Grassroots Efforts at DL for ACS and FAs, no personal attacks.

[WeAAsles]

 

I hear ya, but I'm curious where all this talk of allegedly "eliminating" the RR program at DL is coming from..

Is someone claiming that DL is going to do that? I haven't read anything like that anywhere.

 

[700UW]

And FAs will set their own dues with their bylaws as this was changed in the last Grand Lodge Convention as FAs get paid different than people who put in a 40 hour work week.

 

[700UW]

 

[Kev3188]

 

Is someone claiming that DL is going to do that? I haven't read anything like that anywhere.

It has been alleged on this site that the IAM will somehow "eliminate" the RR program at DL.

 

[WorldTraveler]

the IAM will, wait, wait, negotiate what the members want.

or are you saying that the IAM and people here are luring voters by attacking the RR program but then once elected, the IAM will protect the interests of senior employees at the expense of RRs who will be necessary if the IAM is going to win?

the IAM would NEVER engage in a bait and switch campaign would they?

and if they don't, there is no way that you can justify union membership for RRs if you can't deliver something of significance to them.

what ARE you proposing that the IAM can give the RRs that won't make the program too costly that DL eliminates the program and starts closing stations?

 

[700UW]

FAs dont have RR.

Try again.

 

[700UW]

http://www.goiam.org/index.php/imail/latest/13912-delta-flight-attendant-addresses-afl-cios-2015-mlk-civil-and-human-rights-conference

 

[700UW]

A very scary position.
 
I have several reasons for wanting the protections of a legally binding union contract which specifically outlines my compensation, work-rules, and minimum benefits in addition to providing protections and just-cause for discipline. All of these appeal to me as great reasons to vote yes for an IAM contract. But theres something else, and its very scary, and as a major IAM union and flight attendant activist I think everyone should know more about it.
 
As the only major flight attendant work force in America without collective bargaining rights, our management reserves full and final authority to manage us however they deem necessary. In a capitalist economy such as the United States, corporations often favor shareholders and management before employees. As employees we represent operating costs on the seat mile to our employer; costs they intend to continuously manage to their favor. This is a pertinent reason why a union is necessary; Its a given right to a voice in your relationship with your corporation employer. If you elect to not have a contract outlining and otherwise stating conditions and terms of your employment you essentially forfeit your legal right to a voice.
 
So what could happen, how bad could it really be in the future if our group doesn't have a voice and a legal contract outlining the specifics I mentioned above?
 
Look no further then our own colleagues working In the terminal at the check-in coutners and gate, and outside on the ramp.
 
Our company has transitioned THOUSANDS of jobs to something called "Ready Reserve" This program allows the company to hire employees and keep them separate from regular full-time and part-time employees. So whats the motivation for ready reserve?
 
Cost savings. The company has said this program is a win win, but will not comment on the amount of money it has saved them overall.
 
Regular full-time and part-time non ready reserve airport employees have benefits, company sponsored retirement programs, OJI and sick leave, vacation, and accrue seniority. Essentially the Ready Reserve program, void of all the benefits of regular full-time and part-time employees, is cheaper or on par with contracting out workers to third party ground handling.
 
Without a legally binding contract that states the terms and conditions of our employment theres zero protection from our employer implementing a ready reserve style system within Inflight Service. Regardless of their rationale for such a move flight attendants without a union will have ZERO say or recourse and no protections for our jobs.
 
Whats even worse, as the only group of major U.S. carrier flight attendants that are non-unionzed, if our company elected such a program within Inflight like Ready Reserve, it would place huge cost pressure on American, United, Southwest, and Alaska, and bring the entire flight attendant profession down even more as those carriers management aimed to match our labor costs. We've already seen it with United. They've been forced to lay off thousands of ground workers while the IAM tries to preserve the integrity of these middle class jobs.
 
We can not take this type of risk in our future, we absolutely must have a legal agreement that protects our benefits, seniority, health, compensation, and scope.
 
Please do not wait to find out what corporate america and the board of directors has in store for us- vote yes for the IAM so we have a legal seat at the table and a say in the matters at hand.

 
 

 

[WorldTraveler]

yes, they have power to pay you ABOVE average compensation which is what they have done for years... and they have the power to tell you that they will only pay you AVERAGE compensation with a union including stopping the profit sharing that DL employees have overwhelmingly said they enjoy (who wouldn't like an extra 16% of their salary).

DL employees can't take the risk and a fairly high one that the unions will be unable to deliver what they should have and DL employees will end up with a union they can't get rid of and union underperformance.

 

[700UW]

And they have the power to reduce the PS by 33%, oh wait, they did that already.
 
They have the power to have three pay scales and offer some employees 3% raise while others get 4%.
 
With a CBA, they have to follow it and cant do what ever and when ever they want.
 
Why did the pilots get a 20% raise since June of 2012 and ACS and FAs only got either 6% or 8%?

 

[Kev3188]

DL's entire base rate strucuture is built around "industry average."

 

[Kev3188]

BTW, I'm still waiting for any evidence of "eliminating" the RR program as part of either representation campaign.

Anyone?

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL's entire base rate strucuture is built around "industry average."

and if you take away the profit sharing, that is what DL compensation becomes.

it isn't hard to see that profit sharing IS what makes the difference between just average and above average compensation.

given that DL can end that profit sharing at any time,  or that is what you have been harping on, then DL employees could EASILY become just average in their level of compensation
 

BTW, I'm still waiting for any evidence of "eliminating" the RR program as part of either representation campaign.

Anyone?

I'm waiting for you to tell me that RR doesn't really matter any more - it has been a major part of your campaign for years.

and if it isn't an issue, then how are you going to get the votes of the RR employees if you can't offer them anything without risking the program's viability to the company?

if you don't care about the RR employees any more and can't deliver something to them without risking the program's viability, then you are engaging in the same tired union tactics of vote pandering only to fail to deliver to the constituency.

Buyer beware.

 

[Kev3188]

Still haven't seen/heard anything discussing "eliminating" the RR program as part of representation.

Anyone?

 

[topDawg]

for you to believe that AA employees ALL of them have work rule and medical benefits that are worth more than 8% more than what DL employees get in scale pay and profit sharing is simply false.

When over 50% of a work group doesn't have any benefits like those at Delta I can completely believe that AA, Below wing(or ACS in general) make more than Delta. When only 35-40% of your employees get anymore than pay and flight benefits your cost will be lower.  

Think about all the people who, alone, aren't getting the 7% match in 401K. Add in 4-5 weeks of vacation week of PPT and health care....... If i had to bet i'd put money on UA/AA/US and WN all making more in total compensation then the Delta group. 

further, employees DO NOT equally use health care benefits - use is skewed towards more senior workers and many get health care benefits from other sources, including their spouse's employer. Kev has noted on here that he gets his health care benefits that way.

*sigh* why don't you just give us a run down on Delta's health care cost? 
 

 

thus, if DL cut profit sharing in order to be "on par" with AA or even UA but got better health care, Kev and other DL employees would see a REAL cut in total compensation.

Profit sharing is for sale....... 
 

ALL DL employees get 16% of their pay in profit sharing.

And look at all the employees Delta would have if they used NWs scope.  

and once again, all DL has to do is drop the amount of PAY and PROFIT SHARING INCREASES and DL employees will very quickly become just INDUSTRY AVERAGE in terms of compensation.

All you have to do is understand how a union works, sections 6 works and the world works and you'll quit saying this amazingly stupid thing. 
Delta can not, NOT NOT NOT at this point drop the FAs profit sharing. The only way they could be done is if the FAs agreed to it in negotiations. 
 

that is exactly what WN - the most unionized airline - is doing. they are dragging their feet in settling contracts while AA and DL are racing to increase pay with the result that it won't take long before WN employees' above average pay is now just average.

Lol just avg? I think they make damn near 10 an hour more than me......plus profit sharing.  
 

no, what is hilarious is that some here can't see that DL RETAINED those stations because it made business sense to do so and when you remove the company's ability to use RR's - the largest reason why DL has been able to maintain those cities - DL's motivation to keep them open is gone and those cities are just as vulnerable as small and medium sized cities are for AA and UA.

So it makes sense to keep a station like GRB that doesn't have a single mainline flight and has a grand total of 9 flights......
but a station like SAN which has 2 times the mainline flights alone GRB does total flights can't support mainline? 
 
Boy you just buy whatever Delta sells you don't you? 
 
Delta has the stations they have because they know that as soon as they start cutting stations in-mass they will have a union so fast it will make their heads spin. It will also make EVERYONE see that the "no layoffs" deal is complete bull crap and that they could be coming for other work groups next. Its pretty simple. Its a bribe....thats all it is. 
 

and while you brag about what the IAM did at NW in BK, plez give me a list of the cities that NW DID succeed in outsourcing during BK and then compare it to the list of cities that DL closed to its own people in BK.

Nope. Nope. Nope. Nope. Nope. 
You don't get to pull this horse **** again. Its simple, Delta was down to 14 station after BK. Doesn't matter if they cut them in BK or 7.5
 
thats not true, it makes it worse. Because of ass hole pulled a random number from his butt that meant Delta had to basically eliminate the ramp. So all you ACS people keep that in mind, all it takes is some bean counter wanted to get CASM down to some random number and you are gone.....just like that. 
They can't do that to you with a CBA.............
 

hey, I'm just an outsider so I won't be affected but if you think for one minute that imposing union work rules including eliminating the RR program and expecting DL to continue to pay as much as it has including profit sharing, then you need to be drug tested.

This is how we all know you are an outsider. 
 
The only person who has said anything about dumping RR is you. That is because you are posting to try to scare people, not tell them anything remotely close to the truth. (which seems stupid to me. Only person who is around here that is on the ramp for Delta, and see can see right past all the bull crap.....so i guess you just do it for you......?)