Beyond Repair: Union Strife Divides Aa Mechanics

button_yes.gif
AMFA
 
Decision 2004 said:
Can you translate this message? I really don't understand your point!

Is this actually English? Or some language that the liberals have developed to communicate with legal er uh illegal aliens?
I think the graph left him so befuddled he couldnt even type out a semi-coherant reply.

By the way I dont think we have that many illegal aliens anymore, that liberal Bush made them legal so they can take our jobs.
 
Bob Owens said:
For that matter it is also an example of AMFA's democracy is action, each local gets one vote during negotiations, but all the members of all locals have to pay dues based on their headcount.

First of all, the members do not pay dues based upon the headcount of their Local.

Every member gets to vote for ratification. One member, one vote, and each member casts their own vote-no proxy voting like corporations and the TWU.

Why should Randy McDonald get to vote in behalf of 7000 members when less than half of that number ever cast a vote for him? He may have won the right to represent them, but should he also have the right to vote for them? Should he also have the right to determine the future of over 16000 members, most of whom are not in his local based upon as little as 3000 votes in Tulsa?


So AMFA modeled their "democracy" on that of The United States of America, while the TWU, according to you, modeled their "democracy" on that of big corporations.

Which structure is more "democratic"?


The one vote per Local guarantees equality at negotiations. The larger locals still have the advantage when it comes to ratification.

The TWUs structure pretty much makes the majority of locals spectators, not equals. Its like our government where the two Senators from sparsly populated Oklahoma have the same electoral power in the Senate as New York or California, however in order for a bill to become law it must also pass the House of Representatives where proportional represention, and voting exists. Its a form of checks and balances that ensures that the smaller states cant just be disregarded by the larger states. If we simply allow majority rule, without any safeguards for the rights of the minority then there is no moral, ethical or practical reason for the minority to support or remain associated with the majority. If you want unity, it has to be fair, something that you and your comrades have absolutely no comprehension of.
Bob, funny, the president of the US received around 25% of the vote, but he is still making the rules at this time. You are trying to twist the politics of voting to your advantage. Whether you like it or not Randy McDonald represents all members of local 514. Last I checked that is how democracy works. Of course maybe AMFA will only represent those who can prove they support it? Your mind set is running in interesting directions.

You seem to advocate that each local gets one vote at the table, fair enough; lets divide the negotiating expenses by the number of locals and each local pays an equal share.
 
j7915 said:
Whether you like it or not Randy McDonald represents all members of local 514. Last I checked that is how democracy works.
Go tell that to the 718 That lost their job security and hit the street.

Go tell that to the guys who took aa 34% paycut.

Go tell that to someone that cares who Randy McDonald represents, which is not many, he will NOT be re-elected.
 
Bob, funny, the president of the US received around 25% of the vote, but he is still making the rules at this time.


Funny, I thought that the two houses of Congress also had a big part in "rule making" and all are "elected" by "the people". After a rule gets through all three (Reps, Senate, Exec) the the Supreme Court decides whether or not it conforms to the Constitution. Whereas with the TWU the contract and all the top decisions are made by the International, none of whom are elected by the members. I often see letters of agreement with Bobby Gless, Gary Yingst and John Connely's signature on them. They are binding agreements that the members had no enforcable say on and all these guys were appointed. They were all appointed by someone else who was appointed by someone who the members do not get to vote for.

Can you tell me how this last contract and the International promotion of it conforms to Article II of the TWU Constitution?


You are trying to twist the politics of voting to your advantage.

I'm making my arguement and presenting things to support it. Its up to you to counter it. If you cant then the fair and logical conclusion is that I am right.

Whether you like it or not Randy McDonald represents all members of local 514. Last I checked that is how democracy works.

And the members voted to make Randy their President?

Of course maybe AMFA will only represent those who can prove they support it?

Do you mean like the TWU?

Your mind set is running in interesting directions.

I wish I could say the same. Instead I see a "man" who thinks he is pro-union but brags that his Unions democracy is structured like a corporations. The labor movement has been very critical of "corporate" democracy. I see a "union man" in favor of massive long term concessions because he is too much of a coward to risk a fight. I see a union man, repeating all the company's arguements in favor of concessions, arguements that go back to the beginning of the labor movement, arguements that have been repeated by every "company" union since, arguements put forward by "anti-labor" forces like the RTW and not once has it really dawned on him that he has taken on, accepted and promoted the ideology of anti-unionists.

Its not interesting, its sad, scary even.


You seem to advocate that each local gets one vote at the table, fair enough; lets divide the negotiating expenses by the number of locals and each local pays an equal share.

I dont recall Tulsa paying any of our expenses. The International pays most of the expenses because after all it is their contract. The only place that the Locals sign is as "witnesses". Why are you so preoccupied with thinking that other Locals benifit at Tulsas expense? They dont, except for maybe a few that Tulsa may have volunteered to support. Dont you have over $12 million in the bank? If you feel that each Local should only finance its issues then I guess you support Local 100s decision to keep all their COPE Contributions instead of turning them over to Sonny?
 
Decision 2004 said:
Go tell that to the 718 That lost their job security and hit the street.

Go tell that to the guys who took aa 34% paycut.

Go tell that to someone that cares who Randy McDonald represents, which is not many, he will NOT be re-elected.
How about the folks at ATL? AMFA did nothing. At UAL they claim ignorance while they were trying to become the representing union, during contract talks and after 9/11.

As always AMFA goes fishing in troubled waters. Sort of like two other extremist organizations I can think of.

It is always easier to promise the sky when things are gloomy, and then blame everything on others.

What is the statute of limitations, when AMFA will have to step up and take responsibility? One contract, two, NEVER?
 
j7915 said:
How about the folks at ATL? AMFA did nothing. At UAL they claim ignorance while they were trying to become the representing union, during contract talks and after 9/11.

As always AMFA goes fishing in troubled waters. Sort of like two other extremist organizations I can think of.
Number one, ATL Mechanics had job security provisions and CHOSE not to exercise their rights, and as for UAL, if you guys are going to claim that AMFA has some responsibility at an Airline that AMFA has not yet been certified, then will you please get the AA/AMFA organizers into your secret meetings with AA management so we can at least have some input on that which you claim we will be accountable for? :rolleyes:

Number two, can you tell us the "troubled waters" at AA in 1989 when Scott Davies was fired for running an advertisement in the Tulsa about an AMFA meeting? Can you describe for us the "troubled waters" at AA in 1994 when Kenyon Wallace sued the TWU for being placed in bad standing for supporting AMFA? And can you inform us about the "troubled waters" at AA when 7 Tulsa mechanics sued AA in 1999 for violating RLA 152 Eleventh (inteference in union organizing)? Can you tell about the "troubled waters" at AA when between 1999 and 2001 over 85 TWU members were found guilty of dual unionism? Was there "troubled waters" at AA when Dave Kruse and Dennis Burchette held an anti-AMFA rally on the ramp in June of 1999? Most of the above activity took place during periods of AA record profitability.

Look at the facts j7915, the Mechanics at American Airlines have been in pursuit of AMFA since 1963, and very strong since 1989. "AMFA" is not in pursuit of your union or AA, the Mechanics at AA are in pursuit of AMFA! What part of "FED UP" don't you understand?

Tell us all again about how AMFA is taking any advantage of "troubled waters"? This is nothing more than another TWU liberal attempt to blame someone or something else on TWU failures that trigger membership rebellion.

Get a grip and look at the FACTS! The rest of us are !
 
How about the folks at ATL? AMFA did nothing.

Do you mean the TWU represented AA mechanics at ATL, not to mention JFK, LGA, BOS, SJU, BDL, PHL, EWR, (and thats just our Local) that got laid off? What is AMFA suposed to do about that? Or are you trying to focus on NWA, which as an airline, which has remained profitable, chose a different method of dealing with the recession? You usually forget to mention that at NWA the layoffs were across the board, and that the AFL-CIO affiliated members at NWA were hit just as hard as the AMFA represented members. Besides arent we talking about AA? According to Jim Little whatever happens at NWA is none of our concern. Why dont you start a TWU drive over at NWA?

At UAL they claim ignorance while they were trying to become the representing union, during contract talks and after 9/11.

Ok, and at what time would you find such an effort "acceptable"? You forget that the UAL drive was initiated by mechanics at UAL. Unlike the TWUs failed drive at Delta that was promoted run and financed by George Roberts, who never even worked at Delta. What was that figure again $2 million? I doubt AMFA ever spent that much money organizing.


As always AMFA goes fishing in troubled waters. Sort of like two other extremist organizations I can think of.

Again, every AMFA drive was initiated by would be members who are employees at the company in question. They volunteered their own time and money to get AMFA. Does the TWU have any such volunteers? Does anyone contribute voluntary dues to the TWU? You guys ask to be given a chance. Then when you fail, you complain when those members who gave you the opportunity to do right decide to go for AMFA.

It is always easier to promise the sky when things are gloomy, and then blame everything on others.

OK, so who is to blame for the performance of the TWU over the last TWENTY YEARS!

You guys keep claiming that all these "promises" were made. Well what are they other than democracy and accountability?


What is the statute of limitations, when AMFA will have to step up and take responsibility? One contract, two, NEVER?

Well we have given the TWU twenty years. I dont have another twenty to wait.
 
Decision 2004 said:
Number one, ATL Mechanics had job security provisions and CHOSE not to exercise their rights, and as for UAL, if you guys are going to claim that AMFA has some responsibility at an Airline that AMFA has not yet been certified, then will you please get the AA/AMFA organizers into your secret meetings with AA management so we can at least have some input on that which you claim we will be accountable for? :rolleyes:

Number two, can you tell us the "troubled waters" at AA in 1989 when Scott Davies was fired for running an advertisement in the Tulsa about an AMFA meeting? Can you describe for us the "troubled waters" at AA in 1994 when Kenyon Wallace sued the TWU for being placed in bad standing for supporting AMFA? And can you inform us about the "troubled waters" at AA when 7 Tulsa mechanics sued AA in 1999 for violating RLA 152 Eleventh (inteference in union organizing)? Can you tell about the "troubled waters" at AA when between 1999 and 2001 over 85 TWU members were found guilty of dual unionism? Was there "troubled waters" at AA when Dave Kruse and Dennis Burchette held an anti-AMFA rally on the ramp in June of 1999? Most of the above activity took place during periods of AA record profitability.

Look at the facts j7915, the Mechanics at American Airlines have been in pursuit of AMFA since 1963, and very strong since 1989. "AMFA" is not in pursuit of your union or AA, the Mechanics at AA are in pursuit of AMFA! What part of "FED UP" don't you understand?

Tell us all again about how AMFA is taking any advantage of "troubled waters"? This is nothing more than another TWU liberal attempt to blame someone or something else on TWU failures that trigger membership rebellion.

Get a grip and look at the FACTS! The rest of us are !
Dear cool shades, if you don't understand what fishing in troubled waters means then look at the airlines where amfa has organized, they are in financial trouble or in contract talks. Most of your efforts have not gotten you anywhere otherwise.

These should be the golden years for AMFA, line maintenance is in, and the overhaul bases of all the majors are in trouble.


Happy fishing, just remember you got to do something with them fish after you land them. Gutting them a la NWA comes to mind.

Need I remind you of my earlier question...do they need welders on the line stations?
 
j7915,

"Need I remind you of my earlier question...do they need welders on the line stations?"

The answer is not really. What is your point? We need welders at overhaul facilities. It seems as if you are trying to divide the work force. The twu tried doing that for the past twenty years. Listen, there is no difference from overhaul to the line because we all do the same job. We provide safe, airworthy aircraft. Our job functions may be different but that is it. There is no "us" or "them". There is only AMTs.
 
j7915 said:
Need I remind you of my earlier question...do they need welders on the line stations?
We have two at JFK and they end up with more OT than anyone else. They are the two highest paid mechanics in the station.
 
Decision 2004 said:
There is a big difference between lobbying in Washington D.C. in favor of worker/mechanic specific issues and funding Election Campaigns like Gephardts.

Why is this difference so hard for TWU stooges to understand?

Nobody ever said anything about AMFA not being involved in political lobbying.

It the useless contributions to failing campaigns that only last one week that I hear most members opposing.

Funding Campaigns - FOOLISH
Membership Lobby - Great Idea

TWU and the AFL-CIO - FAILED POLICY

AMFA - HOPE of Our Future and Profession


Tell us Mr. Mullings, did Gephardt refund your contributions once he quit?
You sir, are a spinner! :down:
No credibility :down:
Just a spinner :down: