"Machinists, F/A's Likely Face Uphill Fight At Delta"

[LukeAisleWalker]

Bababooy---

I saved you work. You owe me!!! LOL 🙂

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKN2111584...lBrandChannel=0

 

[BABABOOY]

Bababooy---

I saved you work. You owe me!!! LOL 🙂

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKN2111584...lBrandChannel=0

Thanks! ;-)

 

[WoRkInG]

I don't see the uphill battle. around 40% voted yes to a union last go around, now you have a whole group coming in union. All they need is 10% plus 1. I really wonder why they are bringing back retirees threw DGS on salaried and hourly jobs. I hear they are going after salaried employees, but if you look at ebid, they are hiring out the @$$ for merit positions. Also, which most know that, if the f/a vote in a union half of Delta employees will be under a CBA.

 

[RGM7]

yes 10% plus 1 would get it in...but you would like to have more than that for a union to be strong. you would have a hard time at the bargaining table with it just squeaking in.

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

I don't see the uphill battle. around 40% voted yes to a union last go around, now you have a whole group coming in union. All they need is 10% plus 1. I really wonder why they are bringing back retirees threw DGS on salaried and hourly jobs. I hear they are going after salaried employees, but if you look at ebid, they are hiring out the @$$ for merit positions. Also, which most know that, if the f/a vote in a union half of Delta employees will be under a CBA.

Working...You're not really looking at the numbers in their totality.
Here's the way it works:
50%+1 of the COMBINED (DL and NW) FA group must vote "YES".
NW has approximately 7,000 FAs
DL has approximately 13,000 FAs
Total: 20,000 FAs
This means that approx. 10,000 +1 of the COMBINED group must vote. Even if the 5,000 DL FAS that voted last year vote YES again, another 10% of the combined group (approx 2,000 FAs) only brings the total up to 7,000---3,001 too few to win the election.
The real way you have to look at this is, and I am a realist, about 85% (just under 6,000 FAs) of NW FAs MUST VOTE YES in order for AFA to win. I say this because I feel, for a variety of reasons that I don't have time to go into, you will not see that 40% (5,300 in '08) of DL FAs vote this time around. I anticipate somewhat less due to again, reasons I don't have time to explain.
In MY OPINION, and all of this is JUST MY OPINION, if 1,000 or more Pre-merger NW FAs choose not to vote, that's the end of the road for AFA at Delta....at least for a number of years.

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

Working...You're not really looking at the numbers in their totality.
Here's the way it works:
50%+1 of the COMBINED (DL and NW) FA group must vote "YES".
NW has approximately 7,000 FAs
DL has approximately 13,000 FAs
Total: 20,000 FAs
This means that approx. 10,000 +1 of the COMBINED group must vote. Even if the 5,000 DL FAS that voted last year vote YES again, another 10% of the combined group (approx 2,000 FAs) only brings the total up to 7,000---3,001 too few to win the election.
The real way you have to look at this is, and I am a realist, about 85% (just under 6,000 FAs) of NW FAs MUST VOTE YES in order for AFA to win. I say this because I feel, for a variety of reasons that I don't have time to go into, you will not see that 40% (5,300 in '08) of DL FAs vote this time around. I anticipate somewhat less due to again, reasons I don't have time to explain.
In MY OPINION, and all of this is JUST MY OPINION, if 1,000 or more Pre-merger NW FAs choose not to vote, that's the end of the road for AFA at Delta....at least for a number of years.

UPDATE: As heard on The Union Edge Talk Radio program yesterday, Pat Friend (AFA Pres.) said that once the NMB makes their Single Carrier Determination (she expects this around Labor Day), AFA will begin talks with them about allowing a more democratic balloting process to be used this time at Delta (Yes/No ballot). If the NMB (now Democratically-controlled vs. the past 2 elections when it was Republican-controlled) approves this, then it is easy to surmise (due to plain ol' voter apathy like in other elections) that AFA would be voted in as the collective bargaining unit of the combined Delta/Northwest FA group.

 

[aislehopper]

AFA will begin talks with them about allowing a more democratic balloting process to be used this time at Delta (Yes/No ballot). If the NMB (now Democratically-controlled vs. the past 2 elections when it was Republican-controlled) approves this, then it is easy to surmise (due to plain ol' voter apathy like in other elections) that AFA would be voted in as the collective bargaining unit of the combined Delta/Northwest FA group.

What Pat Friend wants is a Laker Ballot. Typically, Laker ballots are used as a remedy only after a company has been found to have interfered in an election. If she is successful in getting a Laker ballot on a first vote, it will be a change from long standing NMB policy.

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

What Pat Friend wants is a Laker Ballot. Typically, Laker ballots are used as a remedy only after a company has been found to have interfered in an election. If she is successful in getting a Laker ballot on a first vote, it will be a change from long standing NMB policy.

You are indeed correct, aislehopper. (Are you also "Cokepopper" on airliners.net? just curious 'cause the names are so similar.)
I don't, however, think there is anything in the RLA prohibiting the NMB from permitting a Laker-type ballot in the initial election.
The L.A.W. (Lukeaislewalker) Crystal Ball 🙂 goes out on a limb and predicts:
--No Laker-style ballot in the initial election but a re-vote w/ a Laker Ballot if the NMB finds even the slightest charges of interference to be true AND even more so if these charges are combined with a really close election and I believe it will be. Remember, this is a pre-dominantely Democratic NMB (2Dems, 1Rep) which is very different from the '02 and '08 elections. Mr. Hoglander (D) is, to my knowledge, still on the Board and wrote a dissenting opinion when the charges of interference in the 02 election were not considered to meet "the standard" to trigger a second election. Buoyed by a majority, his opinions this time will not be taken lightly.

 

[Kev3188]

Mr. Hoglander (D) is, to my knowledge, still on the Board

Correct...

 

[WorldTraveler]

Whether the NMB is controlled by Democrats or Republicans doesn't change that the fact that there are laws and precedents supporting all of these decisions... it is not the right of any administration to simply rewrite laws... that is the role of Congress. It is also worth nothing that some of the current Administration's top priorities are being scuttled in Congress and they are also rolling back some of the previous Administration's attempts to overturn precedent in the name of reforming the way business runs (see the NYC slot reduction case). Bottom line is that anyone who thinks that the Obama Administration or its agencies will move and succed to overturn labor precedent and law may very well be surprised.

The math presented is really quite realistic. Even with the threat of a potential takeover of DL in bankruptcy, unions made no headway at DL. The fact that only 40% of DL FAs voted for a union during DL's darkest hours and when its future was most bleak (and takeovers most likely) speaks volumes about how DL employees value unions - or not.

The greatest opportunity for unionization actually probably come on the ramp.

Still, this prediction would be more meaningful if it came from a university in a NW controlled city instead of DL's HDQ city.

 

[Kev3188]

Whether the NMB is controlled by Democrats or Republicans doesn't change that the fact that there are laws and precedents supporting all of these decisions... it is not the right of any administration to simply rewrite laws... that is the role of Congress.

Which is good, since Anderson tried to get the NMB to do just that for this (these) current drives.

Still, this prediction would be more meaningful if it came from a university in a NW controlled city instead of DL's HDQ city.

Good point. Still, it hasn't stopped DL from plastering this article all over. It's all about the manufacture of opinion, you know...

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

Whether the NMB is controlled by Democrats or Republicans doesn't change that the fact that there are laws and precedents supporting all of these decisions... it is not the right of any administration to simply rewrite laws... that is the role of Congress.

I never said a word about rewriting law. I talked about interpretation of POLICY and opinions/findings of previous NMBs of charges of interference by Delta management in the previous elections.

It is also worth nothing that some of the current Administration's top priorities are being scuttled in Congress and they are also rolling back some of the previous Administration's attempts to overturn precedent in the name of reforming the way business runs (see the NYC slot reduction case). Bottom line is that anyone who thinks that the Obama Administration or its agencies will move and succed to overturn labor precedent and law may very well be surprised.

POLICY Precedent? Maybe. Laws? Again, no one is talking overturning laws as you are indeed correct, Congress is in charge there.

The math presented is really quite realistic.

Thanks, I think so.

Even with the threat of a potential takeover of DL in bankruptcy, unions made no headway at DL. The fact that only 40% of DL FAs voted for a union during DL's darkest hours and when its future was most bleak (and takeovers most likely) speaks volumes about how DL employees value unions - or not.

Sorry, your timeline is off. 2005 (beginning of huge paycuts and BK filing) thru 2007 were the darkest hours. When the last AFA election took place (May, 2008) we were already 1 year out of BK and a small percentage of pay/benefits had already been added back.

Still, this prediction would be more meaningful if it came from a university in a NW controlled city instead of DL's HDQ city.

Absolutely agree with you here.

 

[Dignity]

if 1,000 or more Pre-merger NW FAs choose not to vote

the last TA, TA 3 the current contract for PMNW at this time..that is about the number of those who did not even vote!

(1000)

even though we had an 182 million dollar equity claim, that 1000 did not even vote yes or no, they just did not participate..at all! and were willing to forfeit their share of the claim. (that would have been about 15 million dollars!)

(they still received their claim because the TA was ratified if they were hired by a certain date, but still!)

I know Flight Attendants at my seniority who are not voting at all or No!

so it is anyone guess how this is going to turn out. Usually our group seem complacent during certain local elections with low voter turn out for elections such as, LEC.. but generally the group participates during the two Union elections we had with a greater turnout, so it will be interesting to see when its all finalized.

I am thinking a good 70 percent, but I dont know about 85 percent, but that's just a hunch.

 

[Kev3188]

I am thinking a good 70 percent, but I dont know about 85 percent, but that's just a hunch.

FWIW, I'd say 85-90% "yes" on the NW ramp, but like you, that's just a hunch.

 

[Dignity]

FWIW, I'd say 85-90% "yes" on the NW ramp, but like you, that's just a hunch.

some of the junior people want the ADays..as soon as... yesterday! a lot of the seniors took the buyouts and then they hired new people so who knows this time?!