Grassroots Efforts at DL for ACS and FAs, no personal attacks.
- Thread starter 700UW
- Start date
- Status
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
you are the IAM's spokesperson and you have indeed jumped on it.
and it still doesn't matter whether the IAM focused on it specifically or not.
If a union is elected, DL has made it clear to its own FAs that any attempts to improve what actually exists will likely come at the cost of something else.
unlike what so many have pushed, getting a union DOES NOT equate to a walk in the candy store where FAs will simply build on what they already have and just keep adding to it.
DL will look at industry standard and anything that DL currently offers that is above industry average will be at risk - and that includes the size of DL's profit sharing, crew rest facilities, and more.
there is absolutely no assurance that DL FAs or any other workgroup can increase what they currently have and there is a very large risk that they will lose more of what they have than they will gain simply because DL employees ARE more highly compensated on average than their peers in the rest of the US airline industry.
and it still doesn't matter whether the IAM focused on it specifically or not.
If a union is elected, DL has made it clear to its own FAs that any attempts to improve what actually exists will likely come at the cost of something else.
unlike what so many have pushed, getting a union DOES NOT equate to a walk in the candy store where FAs will simply build on what they already have and just keep adding to it.
DL will look at industry standard and anything that DL currently offers that is above industry average will be at risk - and that includes the size of DL's profit sharing, crew rest facilities, and more.
there is absolutely no assurance that DL FAs or any other workgroup can increase what they currently have and there is a very large risk that they will lose more of what they have than they will gain simply because DL employees ARE more highly compensated on average than their peers in the rest of the US airline industry.
Kev3188
Veteran
It's not an "IAM issue." It's a DL flight attendant issue.
...and it is DL F/A's who will prioritize what issues to bring to the table.
...and it is DL F/A's who will prioritize what issues to bring to the table.
IAM Spokesperson?WorldTraveler said:
Unlike you I dont claim to speak for the IAM, nor am I employed or compensated by the IAM or anyone else.
Unlike you who on multiple occasions have spoken for DL Employees, which you are not.
World Fraudster lies again.
And you are making threats against the DL FAs, you have no idea what the relationship and negotiations will be between the IAM and DL if they FAs unionize, which they will if an election is held.
And once again you are lying, there is a status quo and what the FAs have now currently is the starting point for negotiations?
How many negotiations have you been part of for a newly organized group?
You are lying once again, every newly organized group has used their current status as a starting point in negotiations.
Kev3188
Veteran
If I'm honest, at this point I have to believe WT is (willfully) ignoring Section 6, status quo provisions, and what constitutes good & bad faith negotiating under the law.
southwind
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2008
- Messages
- 7,709
- Reaction score
- 3,928
And again, for the 127th time....are these people being forced to stay in said tube or are they able to seek employment elsewhere. If the job were so bad, you'd thing the company would have problems filling those position's. I'm sure there are plenty of people waiting on those jobs to open up!Kev3188 said:
Why is it people accept a position, knowing the terms of employment, then want to bring a 3rd party into the mix to hold the company hostage?
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
first of all, I do not work for DL or am in any position to negotiate on their behalf so I can't be ignoring anything at least with respect to what DL will or will not do.
What I am capable of doing is seeing that the two mindsets that DL people are compensated at above average rates due to their desire to keep the unions out AND ALSO that DL people can expect to continue to add simply add to their wealth if they unionized cannot both be true.
DL has paid above average compensation because they want to keep unions out. I have never denied that.
and there is no violation of section 6 or good faith negotiations to believe that DL will instantly put a value on everything it has done to invest in its employees including having lie flat off passenger cabin FA crew rest facilities on 100% of DL's int'l widebodies.
the same thing is true for DL's above average profit sharing payouts.
If any employee group thinks they will simply add to what DL employees have without a cost to what they already have, DL itself has made it clear that negotiations always involve trading off something that DL employees have to gain what they do not have or wish to see increased.
DL has made that statement over and over again not just regarding workgroups which wish to unionize but those that are alraeady unionized.
and that means that things like the crew rest facilities and profit sharing - remember DL paid out over $1 billion of which approx. $250 million is allocated to FAs based on their percentage of DL's total compensation are exactly the things that will most likely be targeted.
DL doesn't have to take anything away but merely freeze what currently exists - which has been growing profit sharing in order for DL employees to quickly start losing just by going with a union - and that doesn't even include the cost of union dues which are likely around $700/year based on other IAM FA workgroups.
just as with AA's unions foolish decision to walk away from profit sharing just as the industry enters record profits, so too do DL employees face enormous risk at losing what they have because it is above average at a time when those things will most matter.
I have NEVER heard any pro-union employee be willing to say what they are willing to cut in order to gain something more but that is exactly what will be required to improve what DL employees currently have.
and those below deck crew rest facilities on flights that are less than 12 hours do come with a large price that DL will have no problem producing when it comes time to value what DL employees have against what a union wants.
and DL doesn't have to factor in the cost of union dues into the value of the package DL currently offers. that is a cost the employees bear fully on their own
the notion that DL employees will simply tack on more and more with a union while it costing nothing is simply wrong thinking and I can absolutely assure you that employees who vote YES thinking that is the way it works will be very disappointed.
What I am capable of doing is seeing that the two mindsets that DL people are compensated at above average rates due to their desire to keep the unions out AND ALSO that DL people can expect to continue to add simply add to their wealth if they unionized cannot both be true.
DL has paid above average compensation because they want to keep unions out. I have never denied that.
and there is no violation of section 6 or good faith negotiations to believe that DL will instantly put a value on everything it has done to invest in its employees including having lie flat off passenger cabin FA crew rest facilities on 100% of DL's int'l widebodies.
the same thing is true for DL's above average profit sharing payouts.
If any employee group thinks they will simply add to what DL employees have without a cost to what they already have, DL itself has made it clear that negotiations always involve trading off something that DL employees have to gain what they do not have or wish to see increased.
DL has made that statement over and over again not just regarding workgroups which wish to unionize but those that are alraeady unionized.
and that means that things like the crew rest facilities and profit sharing - remember DL paid out over $1 billion of which approx. $250 million is allocated to FAs based on their percentage of DL's total compensation are exactly the things that will most likely be targeted.
DL doesn't have to take anything away but merely freeze what currently exists - which has been growing profit sharing in order for DL employees to quickly start losing just by going with a union - and that doesn't even include the cost of union dues which are likely around $700/year based on other IAM FA workgroups.
just as with AA's unions foolish decision to walk away from profit sharing just as the industry enters record profits, so too do DL employees face enormous risk at losing what they have because it is above average at a time when those things will most matter.
I have NEVER heard any pro-union employee be willing to say what they are willing to cut in order to gain something more but that is exactly what will be required to improve what DL employees currently have.
and those below deck crew rest facilities on flights that are less than 12 hours do come with a large price that DL will have no problem producing when it comes time to value what DL employees have against what a union wants.
and DL doesn't have to factor in the cost of union dues into the value of the package DL currently offers. that is a cost the employees bear fully on their own
the notion that DL employees will simply tack on more and more with a union while it costing nothing is simply wrong thinking and I can absolutely assure you that employees who vote YES thinking that is the way it works will be very disappointed.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
it is nice to throw the anti-worker phrase out there.
since I am also a worker and have been doing it longer than you are, I would have to be against myself - and I am not.
You yourself have repeatedly said that everything in a CBA has a price.
as much as you want to throw complaints about a purser having to use a bunk in a different position of the crew rest facility and make it sound like a big deal, the ENTIRE crew rest facility has a price and will be considered in negotiations.
no one said that DL FAs can't improve their lot in life and their working conditions.
do you realize that DL only put lie flat crew rest facilities on its 767s - the largest type in DL's int'l fleet - in the last 7 years?
do you realize that AA and UA don't have them at all on 767s, IIRC?
do you also realize that the percentage of AA's fleet that has off passenger deck crew rest facilities is pretty small?
all of that factors into the value of the CBA when negotiations are opened.
DL added those crew rest facilities at no cost to DL FAs.
if they are costed out as part of a CBA, DL FAs will quickly find out how good they actually had it and how much they could lose just because a very few people laid too tight of a claim to a specific bunk on an aircraft.
since I am also a worker and have been doing it longer than you are, I would have to be against myself - and I am not.
You yourself have repeatedly said that everything in a CBA has a price.
as much as you want to throw complaints about a purser having to use a bunk in a different position of the crew rest facility and make it sound like a big deal, the ENTIRE crew rest facility has a price and will be considered in negotiations.
no one said that DL FAs can't improve their lot in life and their working conditions.
do you realize that DL only put lie flat crew rest facilities on its 767s - the largest type in DL's int'l fleet - in the last 7 years?
do you realize that AA and UA don't have them at all on 767s, IIRC?
do you also realize that the percentage of AA's fleet that has off passenger deck crew rest facilities is pretty small?
all of that factors into the value of the CBA when negotiations are opened.
DL added those crew rest facilities at no cost to DL FAs.
if they are costed out as part of a CBA, DL FAs will quickly find out how good they actually had it and how much they could lose just because a very few people laid too tight of a claim to a specific bunk on an aircraft.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
you've stated your age on here.
I know what US labor laws are and were decades ago.
Your perception of threats and reality both need some significant fine-tuning.
southwind has identified himself as a DL employee which makes him a worker and your flippant charge of anti-worker just one more of your lies. NO one on this forum or anywhere else is anti-worker just because they don't agree to the IAM party plank.
I know what US labor laws are and were decades ago.
Your perception of threats and reality both need some significant fine-tuning.
southwind has identified himself as a DL employee which makes him a worker and your flippant charge of anti-worker just one more of your lies. NO one on this forum or anywhere else is anti-worker just because they don't agree to the IAM party plank.
Kev3188
Veteran
Sad that mindset still exists.
BTW, today is the anniversary of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire.
BTW, today is the anniversary of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire.
- Status
