CWA Files for Representation Election

[737823]

I didn't say they were irrelevant; I said they were negligible in the grand scheme of things.

For an organization like the IAM international with annual receipts of nearly $150 million a few hundred thousand dollars in negotiating expenses may not be significant. Not sure how the negotiating costs are allocated/traced between international, district, and local lodges but again it is still a relevant cost.

That gets trotted out by anti worker activists a lot, and I'm not sure why that seems so scandalous to them. After all, the union has several hundred thousand members in all corners of the country. Plenty of corporations have them- the view from my "office" is of 3 corporate hangars-for the same reason(s), and no one ever says boo about it...

Back track a second there. "anti worker"? Seriously? I had assumed you could distinguish someone who maybe anti-IAM, or anti-union but anti-worker, but wow. That's like me saying that because I dislike and disagree with the Catholic Church (a political organization as far as I'm concerned) that I also dislike the billion plus people that are either practicing Catholics or identify with those traditions/beliefs/values. I disagree with many of their views but I don't dislike them on an individual level. To you and others though, maybe being pro-worker and pro-IAM are one the same but I certainly don't believe so and you shouldn't label anyone who criticizes lavish perks for IAM officials as anti-worker, that is a bit extreme and outrageous IMO.

With that aside, I'm not sure if you noticed the outcry a few years ago about the Chrysler & GM senior management flying to DC separately on private jets to plead for a bailout of the mess the unions helped them get into. My firm has reduced use of corporate jets considerably, it's pretty much just for our CEO, CFO, CIO and a few others on rare occasions. Five or six years ago it was much easier to arrange flights. People are spending more time at Logan, LaGuardia & JFK and less time at Westchester, Teterboro, and Hanscom.

Other Fortune 500s have pared them back substantially or eliminated altogether. Don't think that this hasn't impacted the middle class jobs the corporate aviation industry supports, especially in the Wichita/Sedgwick County area where Learjet and Cessna are manufacturered those are union jobs. Crewing, maintaining, and fueling those aircraft for those pesky "rich people" also sustain middle class union jobs too.

It has been posted before that IAM officials get positive space travel on the airlines they represent members as well as privileges on other carriers too and this benefit is "costed out" to the union during negotiations. Why not make use of this then? Wouldn't purchasing tickets on the carriers where IAM members are employed also help sustain the airlines and ultimately the membership?

...Except that a realtor is highly motivated to maximize all their transactions, because they realize that it well produce not only more income in the immediate return, but also potentially much more down the road.

I'd also note that home purchase/selling is usually one of the most irrational/emotion driven processes I can think of, but I digress...

My family is in this business and while client loyalty is important, the structure of the incentives and compensation does not always align the agents interests with the principal and this is only one example. It depends on the nature of the transaction, market, etc.

Josh

 

[700UW]

The Learjet was approved to be bought years ago by the membership. It was built by IAM workers.

The only reps that get postive space are the district AGCs and GC and the international's GLRs who use to work in the airline industry. And its usually only on the carrier that they have worked for.

The executive council, except GVP of Transportation do not get PS travel on the airlines.

None of them get PS on other airlines, unless they represent them and have to go through the travel bureau at each airline to get them or labor relations.

Once again you post of things that are incorrect and you have no idea of what your talking about once again.

 

[eolesen]

Yet you're dodging the issue -- why not support the airlines where they represent workers by flying on them? It's commonplace for suppliers (including my employer) to fly on the carriers we do business with. Some insist on it as a cost of doing business with them.

I've said the same thing about certain members of Congress who appear to be labor friendly, yet insisted on using Airforce 3 for travel back & forth to their district instead of flying commercial...

 

[700UW]

The only people that use the jet are the IP and the Executive Council, and its usually just the IP, the reps that represent the airlines fly on their own carrier who they use to work for or the carriers they represent, and they fly for free on union business/company business, tickets arent purchased.

 

[eolesen]

So, the jet only exists for the convenience of the top executives? Highly paid executives at that?

Yep, I guess you've confirmed that the IAM is simply another corporation, and that it's OK for some people to be more equal than others within the union structure...

 

[Kev3188]

You must not be married... I could probably list at least a couple dozen more...

Lol. Notice I said *one* of the most... Though I would note that single people buy/sell homes as well...

Back track a second there. "anti worker"? Seriously?

Yes, seriously. That wasn't directed at you specifically. It wasn't a typo, either.

My family is in this business and while client loyalty is important, the structure of the incentives and compensation does not always align the agents interests with the principal and this is only one example. It depends on the nature of the transaction, market, etc.

So's mine. Maybe the difference between our respective sphere's is that most in mine aren't obsessed with "trading up?"

 

[700UW]

The jet is based near Upper Marlboro, MD, please show us how it would be cost effective to have it fly all over the US empty to pick up reps who have space positive or can buy a plane ticket cheaper than it is to operate the jet per flight hour.

And the IAM has over 500,000 members and his salary is around $200,000 a year plus expenses, please show us a CEO who has over 500,000 employees and makes only $200k.

Doug Parker has 30,000 employees and rakes in millions.

 

[700UW]

In 2011 they spent $96,000 on maintenance with Lear for the jet.

And $83,000 with Jet Aviation in Teterboro for travel.

 

[Bob Owens]

And the IAM has over 500,000 members and his salary is around $200,000 a year plus expenses, please show us a CEO who has over 500,000 employees and makes only $200k.

Thats just it,he is supposed to be their employee, he is not their employer, they pay him, not the other way around. How many people pay their employees several times what they earn? That rationale is pathetic, what is the IAMs revenue compared to USAIRs? Yes Parker is overpaid but for a Union to try and justify overpaid officials by saying that they should get paid more because they have more members that pay $700 a year in dues to what a CEO skims from employees who generate humdreds of thousands of dollars each for the company, is an arguement that only the most feeble minded would buy into.

$200k and a Lear jet when the best he can do for his members is $70k(while non -union mechanics earn up to $20k more than that) is excessive.

On this occasion I agree with EO. A private Jet is an excessively expensive luxury, just write off the arguement and move on. You are just digging yourself in deeper and deeper.

If you want to defend the IAM fine, but these arguements that you are putting forward do not help the labor movement, they only validate the arguements put forward by those who hate labor and Unionism.

Look at what you are saying as far as members and the pay of Union officials. If a Union is able to double their membership by convincing their members to cut their pay in half and provide an employer labor at half the rate you are saying that he should see his pay go up, because he has more members. Thats not why people join unions, they join unions in the hope that by being in a union they would gain leverage and be able to secure compensation that is better than what they could negotiate as an individual, well if non-union workers, who in theory have less leverage in negotiations are earning more than union then where is the advantage for the member in being in a Union?

 

[737823]

Yes, seriously. That wasn't directed at you specifically. It wasn't a typo, either.

Then please clarify what you mean because as it is I'm lost. So someone legitamatelly criticizes the IAM for having a Learjet for use senior officials (whether justified or not) and you label them as anti-worker? I think that is extreme, people can disagree about the effectiveness of a particular union, the importance of union collectively and the labor movement but it's outrageous to label them as anti-worker, particularly if its comes for criticizing compensation practices and perks enjoyed by senior officials. So based on your responses, it DOES seem you feel criticizing perks given to IAM officials and being anti-worker are on the same. The IAM is an organization that exits to serve the members they represent. Assuming the members know about these perks (some may but I can't imagine Buffy et al go out of their way make this fact known) and the memberships pays for it fine. But it's not right when an organization like the IAM is imposed on workers in an industry like the airlines where RTW is not applicable and they are forced to join the IAM and pay for this non-sense.

So's mine. Maybe the difference between our respective sphere's is that most in mine aren't obsessed with "trading up?"

Dunno must be in different markets with different properties and involved at different levels. I've had experience working on the commercial side for a REIT and know from experience as a home owner that agency conflicts do exist but feel free to pretend they don't.

Josh

 

[737823]

The jet is based near Upper Marlboro, MD, please show us how it would be cost effective to have it fly all over the US empty to pick up reps who have space positive or can buy a plane ticket cheaper than it is to operate the jet per flight hour.

And the IAM has over 500,000 members and his salary is around $200,000 a year plus expenses, please show us a CEO who has over 500,000 employees and makes only $200k.

Doug Parker has 30,000 employees and rakes in millions.

In 2011 they spent $96,000 on maintenance with Lear for the jet.

And $83,000 with Jet Aviation in Teterboro for travel.

Josh

 

[737823]

Thats just it,he is supposed to be their employee, he is not their employer, they pay him, not the other way around. How many people pay their employees several times what they earn? That rationale is pathetic, what is the IAMs revenue compared to USAIRs? Yes Parker is overpaid but for a Union to try and justify overpaid officials by saying that they should get paid more because they have more members that pay $700 a year in dues to what a CEO skims from employees who generate humdreds of thousands of dollars each for the company, is an arguement that only the most feeble minded would buy into.

$200k and a Lear jet when the best he can do for his members is $70k(while non -union mechanics earn up to $20k more than that) is excessive.

On this occasion I agree with EO. A private Jet is an excessively expensive luxury, just write off the arguement and move on. You are just digging yourself in deeper and deeper.

If you want to defend the IAM fine, but these arguements that you are putting forward do not help the labor movement, they only validate the arguements put forward by those who hate labor and Unionism.

Look at what you are saying as far as members and the pay of Union officials. If a Union is able to double their membership by convincing their members to cut their pay in half and provide an employer labor at half the rate you are saying that he should see his pay go up, because he has more members. Thats not why people join unions, they join unions in the hope that by being in a union they would gain leverage and be able to secure compensation that is better than what they could negotiate as an individual, well if non-union workers, who in theory have less leverage in negotiations are earning more than union then where is the advantage for the member in being in a Union?

Sounds like a business unionist going around justifying compensation and perks for IAM officials based on the number of members the IAM represents.

Josh

 

[Bob Owens]

Sounds like a business unionist going around justifying compensation and perks for IAM officials based on the number of members the IAM represents.

Josh

He is wrong on this issue, but not for your reasons. You hate Unions and working people and are simply an opportunist exploiting a weak issue and trying to incite a battle between people you don't like.

Some people think that they have to defend any action by their leaders, I don't, leaders should conduct themselves in a way that does not need defending. I'm loyal to the cause not any person. I don't believe in defending people who flat out wrong, even if they are supposed to be on our side.

 

[Kev3188]

Then please clarify what you mean because as it is I'm lost.

Pretend we were sitting together, and I was recounting past experiences.

 

[john john]

I also wouldn't count on everything in that list being what is ultimately implemented.

Your entire post just supports the fact that agent’s jobs have and are going to be outsourced at managements will without negotiating if a union is not voted in. Everybody has a seat at the table in the merger talks except for the American Airlines agents. Your management AA mentality is all the reason why AA agents need a union