Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The judge overseeing NWA bankruptcy IN NO WAY enjoined the FAs from striking the carrier if the contract was indeed abrogated, additionally that ability has yet to be tested in a court of law.
Curiosity? Really, why do you ask?Bob,
Out of curiosity, what airline do you work for? And do you feel you are being compensated for what your labor is worth?
How do you know how many applications they recieved? Do you go by what the company says? If they didnt receieve any do you think they would admit it?
The fact is that you are simply willing to accept whatever your master throws at you.
But you are still relying on information that is under the complete control of the company.Because they only took applications for 3 days online because they had more than enough applicants to work through. (note: this in NO WAY means they were qualified applicants, just enough to slow down the website)
Its hypocritical because in addition to my name you also want to know where I work yet you choose to reveal nothing about yourself.No. What's hypocritical about it? And if I posted under my real name (Glenn Tilton) when I asked the question, why would that be different?
I do find it revealing that you won't answer the questions though. Especially the second one.
Sincerely yours,
Leo Mullin
I don't know what your name is. You post under the name "Bob Owens." Who that is, or if that is your real name, is unknown to me and unverifiable. And I didn't want to know your name. What your name is or isn't is irrelevant. If you choose to post under your name, that is your business.
May we assume you at least work for an airline in some capacity and are represented by a union?
Finally, a little progress. (I can see why airline management has trouble communicating with unions. Sheesh.)
So you are an airline employee, covered by a CBA (at least you are "represented" that much, no?).
You still refuse to answer whether you feel compensated fairly. So let's explore the two options:
1. YES, you feel you are compensated fairly. Yet you criticize Jamake for "accepting what his master throws at him." If you feel fairly compensated, isn't it just possible that Jamake feels fairly compensated as well?
2. NO, you don't feel you are compensated fairly. Yet you criticize Jamake for "accepting what his master throws at him." If you feel you are not being compensated fairly, yet you still work for the "master," aren't you just accepting what your master throws at you too?
So this is an interrogation, you ask and I answer.Dont think so.How long have you been feeling that way?
...the move by the NWA FAs towards unity within the AFA is a step in the right direction.
Well it has.
In the United States the presumtion is that unless the law explicitely prohibits you from doing something you can do it. The RLA is clear in that once a company makes changes that constitute a major dispute that we have the right to strike, the Judge does not posess the right to make laws, he can only enforce them and the RLA is clear-if compensation has been changed we are free to self help. There are scores of examples where this has occured, there are no examples where a Judge has enjoined workers to show up for work after their contract has been abrogated and they are being paid less. Whats really sickening is that our unions are joining with the companies in insinuating that that a Judge can do that. Let me ask you this, could a Judge turn around and tell Exxon to sell fuel to the Airlines at below market costs? I mean if we want to look at what sent the airlines into a tailspin its easy to see that its fuel right? So Fuel costs have spiked upwards, some of that is because of supply, it costs more for the oil companies to buy the fuel, but at the same time the oil companies are posting record profits, in other words profiteering, but yet there is no move by the airlines to go to court in order to force the oil companies to lower their price!Why? Because there is nothing in law that would give the Judge the right to do that. The Judge can throw out a contract, he can not impose new terms. In the examples where new terms were put in place its because the unions did not challenge it, obviously the unions had met with the Judge and agreed to these terms but they needed it to sound like it was a ruling from the Judge, the Judge was acting more like an arbitrator than ruling as a Judge. The fact is there is nothing in law that would stop anyone from striking when their contract has been abrogated-in fact the law is explicit in that they can.
Most of your concessions are going straight into the oil companies pockets yet the Judge cant force them to lower their prices. They sell oil, you sell labor, if they cant force them they cant force you.