A Historic Day

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/story/10751773/1/feds-make-unionization-easier-at-airlines.html?cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA

The change means that in union representation elections, the outcome will be based on the votes of a majority of the workers who participate -- rather than requiring a majority of eligible voters
😀

 

[The Goose]

http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/story/10751773/1/feds-make-unionization-easier-at-airlines.html?cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA

The change means that in union representation elections, the outcome will be based on the votes of a majority of the workers who participate -- rather than requiring a majority of eligible voters

😀

Where are the cards?

Let's get rid of the AA/TWU bedpartners!

 

[eolesen]

Guess it's time to fish or cut bait, now that you don't have to worry about management & the lapdog NMB stacking the deck against y'all....

 

[jersey777]

Guess it's time to fish or cut bait, now that you don't have to worry about management & the lapdog NMB stacking the deck against y'all....

Wow! What a concept! Let an election be decided by those that bother to vote.

 

[767 mechanic]

Yes this is a great day,but we still have to get it to a vote by getting 50% + 1 to sign cards. The company and the union can still pad the list like they did last time.

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

I dont read it that way but I could be wrong.



The change means that in union representation elections, the outcome will be based on the votes of a majority of the workers who participate -- rather than requiring a majority of eligible voters

 

[767 mechanic]

I could be wrong,but that was how I read it because they would have to know who is eligible to vote.If anybody knows the answer let all of us know.

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

For arguments sake
if ten thousand people are eligible to vote but only four thousand people vote then in order for it to pass 2001 would need to vote yes that is how I understand it.

 

[nbmcg01]

Wow! What a concept! Let an election be decided by those that bother to vote.

Be careful..they may try and figure out a way to take your vote away..Oh sorry, that is the APFA

 

[nbmcg01]

Where are the cards?

Let's get rid of the AA/TWU bedpartners!

Do any of you have a game plan? Are you wanting to form an independent union? Teamsters? God forbid the IAM. You all seem to forget it is all about the dues, no more,no less.

 

[aapitbull]

Do any of you have a game plan? Are you wanting to form an independent union? Teamsters? God forbid the IAM. You all seem to forget it is all about the dues, no more,no less.

Guys lets be clear the Teamsters & Iam are not options here the Iam because they are a member of the Afl-Cio and the anti raid clause forbids them from organizing a affilated members &the Teamsters because while they are no longer a Afl-Cio member they still adhere to the anti raid clause.

Both have been approached and have repeatedly declined to get invovled, you are left with the 2 choices that we had when we ran the Amfa drive and they are Amfa our start your own independent union. good luck because in either case your going to need it!!!

 

[The Goose]

Guys lets be clear the Teamsters & Iam are not options here the Iam because they are a member of the Afl-Cio and the anti raid clause forbids them from organizing a affilated members &the Teamsters because while they are no longer a Afl-Cio member they still adhere to the anti raid clause.

Both have been approached and have repeatedly declined to get invovled, you are left with the 2 choices that we had when we ran the Amfa drive and they are Amfa our start your own independent union. good luck because in either case your going to need it!!!

Even if the Teamsters had interest in American, I'm certain we would end up in the same situation we are now due to corporate payoffs as they're not exactly known for their above-board operations. AMFA has proven to be the same as the TWU re: dealings with the company, otherwise the debacle of NWA would have have been handled in a totally manner from its outset.

Organizing an Independent union, like the other two choices, still relies on the honesty of the installed officers to work for the membership and not be sneaking around the corporate offices looking for a handout. The same yahoos will gravitate to positions of authority within whatever is assembled and it'll probably be the same ones we have now - you know, the ones that put us in this situation. We'd be back where we were even after a lot of work.

We're left with non-trustworthy entities bargaining "for" us "against" a corporation that is no different. Penalties cannot be made severe enough (legally) to stop the behavior of the TWU's officers such as Burchette, Yingst, and now Luis with his unannounced (yet listed on the International's website) appointment to Int. VP.

Shut it down - last one out, hit the lights.

 

[Boomer]

If I recal, the thresholds for organizing and changing representation are different; and, I would be shocked if this Administration allowed the same bar to be set for both.

Without having read the actual changes to the NMB Representation Manual, or the outcome of Legal Challenge, I would highly suspect that any political administration would induce more volatility into the labor managment relationship within the airline industry due to the potential for economic disruption given the consolidation ongoing.

 

[PlayTheOdds]

Do any of you have a game plan? Are you wanting to form an independent union? Teamsters? God forbid the IAM. You all seem to forget it is all about the dues, no more,no less.

No they do not. They can think no further than their next gripe. They will never be happy for they are always looking for greener pasture while poisoning the one that they are in. The problem is they have no means of getting over the fence.

 

[Birdman]

No they do not. They can think no further than their next gripe. They will never be happy for they are always looking for greener pasture while poisoning the one that they are in. The problem is they have no means of getting over the fence.

Great, look who's back.