Thanks Bob. I agree with most of the things you said here actually and the ones I don't quite agree with I'm not going to argue with you out of personal respect.
On the last line though all you have to do is read how FSC people are treated (I earn it myself some) when any of us comment on one of their threads and "maybe" that's why some people feel the way they do "unfortunately" about Maintenance. But there is some level of reciprocation which I find personally shameful.
Yes I did hear that Lombardo and co. did try to get us out of the deal but Little made sure it was rock solid. The CWA thing we're not completely out of yet either. There's still the matter of a lease agreement in DC (Whether it's a good place to be or not) That lease seems pretty expensive but what do I know about Real Estate prices in the Nations Capital?
Did you ever hear a rumor that Pike, Danker and Peterson were asked to take a seat but none of them could decide amongst each other? (Since you put this out there) I'm not 100% committed to this "Autonomy" thing myself but it's the price to be paid for the Little regimes heavy hand I guess?
I like Doyle and Virella was cool with me but we both know experience or not they put their best foot forward and went full bore for Lombardo against Gordon so that's not a surprise. But no 100% you need to have a Maintenance guy in the ATD 100%. I have ZERO argument against that. Maybe Gless put a bitter taste in some people's mouths but it's high time to put him in the past and move forward, IMO. I'm hopping it happens after we get that JCBA and if not I would gladly join anyone who would have me in that push. (Frankly Peterson has really impressed me lately)
As for Samuelsen I don't know the man personally but I like the "real" stories I've read about him in the papers. And if he doesn't know the Airlines I hope he's a quick learner and has people that will force feed it down his throat if need be? Otherwise for now Garcia knows our issues very well in the meantime. But Political activation for Aircraft Maintenance HAS to become a future primary focus, again IMO. I just don't read much of a push in that area from anyone where I think it should be. And that goes for AMFA, IAM, IBT and the TWU as well.
I've never supported the way some guys trash Fleet, I've repeated my assertion that any job that needs to be done should be paid a livable wage, and on many many occasions challenged those of my peers who do trash other workers.
IMO they did not try hard enough, they did the Association because they were afraid of an AMFA vote.
What happened was Peterson was offered a spot if he withdrew the lawsuit. In other words he had to do what he was morally against and commit personal political suicide. He rejected the offer as he should as it was made with ill intentions. Lombardo tried to bully nus at the Convention. Peterson and Pike did not get along very well and Dale was unknown, so there was never any such meeting or offer that I'm aware of.
Little fancied himself a Real Estate mogul, and nearly bankrupted the Union.
Autonomy in TWU parlance has always been "You are on your own, but you do not have complete control. You can sink or swim but we pick the waters." The rejection of moving Title II from local 510 to 591 is a perfect example of this.
I'd met with Virella prior to the 2009 Convention and brought up just meeting with Samuelson to see what he had to say. He was extremely critical of Samuelson, I found out why when Virella got the nod from Little a few weeks later at the Convention, he reminded of Pauly when he found out he was being a made man in the movie Goof Fellas. In 2013 they put their cards on the table only after it was already obvious that momentum was going against Little's Team.
Garcia knows your issues, not ours, remember, although Fleet has suffered immensely your relative situation has remained fairly good. Your standing among your peers has not been as severely damaged as ours. Most of your decline is market driven, ours was too but made even worse by our own Union, by people getting paid off by the company. Your situation is much harder to fix, IMO you need to structure yourselves as much as possible like the Longshoremen. One Union for all of Fleet, if possible one Local. The people taking your jobs for much less are often in the same union, TWU Local 504 for example. They too are good people trying to do the best they can for their members but their challenges, their survivability is in direct conflict with you. Its easy for a company in that end of the Industry to simply liquidate, change their name, transfer their contracts and tell their employees come back here tomorrow at minimum wage and no union.
Samuelson is a good leader but he has demonstrated that he is all about Local 100. Sure he will help within certain confined parameters but he also has no use for mechanics as he considers us to be Craft Unionists. Something he is very much against, his views are based upon their relationship with the very strong, but also very right wing Conservative Craft Labor movement in NYC. He doesn't understand airline culture. He is in charge now but I don't see him interfering with Garcia, and Garcia has already shown that he is no friend of Maint, the Local 510 deal made that perfectly clear. Garcia will block anything that shifts power of mechanics to mechanics and away from Fleet. They wont even let us have what works pretty well for the TWU at SWA.
To me the most pressing political issue is not a Maint issue, it affects all airline workers. We are not going to get rid of Foreign Aircraft Maintenance, even with Trump for all my coworkers who supported that altzheimers riddled idiot. IIRC we as a nation in-source more Aircraft Maintenance than we outsource, so the argument is weak, most of the outsoucing went to places in the US. Where we do have a much better argument is the inequality of the treatment of Airline workers in Bankruptcy, where the courts cherry picked rulings while ignoring the repeatedly stated intent of the legislation those rulings were about. The RLA was clear that we would never have terms that were never agreed upon imposed on us, but the courts said that didn't apply to the Airlines. The RLA was founded upon the concept that a standing mutual agreement was the basis of the prohibition against strikes or Lockouts, that's why our contracts are amendable. It even says that contracts can not be modified though any other means such as bankruptcy. It blocked any such unilateral moves and said that if such moves were made then the prohibition on striking was no longer in effect. The courts however chose to ignore this incrementally, step by step over decades and the Unions did nothing about it. The pilots did try, but the way they presented it was ineffective.
