Agents TURN DOWN Union

[1AA]

After what the TWU did to us it must have left a bad impression on unions.
A non voter was not a no vote. It just did not count.
Low participation in the vote. That is sad. Non union groups that have been that way are reluctant to vote union. With the TWU debacle no wonder many took no interest in the vote.

 

[eolesen]

And the low participation rate is exactly what the union was counting on, and why they lobbied for the "50% of those voting" change with the NMB.

 

[700UW]

No election in this land requires the 50%+1 method, no public office and unions under the NLRA is simple majority.

How is 50%+1 democratic?

And that is what is in effect now, since Congress changed it again.

 

[1AA]

50% plus 1 is to show interest to generate a election. Election is still the same way that we vote in presidential elections.

 

[eolesen]

50% plus 1 is to show interest to generate a election. Election is still the same way that we vote in presidential elections.

That's actually all new within the past 18 months. Some of the consternation over the 35 vs 50% rule is because NMB ruled by fiat that voting majority of 50% vs. class majority of 50%. Prior to that, non-votes counted as a No vote.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/faa-deal-on-capitol-hill-labor-language-dropped-20120120

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

As (AA) Usual, I'd love to see the Hub 'breakdowns'.

DFW/MIA vs. JFK/LGA/BOS.

Bottom line. F em'. I'm DONE felling sorry for Ignorant MORONS.
I hope they enjoy EVERY Bite of EVEY SH!T Sandwich..that come's thier way !

Stupid is as STUPID Does.

 

[eolesen]

Twice in the past 15 years, the agents have voted down representation.

You, on the other hand, never had a say in whether or not you were represented. It was simply the way it was.

So I don't fault you, Bears, for not knowing the difference.

But the agents have had 15 years to see what good a union could offer them. They've seen how effective it was for the ramp, the mechanics, the pilots and flight attendants.

For what it's worth, there really hasn't been a whole lot of difference between what happened to the agents and the unionized employees.

I'd say they more than a fair opportunity to make an informed choice, especially watching six years of failed negotiations and the S1113 process.

Yet, you have the balls to call them ignorant? Interesting...

Keeping an ineffective bargaining agent all these years is the epitome of stupid is as stupid does.

Ignorance is pissing and moaning about how ineffective they are, and then wondering why another workgroup would think twice about voting in a union...

The least you could do is respect their choice.

 

[Kev3188]

You, on the other hand, never had a say in whether or not you were represented. It was simply the way it was.

Disagree. That myth is peddled a lot by "union avoidance" consultants. The truth is, people always have a say; they can either push to change unions, or push to de-cert if they're that unhappy.

Keeping an ineffective bargaining agent all these years is the epitome of stupid is as stupid does.

^This^

Why more rep'ed AA'ers aren't agitating for change is beyond me. I can see how it might color the agents' perception of organized labor. You're right that they should know enough data by now to make an informed choice. They also should've participated in the vote. That low of turn out is absolutely inexcusable IMO, especially given how easy it is to actually cast a ballot.

 

[WorldTraveler]

As (AA) Usual, I'd love to see the Hub 'breakdowns'.

DFW/MIA vs. JFK/LGA/BOS.

Bottom line. F em'. I'm DONE felling sorry for Ignorant MORONS.
I hope they enjoy EVERY Bite of EVEY SH!T Sandwich..that come's thier way !

Stupid is as STUPID Does.

and Kev...

I haven't seen a lot of mention of it on here ... but suppose that part of AA's strategy to move from NYC to Texas decades ago was to be in a more labor friendly climate?
AA is not the same airline it was when you, Bears or Bob were hired by AA. Their HDQ and largest operation is now in a very different state than the NE states where labor has much greater influence.

Is it possible that there are now a whole generation of AA employees who have been influenced by the climate in which they live and work?
Add in that AA's unions for ground workers have not been effective, and it isn't terribly surprising regarding these results.

The south is not what it was in the past and you can't help but acknowledge that a significant shift in the aviation industry has taken place from the north to the south and that it might have been orchestrated to help tilt the balance of power.

 

[eolesen]

Labor wasn't the reason for the move. It was driven by taxes, lost time and the work week, and the fact that DFW was already the main location for crew training.

The average commute for someone coming into 633 Third was 60-90 minutes, and the work week averaged 35 hours by the time you figured in the commuting delays and constraints of having to catch a certain train out of the city. In Grand Prairie & Euless, the average commute was 30 minutes or less.

I suspect there was also higher lost time as a result of that. Who wants to trudge thru snow or rain when you can call in sick? Planes, trains and buses are all known as great incubation zones for catching and spreading the flu.

Taxes were also an issue. But labor? That was always going to be driven by where the employees worked, not where the main office was located. Just look at Boeing. They're headquartered in Chicago. Had that made labor relations any better?...

 

[FWAAA]

Bears has been harping on the move of the corporate headquarters for more than a decade, and I've never understood why he thinks it matters.

The employees who worked in downtown Manhattan who now work at HDQ in Fort Worth were management and support personnel who wouldn't be unionized no matter where they worked. Pilots, flight attendants, fleet and maintenance have been unionized for a long, long time and the move to DFW didn't affect that.

 

[WorldTraveler]

correct on the distinction between frontline and mgmt unioniozation levels.... however, overhead costs do trickle down to the operation and that was an advantage of moving south. At the same time, you can't rule out the more labor friendly climate as being a factor... undoubtedly not the largest by any means.

AA's network growth shifted dramatically to DFW w/ its HDQ move also. MIA didn't even exist at the time of the HDQ move.

The profile of labor has changed alot at AA in 30 years including a shift to the southern states - which reflects the shift w/ the overall US economy.

 

[737823]

There is definitely some truth to the change in attitudes from AA relocating but AA does have considerable operations in strong holds for organized labor like Chicago, LA, and NYC. Since the DL merger I feel the former NW workers have lightened up a but at DTW, different leadership at ATL may be part of it. Of course the IAM decertification has been a real culture shock for many I've heard.

Josh

 

[Ms Tree]

When I was in res and some union tried to organize us (I do not remember who) the general consensus was that we knew AA would screw us. Why on earth would we want to get screwed by a union as well?

 

[usa1]

A union could have negotiated mainline agents back into some of AA's medium size cities where contractors are now? If there is a merger and US medium size cities get outsourced, I wonder what the furlough / displacements / transfer process will look like.