Robert Roach interview at New York AFL-CIO:
Spreading lies that DL ready reserves do not get wage increases, have no advancement opportunities, making an emotional appeal that DL is "Unamerican" by having ready reserve and being non-union. He conveniently neglects that his very own union encouraged, facilitated, and ratified in January 2010-a full ten months before this interview regarding DL. The IAM will likely offer ready reserve in the PCE negotiations at UAL, just among the other gifts to the company they offer to keep dues payers on the payroll.
See article 26:
http://www.iam141.or...014clerical.pdf
Josh
As for raises, that's actually true. The ready reserve pay scale has one step, and no one ever progresses above it, regardless of how long they've been in the position. The rate
itself increases occasionally (it goes up in Jan. when everyone else's does), but that's it. He's also right about no benefits. Sure, they get pass travel, but if someone is struggling to get by, going on vacation is at the bottom of the list.
Regarding advancement: The program has grown exponentially in the last few years. That's not hyperbolic labor rhetoric, that's the term a (now retired) DL SVP used to describe it. What does that have to do with advancement? Well, it used to be that someone got in the door as a Ready Reserve (or TPT, as DL used to call it), then when a benefitted opening came up, they were able to move into it. NW had a similar program- it's how I was hired.
The difference today is that not only is all new hiring in ACS done via the program, so too is almost all backfilling of vacated positions. Sure, there are outlier examples (LGA becoming a hub, for example), but for the most part, any local movement isn't going to happen, and transfer opportunities to other cities to get a benefitted spot aren't that frequent.
Roach doesn't mention it, but one of the knock-on effects of the latter is that when you finally get a good employee, they get frustrated and wind up leaving as soon as an opening somewhere else comes available. In my city's case, we've said goodbye to 2 extremely good workers recently that didn't want to leave, but were tired of being over promised and under delivered to. These guys would've been here for the long haul, and the company would've received a decent return on their investment in them. Instead, we're going short again, and scrambling to hire. With the former, station performance can suffer, and impact the passenger experience (to say nothing of workers getting tore up). And with the lack of benefits, and low pay, we're not competing with, say, a utility for a career minded worker; we're competing with Target or even Subway. Of course, that also puts pressure on mgmt. to find a "right now" candidate, instead of holding out for the most competitive one, and it becomes a vicious cycle.
Roach mentioned downward pressure on other carriers. I get you seeing it as hypocrisy, but I see it as evidence of him actually getting something right for once. Will UA's PCE group see this coming up? Dunno, but with DL consistently lowering the bar, who knows? In another thread, WT mentioned pattern bargaining being dead. I claimed it wasn't; it just goes in the wrong direction today. This is a prime example of just that.
He didn't specifically refer to these jobs as "Un-American." Rather, he compared them unfavorably to what he called "good, American jobs," which to him meant a living wage, solid benefits, and so on. I suppose whether or not one disagrees with his assessment depends on what their vision of America is. Do you want a vibrant middle class with decent jobs, good wages, etc., or do you want an entire swath of the populace toiling away at dead-end service sector jobs? I've said it before, but honestly, at the rate we're going, the latter seems to be ruling the day. If this trajectory keeps up, our kids are going to see an America with 3 career paths: Flipping burgers, selling derivatives, and suing people.