U.S. May Ease Rule On Labor Vote

[2BlacknBlue]

How 'bout this for real! When Delta starts throwing it's weight around with memos , flyers and such, saying, " Make sure to vote, every no vote counts as much as a yes vote", don't start yer whining, they're just playing by "YOUR" new rules !

But what about the "Give it a rip", "Don't click, Don't Dial" campaign?

 

[dapoes]

Wow, not off to a good start...Link

The NMB couldn't even issue the notice, which will be printed in the Federal Register tomorrow, without its own odd internal controversy; Chairman Elizabeth Dougherty issued a dissent from the proposal, saying she had no part in it and was given little time to read it.

It would appear that the other two members of the three-member board--Linda Puchala and Harry Hoglander--proceeded without Dougherty. In a Nov. 2 letter to nine Senators, Dougherty said, "The proposal was completed without my input or participation, and I was excluded from any discussions regarding the timing of the proposed rule."

She went on to say that she was not privy to early drafts of the proposed rule, nor its timing. She was given the "final" version of the rule on Oct. 28, and was told she had 1.5 hours to consider it. She went on to say that she was told that if she dissented, her dissent would not be published. Although she was given an extra 24 hours to digest the proposal after she requested more time, additional pleas by her for an extension were rejected.

Dougherty told the senators she is troubled by the exclusionary behavior of her colleagues, and their lack of consideration of her role as an equal member of the board.

 

[dapoes]

Sounds more like, if at first you don’t succeed, change the rules? :down:

 

[BoeingBoy]

a hopeful theory.

True most of the time, but that's because most of the time members complain on the airplane, in the crewroom, or in on-line furums like this but rarely if ever darken the door at a local union meeting or even bother to vote. It takes a motivated, informed, involved work group to make the union work for them. Lacking that, the members only count when it comes to dues.

 

[Dignity]

True most of the time, but that's because most of the time members complain on the airplane, in the crewroom, or in on-line furums like this but rarely if ever darken the door at a local union meeting or even bother to vote.

The Union is really not discussed at all on the "airplane"

and

I dont hang out in the lounge so I dont know what they complain about in there...

(it seems sort of quiet when I do go in there from time to time)

in the age of concessions and bankrupt airlines, I would assume its hard to fly 100 hours and then make it to every "union meeting", I mean people do travel for a living, just because they may not be able to attend does not mean they just dont care.

(someone has to fly)

right?

It takes a motivated, informed, involved work group to make the union work for them.

I know of very few airlines that have very effective Leadership including a Union

and then most are a complete mess now-a-days regarding the Union and I dont really think... it has anything to do with an un-informed or un-motivated work group.

 

[Dignity]

Sounds more like, if at first you don’t succeed, change the rules? :down:

the bright side.. hopefully this means someone is going to finally make a decision on something.

 

[BoeingBoy]

right?

Right - it's always easier to "let someone else do it" on those few precious off days. Unfortunately, the "someone else" usually ends up being the local leadership.

I know of very few airlines that have very effective Leadership including a Union

and then most are a complete mess now-a-days regarding the Union and I dont really think... it has anything to do with an un-informed or un-motivated work group.

Probably because that's about all you see in the industry, especially the legacies. It's easy to assume that the way it is today can't be changed because it's the fault of someone/something else or "That's just the way it is."

I have no firsthand experience with any airline other than PI/US, but when local union elections in a base of 1000+ members are decided by a vote of 60 - 39 or nearly every member complains about So & So the local rep yet So & So gets reelected time after time, or a tentative agreement with concessions is ratified by 28% of the membership because 50% didn't bother to vote, the members aren't involved. Everyone who rarely at best goes to a local union meeting has a good excuse - my commuter flight home left before it started, I was off that day, I had other things that needed to be taken care of, etc.

If I'm not mistaken, just about every union allows the recall of local reps, introducing member resolutions at local meetings, etc. The workers have the tools to take charge of the union (at least on that property) but usually don't do it. So the union leadership (on that property) runs things as they see fit.

Jim

 

[Dignity]

Right - it's always easier to "let someone else do it" on those few precious off days. Unfortunately, the "someone else" usually ends up being the local leadership.

maybe they can go to where there are a lot of crew laying over and have a meeting..

Probably because that's about all you see in the industry, especially the legacies. It's easy to assume that the way it is today can't be changed because it's the fault of someone/something else or "That's just the way it is."

I think some of the problems we have now-a-days is simply some are not being realistic and ignoring economic
factors.

I have no firsthand experience with any airline other than PI/US, but when local union elections in a base of 1000+ members are decided by a vote of 60 - 39 or nearly every member complains about So & So the local rep yet So & So gets reelected time after time, or a tentative agreement with concessions is ratified by 28% of the membership because 50% didn't bother to vote, the members aren't involved.

or they are literally disgusted what was put in front of them to vote on?

"we came up with 40 percent paycuts and gutted your contract"

lets vote! :blink:

Everyone who rarely at best goes to a local union meeting has a good excuse - my commuter flight home left before it started, I was off that day, I had other things that needed to be taken care of, etc.

personally, if someone chose a commuter flight home or attenting a "union meeting"

I would understand the commuter flight home.

(its probably nice to go home every now and then)

without trying to put a guilt trip on someone,

who just wants to do some laundry and sleep in their own bed at least once or twice a month.

ya know?

If I'm not mistaken, just about every union allows the recall of local reps, introducing member resolutions at local meetings, etc. The workers have the tools to take charge of the union (at least on that property) but usually don't do it. So the union leadership (on that property) runs things as they see fit.

I dont have the opportunity to vote for every single Leader,

how do you recall a "Rep" when you arent allowed to vote for them in the first place?

 

[BoeingBoy]

Thanks, you illustrated my point perfectly...

Jim

 

[Dignity]

In a perfect world, two groups would not remain separate in the same union for four years.

maybe someone should illustrate and point out how to do it right.

 

[Kev3188]

Looks like the F/A's pulled their petition...


"Washington, DC – The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA (AFA-CWA) today withdrew the single
transportation certification application it filed with the National Mediation Board (NMB) in July on behalf of
flight attendants at Northwest Airlines and Delta Air Lines. The withdrawal is in response to the NMB’s recent
proposed voting procedures announcement that would permit a majority of workers who actually vote in union
elections to decide the election and stop assigning “noâ€￾ votes to workers who do not participate. "


Press release here.

 

[Dignity]

yeah it looks like they pulled it.

it appears an election will not happen until at least 2010.

what I am trying to figure out is how was it fair and considered single carrier when they filed,

and now its not today?

why did they even file to begin with?

 

[Delta Technician]

yeah it looks like they pulled it.

it appears an election will not happen until at least 2010.

what I am trying to figure out is how was it fair and considered single carrier when they filed,

and now its not today?

why did they even file to begin with?

And how do they have the right to pull it? Do they just march into the office and say oh I made a mistake. If they want to refile can they just walk in and say "my bad" even if it's the next day? Silly games if you ask me.

 

[Wings]

yeah it looks like they pulled it.

it appears an election will not happen until at least 2010.

what I am trying to figure out is how was it fair and considered single carrier when they filed,

and now its not today?

why did they even file to begin with?

AFA-CWA filed a request (on behalf of pre-merger DAL/NWA FAs) with the NMB on July 27, 2009 to determine IF a single transportation system existed for FAs at the 'new' Delta Air Lines. In a merger, that is the first step before an election can actually be scheduled. They did not file for an election.

To date, the NMB has not yet ruled on that STS request. The NMB did, however, post a proposed rule change for NMB elections on the Federal Register today with a 60 day comment period (scheduled to end on January 4, I believe). This proposed rule change would give all transportation employees (governed by the Railway Labor Act) the opportunity to vote using a Yes/No ballot.

The pre-merger Delta and Northwest FAs could have been in the middle of an election under the "old" rules (during this 60 day period) with ballots being counted just days before the new rule would go into effect. Because the NMB had not ruled on the STS request yet (the prerequisite to scheduling an election), the Delta-AFA campaign and NWA-AFA leadership unanimously decided to pull the NMB request until they make a decision on this proposed rule change.

Should the NMB decide to change the rule, all FAs will have the opportunity to vote under the most democratic setting. It literally takes less than 5 minutes to vote. If FAs really care about the representation issue - one way or the other - they will have the opportunity to vote. If they can't be bothered; their apathy should not count as a "NO" vote. It's as simple as that.

And why Delta executives would even object to this is beyond me. Richard Anderson has stated publicly that the NMB has brought politics into play - really? Transportation employees deserve the right for fair elections where everyone must participate in order for their vote to count, just like all other elections in this country.

Speaking of "politics"... it appears Delta sure knows how to play the game (when it suits them) in order to ensure they receive the most favorable terms in their new lease agreement for ATL Hartsfield-Jackson Airport.

http://www.ajc.com/business/delta-lease-at...eld-181448.html

 

[Dignity]

Thanks Wings.

however,

That really doesnt answer my question.

why did they file only to turn around and pull it?

they are saying the NMB never made a decision how to proceed and so the
next thing they, Union did was pull the request altogether?

right now they have nothing filed at all,

but did.

so basically they are saying, they never let us know, so we just pulled the whole request.

this is very disturbing.