IAM Information Meetings (Your Take?)

AOG-N-IT

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
1,132
1
www.usaviation.com
This morining, I attended the 0630 meeting being held in the CLT Hangar breakroom. Thankfully , this meeting did not turn into a Screaming Contest , like the two previous meetings the day before. To be perfectly honest , I did not learn anything of value from our paid representation. I have become convienced that the IAM is not..or did not listen!..or failing to make it''s memberships views clear to the company. The IAM stated a number of points they brought up , as being Deal Breakers. Somehow the so called Deal Breakers became part of the issues anyway. The only exception being R&D (Pushbacks). I do not see for a moment where the IAM stuck to thier so-called guns for a moment. The majority in attendance..seemed to be of an alike mindset. Where''s the Leadership??? in this union?? Why are we voting again?? When No , meant No the first time? Here again, I feel the issues are too often involving the IAM itself...it''s every bit as much of a problem..as the concessions being asked for are, to the ripple (Shockwave) affect , this will have to the industry. My first and foremost concern is the surviveability of USAirways. My biggest fear...is failure to achieve the needed financial backing to insure this hopeful future. I hope many will begin to see..that your frustration is with failed Union Leadership at this point. The past failures of U management are beyond anyone''s control. We either attempt to repair things from our current location?..or we need to be prepared for drastic changes beyond the employment realm of USAirways. Basically , It''s up to you , to pick your poison. I would rather gamble with the Devil I know...as opposed to a complete career change.
 
OP
A

AOG-N-IT

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
1,132
1
www.usaviation.com
I share your frustrations....but I have opted for taking this in what I hope to be Progressive Steps (1) Short Term setbacks are far more acceptable to Total Long Term Losses. I feel certain that regardless of the possible repeat No Vote...we will be force fed the companies desires anyway. This will only leave us in a Free Will status..with NO power regarding our futures at all. (2) I see the need to Stabalize USAirways as the primary issue. With that aspect becoming more secure...other changes in representaion become possible. There are no Quick Fixes to this ordeal. There are however certain End All scenarios pending. I would much rather contribute to a possible solution...than a certain collapse of yet another airline. U's failure to continue will only make us as much a part of the problem...as the greed and hapless direction that this company has been lead by for years. I say that we need to give Dave his shot...and this is a point where we back up no farther. We either make it or break it on the current direction..or fold the tents up. I for one , am willing to give them a chance. I will not however be willing to repeat this process , as Eastern did. This is a one-shot deal from many angles. I hope the one shot connects.
 

wings396

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
3,672
1,122
Well the good old IAM sold Fleet Service down the river..and got paid back 1.2 million from the bankrupt company to do it. Not to mention they will be able to keep us as dues paying members when we work for peanuts at MDA...oh yea they will take care of our pension too.....they made out great all around...I wish they would have taken care of the membership as good as themselves.
This whole deal was poor at best. We did get to vote, but it was like a presidential election with one candidate running......he didn't win the 141M vote so he will run again.....
 

t-man

Member
Sep 4, 2002
41
0
Rumor has it that a second vote for the same contract could be illegal our local is looking in to this.
 

usjacket

Senior
Aug 30, 2002
309
52
On Monday 2nd shift meeting the shop steward stated that after the last vote (no) Dave Siegel summoned the IAM to Washington and told them that the numbers must stay the same but we could rearrange the furniture.The IAM stated that they had been talking for months and they were not interested in rearranging the furniture.This I believe was a huge mistake and a sad display of representation.If the company was willing to continue to negotiate then a effort should have been made.Even if no progress was made at least they could have tried and gave it their best effort. Not being receptive to giving up pushbacks and line utility could prove to be the biggest blunder. Wages,vacation and benefits could have been saved if the IAM had considered giving this up.Now if the vote is NO their going to take this anyway and they will still have your pay,vacation,and benefits.Before everyone slams me about willing to give up other peoples job let me say that I could well be one of those laid off due to giving up pushbacks.At least I would have a decent contract to come back to one day. If the object of these concessions is to make this company more competitive with the least amount of pain to the employee group I think these items should have been on the table.Slam away!
 

insp89

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,286
6
CLT
Visit site
usjacket, You will not get any slamming from me.. You are 100% correct...It really saddens me to say this [since I've been a IAM supporter as long as I've worked for U], I believe the fact that the IAM is totally unresponsive to the will or opinions of the rank and file mechanics at U,,could quite possibly bring down this airline. My suggestion to the IAM is to put your own self interest aside and start REPRESENTING the mechanics at U !! Before it's too late !!
 
Yes usjacket, you are completely correct.

The IAM's leadership has an attitude that we the membership are not capable of realizing the true issues. The District Bureaucrats have decided what the deal breakers should be with total disregard of what the membership wants.

The current events cry for the membership to rise up. The IAM is very obviously trying to herd it's membership into the corral of it's choosing, because it is good for them but not necessarily for us.

Whether you vote yes or no on the proposed contract revisions, it is time to do something about the IAM.
 

cavalier

Veteran
Aug 28, 2002
2,409
1
www.usaviation.com
AOG-N-IT

Thanks for your sound reasoning in a sea of confusion and frustration.

For the people leaving regardless, nothing like burning down the house when you know full well you are hurting the people left inside.


t-man wrote:

Rumor has it that a second vote for the same contract could be illegal our local is looking in to this.

This is one mans idea alone, one with radical views that the local has always shunned.
 

cavalier

Veteran
Aug 28, 2002
2,409
1
www.usaviation.com
cavalier, I would also like to know the reason why we are voting on the SAME contract for the second time...Something is not right.


YES, you are correct. Something is not right. This company is in DIRE straights, and the employees will be victims if it is voted down again! Hence the 2nd vote to prevent that from happening!
 

AP Tech

Veteran
Sep 4, 2002
1,661
246
I was told that according to the D-141 bylaws it illegal to vote on the same contract twice...any truth? But judging by the membership they will not be represented by D-141 much longer
 

tug_slug

Veteran
Sep 9, 2002
550
0
www.usaviation.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/11/2002 4:16:18 PM A&P Tech wrote:

I was told that according to the D-141 bylaws it illegal to vote on the same contract twice...any truth? But judging by the membership they will not be represented by D-141 much longer
----------------
[/blockquote]

Vote no and you wont be represented by anyone!!!
 

Latest posts