mechanics may be free to strike by Sept 17th
- Thread starter sabre
- Start date
- Status
C
chipmunn
Guest
Lakeguy:
Lakeguy said: If your contract is abrogated, you have no RLA protections, no union, therefore no right to strike. You become an employee at will.
Chip comments: Lakeguy, it appears from reports from yesterday's meeting between the company and the IAM your comment is accurate. If the restructuring agreement is rejected, the company will seek immediate emergency relief and considering the judge has approved virtually every motion presented by the company, I believe it's unlikely the present contract will stay in force. Therefore, the IAM would be without any contract protection and the company would be free to do whatever they desire, maybe even draconian steps like furloughing out of seniority, hiring replacement workers, and obviously deeper cuts.
Maybe that's why Joe Tiberi, a spokesman for the mechanics, told the Washington Post the union decided to vote again after misunderstanding what could happen if they voted the tentative agreement down. Tiberi said the mechanics thought a bankruptcy judge would force US Airways to modify the proposed agreement or come up with another one. That would not happen. Instead, a judge would either leave the agreement intact or reject it totally.
The mechanics thought the judge could make some changes to the agreement and that they would take their chances with the judge, Tiberi said.
Chip
Lakeguy said: If your contract is abrogated, you have no RLA protections, no union, therefore no right to strike. You become an employee at will.
Chip comments: Lakeguy, it appears from reports from yesterday's meeting between the company and the IAM your comment is accurate. If the restructuring agreement is rejected, the company will seek immediate emergency relief and considering the judge has approved virtually every motion presented by the company, I believe it's unlikely the present contract will stay in force. Therefore, the IAM would be without any contract protection and the company would be free to do whatever they desire, maybe even draconian steps like furloughing out of seniority, hiring replacement workers, and obviously deeper cuts.
Maybe that's why Joe Tiberi, a spokesman for the mechanics, told the Washington Post the union decided to vote again after misunderstanding what could happen if they voted the tentative agreement down. Tiberi said the mechanics thought a bankruptcy judge would force US Airways to modify the proposed agreement or come up with another one. That would not happen. Instead, a judge would either leave the agreement intact or reject it totally.
The mechanics thought the judge could make some changes to the agreement and that they would take their chances with the judge, Tiberi said.
Chip
Chip is absolutely correct!!Another No Vote , opens all the Mechanic and Related employee's up to the WHIMS of an angered CEO and Company...They are already going to be ticked off at us to begin with. So do you think for a moment that you will be better off with a broken contract in the aftermath? You think you are taking a bath now? Dave will turn us everyway..including loose!! without an agreement. This could also easily spell the end of this airline for everyone period. I could be sacrificed just as easily as the next person...but I'm voting to keep the airline going...this will at least offer someone continued employment...and a slight chance of something to return to for others. If folks are so bitter?..or so selfish? to not see this as the only viable alternative? I think we are all doomed anyway! Put away your anger , about things you can't change or control...You can control what's laid out in front of you. Without an agreement? You are going to be hating life more than you can begin to imagine...and in turn, dragging others down with you!!
FrugalFlyer
Senior
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 254
- Reaction score
- 0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/7/2002 5:54:40 PM G4G5 wrote:
A little common sence here, please. Dave can do what ever he wants to. The Judge vote whichever way he wants to.
No mechanics = No Airline
[/blockquote]
No mechanics = just use contractors and sub-contractors. Huge savings for the company.
[blockquote]
The PR of the "striking" mechanics, alone would do more harm then he could imagine. This is still a powerful union and union busting went out 70 years ago. Let's see, do I buy a ticket on the airline with A&P's or the one without?
----------------
[/blockquote]
IMHO, majority of the p***engers today don't care how many A & P's mechanics work at an airline. The bottom line is price.
----------------
On 9/7/2002 5:54:40 PM G4G5 wrote:
A little common sence here, please. Dave can do what ever he wants to. The Judge vote whichever way he wants to.
No mechanics = No Airline
[/blockquote]
No mechanics = just use contractors and sub-contractors. Huge savings for the company.
[blockquote]
The PR of the "striking" mechanics, alone would do more harm then he could imagine. This is still a powerful union and union busting went out 70 years ago. Let's see, do I buy a ticket on the airline with A&P's or the one without?
----------------
[/blockquote]
IMHO, majority of the p***engers today don't care how many A & P's mechanics work at an airline. The bottom line is price.
A little common sence here, please. Dave can do what ever he wants to. The Judge vote whichever way he wants to.
No mechanics = No Airline
Their is No way that Dave could find hire and gets folks in place in time to save the airline. He would be facing so many FAA violations that his head would be spinning. The FAA does not take kindly to not following your Ops Specs. The cost of farming out the labor to contract maintenance is not something that U could afford. From line maint in PHL to the overhaul facilities, it all would shut down.
The PR of the striking mechanics, alone would do more harm then he could imagine. This is still a powerful union and union busting went out 70 years ago. Let's see, do I buy a ticket on the airline with A&P's or the one without?
The mechanics know this, Dave would be well advised to sit down again with them. This will kill the airline.
No mechanics = No Airline
Their is No way that Dave could find hire and gets folks in place in time to save the airline. He would be facing so many FAA violations that his head would be spinning. The FAA does not take kindly to not following your Ops Specs. The cost of farming out the labor to contract maintenance is not something that U could afford. From line maint in PHL to the overhaul facilities, it all would shut down.
The PR of the striking mechanics, alone would do more harm then he could imagine. This is still a powerful union and union busting went out 70 years ago. Let's see, do I buy a ticket on the airline with A&P's or the one without?
The mechanics know this, Dave would be well advised to sit down again with them. This will kill the airline.
You guys are talking without knowledge. Anyone that even suggest that the mechanics can't walk off the job is ignorant on the situation.
A rejected CBA has nothing to do with the certification of a union under the RLA.
I am 100% accurate on this and the mechanics right to strike, I only don't know the outcome if Wolf decides to push the mechanics to walk off.
Although, It seems to me to be a liquidation wish.
In short, there would be nothing preventing a strike.
I can tell you this. If a CBA is rejected, and no dues checkoff, you effectively push the union to strike...NO QUESTION.
A rejected CBA has nothing to do with the certification of a union under the RLA.
I am 100% accurate on this and the mechanics right to strike, I only don't know the outcome if Wolf decides to push the mechanics to walk off.
Although, It seems to me to be a liquidation wish.
In short, there would be nothing preventing a strike.
I can tell you this. If a CBA is rejected, and no dues checkoff, you effectively push the union to strike...NO QUESTION.
The IAM is in a desperate fight to stave off extinction at U/UA. If the members at U were not adequately advised of the facts prior to the vote, the IAM was at fault. That is there function as a union, to inform the membership of ALL aspects of an agreement prior to a ratification vote. After the agreement was rejected, VP Roach claimed the IAM would defend your contract. Nonsense, the IAM has not aggressively defended an airline mechanics CBA at any major airline in over 20 years. The IAM has repeatedly agreed to concessions at EAL, TWA, UAL and USAirways. Last week, the IAM halted a ratification vote that was in progress at Boeing, citing a mandate from federal mediators to return to the bargaining table. Federal mediators claimed they had no binding authority to halt the vote and order the parties to resume negotiating.Mechanics at U/UA are determined to rid themselves of the IAM and their self serving agenda. Good Luck to all at USAirways.
No Limit,
you are right and you are wrong.
Frank Lorenzo of Texas Air was running Eastern and Continental at the same time. Continental survived, Eastern did not. The IAM was just part of the problem. Go to a library and check out some books.
you are right and you are wrong.
Frank Lorenzo of Texas Air was running Eastern and Continental at the same time. Continental survived, Eastern did not. The IAM was just part of the problem. Go to a library and check out some books.
jetmechline
Member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2002
- Messages
- 96
- Reaction score
- 0
http://www.dcl.edu/lawrev/2001-4/Smith-Bales.pdf
__________________________________________________________
Chip comments: Lakeguy, it appears from reports from yesterday's meeting between the company and the IAM your comment is accurate.
Maybe that's why Joe Tiberi, a spokesman for the mechanics, told the Washington Post the union decided to vote again after misunderstanding what could happen if they voted the tentative agreement down. Tiberi said the mechanics thought a bankruptcy judge would force US Airways to modify the proposed agreement or come up with another one. That would not happen. Instead, a judge would either leave the agreement intact or reject it totally.
The mechanics thought the judge could make some changes to the agreement and that they would take their chances with the judge, Tiberi said.
Chip
____________________________________________________________
Chip, I think the site posted at the top of this page will be of interest to you. It contains the procedure that Judge Mitchell will follow.
I have one suggestion for you. Stop quoting Joe Tiberi,his credibility with the mechanics is ZERO. You won't win any converts quoting him.
____________________________________________________________
Question for you Chip:
If a IAM official is speaking deep in the forest and there is no one to hear..... is he still lying???
__________________________________________________________
Chip comments: Lakeguy, it appears from reports from yesterday's meeting between the company and the IAM your comment is accurate.
Maybe that's why Joe Tiberi, a spokesman for the mechanics, told the Washington Post the union decided to vote again after misunderstanding what could happen if they voted the tentative agreement down. Tiberi said the mechanics thought a bankruptcy judge would force US Airways to modify the proposed agreement or come up with another one. That would not happen. Instead, a judge would either leave the agreement intact or reject it totally.
The mechanics thought the judge could make some changes to the agreement and that they would take their chances with the judge, Tiberi said.
Chip
____________________________________________________________
Chip, I think the site posted at the top of this page will be of interest to you. It contains the procedure that Judge Mitchell will follow.
I have one suggestion for you. Stop quoting Joe Tiberi,his credibility with the mechanics is ZERO. You won't win any converts quoting him.
____________________________________________________________
Question for you Chip:
If a IAM official is speaking deep in the forest and there is no one to hear..... is he still lying???
pitguy
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2002
- Messages
- 1,509
- Reaction score
- 0
I think if the company thought they would get a better deal from the judge they would have taken it to the judge instead of giving us the same contract to vote on again. They must feel this is better than going to court. Doesn't matter to allot of us though. Close the doors if need be. Last one to leave turn off the lights. ((((Unfair deal = NO vote.-----AGAIN.))))
pitguy
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2002
- Messages
- 1,509
- Reaction score
- 0
Well get ready. Everyone I talk to at work says they are voting no again and others that voted yes are voting no too. So unless the union rigs the election (Which just might happen) it looks like the deal is going down again. Gee maybe then we can vote on it a 3rd time. Some folks just don't get it. No fair deal equals no yes vote. The line is drawn in the sand. Cry all you want it matters none to us.
- Status
