All of us(from time to time) have sought answers to questions, only to realize that the answer was "right under our nose's", all the time.
NOW to my question to you all.
Is it possible, that people in "REAL" power WANT USA domestic travel TO BE Low CosT, AND, channel the very few legacy's to(almost exclusive) International service ??
"Is it POSSIBLE" ????????
NH/BB's
Back in the Spring of 2001 I attended an IRRA(Industrial Relations Researce Association) Conference in Washington DC. The theme of the conference was airline labor relations. There were many speakers from industry, government, acadamia and labor. The speakers from industry centered around a theme of the "unrealistic expectations" of airline workers. Sue Oliver from AA complained about how they would come to agreements with union leadership(who typically did not have to live under the terms they were agreeing to) only to see the members reject the terms and in some cases replacing the unions that negotiated those terms(IAM @NWA). She went on and on about how the expectations of airline workers, that they could earn a fair wage in exchange for the huge sacrifices that working in the airline industry demanded, were "unrealistic". Her act, in an obviously choreographed manner was followed up by a Bush cabinet member who went on to say how the governments plans were to turn the air transportation industry into basically a private mass transit industry. He repeatedly stated that the industry must provide cheap transportation that provided its owners with profits and that airline workers high wages were an obstruction to those goals and that the government would work to overcome that obstruction by helping to "adjust" wages lower.
I have no doubts that our demise was not accidental or the result of 9-11. Rather 9-11 presented those in power the opportunity to do what they wanted to do in a much more expediant manner.
Who is to balme for this fiasco, this totrally one sided victory for management? Our union leaders are the ones to blame.
It comes as no suprise to any one with half a brain that the industry would want to deprive us of a fair wage, nor should it come as a suprise that the Bush administration would also support those objectives, however we have unions to give us a voice, but, perhaps to nobodys suprise, they failed to do that. Instead they simply rolled over and allowed the employers to rape their members with no resistance whatsoever. Thousands of jobs were eliminated and pay was slashed yet service went on without missing a beat. Management and the enemies of labor couldnt have hoped for a better outcome. They got EVERYTHING they wanted and it cost them nothing. If one wants to find out why this happened, why labor did nothing, all they have to do is go to the DOL website and check the LM-2s of our unions. From there we can see that as most workers lost 25% or more of their compensation, or their job, union leaders generally didnt see any cut in compensation, in fact some saw increases!! Jim Little saw an 8% increase in 2003, the year he signed in AA workers 25% decrease without membership ratification. In fact its obvious that our union leaders were not on the losing side with their members but on the winning side of management. Instead of threatening to resist, unions gave up jobs AND pay and they accepted funding from the companies to thwart any grassroots attempts at resistance.Union leaders picked up the anti-unionist arguement of better a crappy job than no job, resistance is futile, we have no power etc. Basically airline unions became an extension of management that was funded through corporate funds and compulsory dues, a near exact re-emergence of the "company Union". In fact the TWU is now run by a former member of AA management.
The treachery of the TWU continues unabated. In their efforts to swing more support towards their program of increased concessions on top of our continued paycuts through their PLI program they have been sending elected local officers to brainwashing sessions conducted with Boeing and their union. The message they are preaching is that Boeing and their employees were in the same place as AA and their employees are today and that through cooperative efforts they turned Boeing around and all prospered as a result.
The problem with these sessions is that they are built on misrepresentaions and lies. And, like anything built on such a foundation the message collapses when scrutinized and exposed to the factual light of day.
The people running these sessions claimed that Boeing saved jobs and didnt lay anyone off, that was a lie, thousands of jobs were eliminated and many hit the streets.
They also claimed that the workers gave big concessions prior to entering the cooperative "partnership". That was a lie, they were on a pay freeze that had a Cola built in. As it turns out they had a true "pay freeze", it actually froze their buying power, not their pay, the increases that recieved while working under a pay freeze exceeded most TWU increases. For instance during the "pay Freeze" they recieved at least 3% a year increase through the Cola but the Jim Littles "snapback" only gives us 1.5% a year, in other words less than half the COLA.
What they called a pay freeze the TWU markets as "Industry Leading raises". For instance the TWU called the 6% adjustmest that were negotiated over a six year period in 1995 increases when in fact we saw a 12% paycut in real terms. Their 1.5% snapback in the current imposed agreement is less than half the 30year average inflation rate.
So on top of the 25% cut we gave in 2003 we are taking an additional paycut every year that our pay adjustments lag inflation. So our total cut in real pay grows with each year, by the time we get to vote on a new contract it will sit at around anywhere from 30 to 40%. This did not happen to the workers at Boeing.
When this and other facts were brought forth the Boeing reprsentatives admitted "Well in order for this to work the company has to do right by you first". Imagine that, even company representaives have more insight into the AA workers plight and psyche that the TWU.
What AA and the TWU leave out is that Boeing did not seek to humilate and decimate the expectations of their workers. Boeing sought cooperation. They did not rob them of all their disposable income, they did not take away their vacation time, sick time, holiday pay, shift pay, health benifits, pensions and even the cloths off their backs just to show their workers who is the boss. Thy did right by their employees and expected the same in return, together it worked.
AA on the other hand screwed over its workers yet they want the same level of committment that the workers of Boeing gave to their employer. An employer that has been fair to them.
Why shouldnt the workers of AA do the same to AA as AA did to them?
AA is banking on the fact that instead of dumping money into the workforce they can get off cheaper by dumping a comparatively smaller amount of money into the unions, in other words bribing the unions into selling their programs.
