Tim Nelson
Veteran
Delaney's neutralness was spoken as follows, "The IAM and District 141 continue to withhold support or opposition to the proposed merger until much more information is known about the effect the proposal will have on our membership."
Based on the information we already have, i.e., IND, MSY, SNA being contracted out, together with, management getting a tentative agreement with the TWU that guarantees the same stations for those employees, is fundamentally unfair. Do you agree?
I think all of us may see some interesting possibilities with a merger and working for the world's biggest airline, but I am opposed to any merger up and until our own people are taken care of first. Explicitly, a US AIRWAYS contract first. Thus, a US AIRWAYS contract FIRST is a must. We have to focus on the seniority issue bigtime. My position is a position that has been strongly supported and followed by many other unions in recent mergers, including Airtran/Southwest, and United/Continental, however, it is in sharp contrast to Delaney's which focuses on entering transition talks without first obtaining any considerations of wages/benefits for the members. I don't think it is fair to our members to ask them to wait around another 5 years for a pay raise.
And, I don't think our union should get sidetracked with doing a contract comparison sheet with the TWU like our union said. I myself have little interest in comparing your bankrupt contract with a new bankrupt contract at AMR. We should look straight ahead and focus on getting a leading industry contract. The best way to win any organizing drive is to attain strong contracts at UA and US first and use them against the TWU.
But Delaney's policies are also very very soft. Therefore, one must look at his record to see where he could possibly go in the future. At Hawaiian his policy was to support management and pay part timers half of full time and pay for parking. At United he loved the US AIRWAYS attendance policy so much that he signed on it without a vote at United. His policies led him to sign a no strike clause at airtran without the consent of the negotiations team. His policy was to enter transition talks at United without gaining any considerations like other unions. His policies are fatally flawed. At US AIRWAYS, if we simply look at his merger policies at UA/CO, he will negotiate the US AIRWAYS contract up to the merger but then throw things into transitions, which is absurd. While in transitions, he still has not been successful in gaining or protecting any work. In SAN, where you are I think, a vendor still works the CO flights. And they just closed 5 more cargo centers and just today lost some work in IAH that they historically performed. Alot of flawed events on his part as he simply has not delivered at all on what he said he was.
item 2: I don't know what Joe Tiberi and Delaney talk about but most of the rhetoric and tough talking is just that with this union as the representation that we have had, IMO, since 1999, has been less than adequate because of the 1940's structure of this union failing to adapt. The good news is that we can reform the representation just as the organizing was reformed with me and my team. Once the representation is reformed, then we have opportunity to save this craft. IMO, the TWU, IAM, and IBT all have let this craft down as there is no reason why we continue to lose ramp jobs when the airlines are making millions.
Item 3: Delaney neutral in regards to US becoming TWU? IMO, I think he is indifferent. He has nothing to lose, neither seniority or a US AIRWAYS job, and I suppose the possibility exist that he can more easily support a horse trade if it came down to it. Sorta how the TWU horse traded the America West ramp for the $525,000. Nonetheless, your opinion is as valid as mine on what he may or may not do.
Item 4: At what point get chummy with the TWU? Why would we have to get chummy at all if we can take their members off of them first? IMO, our focus regarding the TWU should be that we should strive for an election, i.e., get a card signup and force an election. I know many of the rank and filers in ORD and I think they may consider the IAM. And the best way to organize them is to first obtain a strong contract at UA and US. If we win an election then the MB act does not apply and we can enforce the IAM's internal policy of Date of hire. However, if there is no representational election and we can't obtain the necessary interest, then the MB act will apply and I think the right thing to do would be to engage the seniority integration process with the TWU only after obtaining a contract for US fleet first.
One of the big contentions I have with Delaney is that our members don't want to wait another 5 years to get a pay/benefit increase, yet, the path he chooses is one that is not supported by other unions and drags out transition talks for years. I'm uncomfortable with that. Again, the focus needs to be on the attainment of a US AIRWAYS fleet contract first and the merger models support that as a viable position.
Onward!
