Delta Labor Relations thread.

[Kev3188]

 
There's nothing in that text 700 posted that reinforces the union position.

Please post the full contract language covering these plans (or a valid source link).

Right now, all anyone has to go by is a flyer created by a special interest group.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

And here is the language TP forgot to post:
 
 

 
Thanks 700 for providing the contract language.
 
Still weak, IMHO. 
 
I say that becasue as I read the language you're at the mercy of the company.  Sure, there will be discussions and consultations with the union, but overall there is nothing there for the union to prevent the company from implementing any changes to the plan(s) it sees fit.
 
I'm still not convinced that this 'something' in the CBA is better than 'nothing' that exists at DL.

 

[700UW]

Frugal under the RLA, neither side can change a CBA, unless both sides agree to it.
 
And its all about intent, that is why during negotiations you take detailed notes, thats who we won the Airbus Arbitration at PMUS.

 

[southwind]

CRAP is CRAP, even when it's in writing!

 

[Kev3188]

Great. Now just post the full, actual language from the CBA in question so we can all judge for ourselves how it stacks up.

 

[700UW]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/union-busting-persuader-rule_us_56f1bdcbe4b0c3ef52172770
 


It’s About To Get Harder For Companies To Hide Union-Busting

Under a new Labor Department rule, companies will have to disclose more of their dealings with union-avoidance consultants.

 

[1AA]

Its About To Get Harder For Companies To Hide Union-Busting

Under a new Labor Department rule, companies will have to disclose more of their dealings with union-avoidance consultants.

 

[1AA]

Its About To Get Harder For Companies To Hide Union-Busting
Under a new Labor Department rule, companies will have to disclose more of their dealings with union-avoidance consultants.

Too bad the NMB is immune to this. They can decide anything they want based on influential groups and organizations. Our current rubber stamping the Association without a vote. A vote would have had a good chance on removing the TWU and IAM from the property. The NMB busted a chance for us at AA to rid ourselves from the greedy industrial unions. The NMB used their own decision to bust AMFA from possibly representing the M&E group at AA. Did you ever stop for once and think that the Delta folks are perfectly happy without union representation? If they wanted a union they would have had one by now. They probably see unions as a disease infested culture full of hate and discontent. The last thing a grown up adult needs is for a union to tell them what's best for them and how to vote for a contract.

 

[Kev3188]

I don't think the NMB will be immune; It's my understanding that this will cover companies under the RLA and NLRB both.

 

[swamt]

Glad to hear this news. It will be interesting to know just how much companies are spending to try and keep the unions from coming in. And I would think Delta would be one of the biggest at doing so.

 

[Kev3188]

I can't imagine they're not...

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/union-busting-persuader-rule_us_56f1bdcbe4b0c3ef52172770
 
It’s About To Get Harder For Companies To Hide Union-Busting Under a new Labor Department rule, companies will have to disclose more of their dealings with union-avoidance consultants.
 

 

Glad to hear this news. It will be interesting to know just how much companies are spending to try and keep the unions from coming in. And I would think Delta would be one of the biggest at doing so.

 
Im all for transparency, but I don't know too much about the current rules and the new/revised rules to do much celebrating because I kind of see a loop hole. 
 
If I hire a consultant on how to bust a union and pay X amount of $ for a presentation or proposal or plan, that gets reported.  No problem.  But I can then just suggest to that consultant, why don't you come onboard as an employee and implement what you have in your presentation?  Then, since that consultant becomes an employee, the money being paid to bust unions isn't reported anymore.
 
Did I get that right or am I missing something?
 
It's kind of interesting that these revisions were sadly 5 years in the making and came out just before elections ... ... ...

 

[Kev3188]

You might be right, but the sudden uptick in lawyers leaving their firms to go work for a regular company would certainly raise a flag or two...

 

[swamt]

 
 
Im all for transparency, but I don't know too much about the current rules and the new/revised rules to do much celebrating because I kind of see a loop hole. 
 
If I hire a consultant on how to bust a union and pay X amount of $ for a presentation or proposal or plan, that gets reported.  No problem.  But I can then just suggest to that consultant, why don't you come onboard as an employee and implement what you have in your presentation?  Then, since that consultant becomes an employee, the money being paid to bust unions isn't reported anymore.
 
Did I get that right or am I missing something?
 
It's kind of interesting that these revisions were sadly 5 years in the making and came out just before elections ... ... ...

You have a very good point.  I am not sure about all the language as well, but I am very positive the co's will find any kind of loop hole and use it.  

 

[Kev3188]

Here's an interesting piece written by a union avoidance firm that outlines some of the points we've been talking about:

http://www.laborlawyers.com/mobile/shownews.aspx?Show=27790&Type=1122