly !. I have 30 years with 3 different carriers and have seen what Ch12 is saying about the union protecting "some" laziness" but overall, the people I have worked with in my career , worked their butts off for the customer!. And why Ch12 would come back to a job where they make less money and non-union doesn't make much since to me. And I don't wish anything bad to anyone, but it's nice to know if I have a major illness and need some time off, I can depend on my union negotiated sick leave accrual of over 154 days and keep my chin up. I can also sit on a beach somewhere and enjoy the extra 2 week I get because a union bargained on behalf to secure this option. I will also be able to enjoy my retirement pension thx to the union keeping it in motion , even after bankruptcy ! Ch12 may have a good point or 2 , but I would rather have my union benefits and enjoy the life I have come to know........

Count me in as in complete agreement!

I know the Delta culture through and through and I look forward to all Danny will be bringing to it.
 
Ch. 12:

Because you drew a correlation to the Iraq war (several times) above, let me explain to you how your "anti-union" opinions are entirely consistent with the ideology that actually got us INTO that war.

Unlike the Bush adminsitration, which openly and admittedly favors 'corporate' power over that of 'the people', labor unions are founded on the principle that MANY MANY heads think better than a few. Unions (at least the 'good ones') are controlled by democratic decision-making. Instead of a single "leader" calling the shots, the membership calls the shots. Whether in the analysis (polling) of issues or in the ratification (voting) of issues, THOUSANDS of heads make better decisions than ONE.

What is ironic about your condemnation against unions, is that if the Bush administration actually "worked more like a union", we may not have invaded Iraq in the first place. Bush and neoconservatives that he surrounds himself with suppressed good intelligence, put a chilling effect on 'free speech" and "dissenting opinons" and with the full funding and support of corporations (read; a handful of filthy rich white men from Texas who stood to gain billions in profit) pushed us into the biggest foreign policy fiasco in our history. So, the isolation of power (and decision-making) involved a small number of people (in governement, as well as in corporations like Blackwater and Halliburton, to name a few) and that small handful, driving by PROFIT, impacted the lives and the wallets of MILLIONS. Who benefited - I might ask you? Did working people (with collective bargaining rights) benefit? Did working people with labor unions have a voice -- hell no. Gee, sounds a lot like what the men who run our airlines have also done (ie., personal wealth, while bankrupting our airlines and causing people to lose their pensions, wages and thousands are out of work today). Meanwhile, they isolate power and tell workers they are better off "trusting them" with their lives, discouraging them from having a legal voice and spending millions to KEEP them from organizing on the job.

So, what's the difference? It's all about money and power, isn't it? Have any of these airlines executives proven they can be trusted with our career (anymore than Bush has been trusted with telling us the truth or improving our economy or standing in the world?). Why do you blindly put your trust in corporate executives at an airline, while scorning the same power and profit tactics from the governement. Do you actually think there is much difference today between government and corporate power? They are practically one in the same. You should read this book; http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine
as it illustrates how the two work together to place fear in the minds of people in order to profit from tragedy. You can't blame one without the other. On the other hand, our warnings of outsourcing are sincere concerns for our "jobs", not for profit.

So, if you think we (AFA) are putting fear in people without merit, quite frankly you are barking up the wrong tree. Our concerns about airline executives are based on FACTS and based on THEIR SPECIFIC ACTIONS - they are not rooted in 'fear mongering' and pure 'speculation'. In fact, had people listen to 'reasonable' voices that WERE looking out for the 'people' (like Richard Clarke, former counter-terrorism czar), perhaps the war you correlate above wouldn't have happened in the first place. A lesson you apparently are missing.

EXCELLENT post, Danny.
I've never understood how CH12 can be so against the Bush Admin. (as am I) and so PRO-corporation( Dubya's favorite entities). It seems entirely inconsistent as you have so clearly stated.
 

Latest posts