NMB: Delta did not interfere with union vote

[2BlacknBlue]

"Delta said it has been informed by the NMB that the board found that the union's claims either are "unsubstantiated," "do not rise to the level of interference" or represent isolated incidents that did not amount to "pervasive conduct that would have tainted" the election results."

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081001/delta_fligh...dants.html?.v=1

 

[North by Northwest]

"Delta said it has been informed by the NMB that the board found that the union's claims either are "unsubstantiated," "do not rise to the level of interference" or represent isolated incidents that did not amount to "pervasive conduct that would have tainted" the election results."

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081001/delta_fligh...dants.html?.v=1

Now..THAT'S a Shocker!

Esp. coming from such a fair pro Labor group of board members...including Northwest's former flunky. Isn't this the SAME group that just tried to sneek under the table NEW NMB rules to "help" Delta after the NW merger?

Yeah..I am sure it is, cause it's the SAME group that got their a$$es chewed out and threated with new Congressional oversight. This is their little way of pay back to AFA for running to Congress and getting them in trouble.

Everybody connected with this crooked disgusting Administration is dirty to the core.

 

[dapoes]

Now..THAT'S a Shocker!

Esp. coming from such a fair pro Labor group of board members...including Northwest's former flunky. Isn't this the SAME group that just tried to sneek under the table NEW NMB rules to "help" Delta after the NW merger?

Yeah..I am sure it is, cause it's the SAME group that got their a$$es chewed out and threated with new Congressional oversight. This is their little way of pay back to AFA for running to Congress and getting them in trouble.

Everybody connected with this crooked disgusting Administration is dirty to the core.

Same results as last time NMB protested back in 2001. AFA cried fouled, NMB (different members) said no dice.

 

[dapoes]

The NMB has set up the process for a reason. This was not an election between two individuals or groups like Obama/McCain, or PFAA/afa. This was an election to see if Delta flight attendants actually wanted a union.

For a non represented group, the NMB conducts an investigation to see if the group wants representation. To do this, it holds an election.

In this type of election, a voter is saying "Hey, I want a union" by voting. If enough (50% +1) vote, the NMB investigator(s) find that there is interest in a union and certifies the union. If someone does not want a union, they simply do not vote.

That is why there is no place to vote no. It is incumbent on the union to bring forth enough people to say "we want representation, and we want the afa to represent us."

In this case, the afa could not get enough people to call in or click in over a five week time period. This is with the constant phone calls and a constant airport presence.

It was not voter apathy that killed the afa drive. Delta flight attendants made a statement. If enough of us had wanted the afa, we would have made our voices known.

The afa is also not telling the truth when it says that no one voted against the afa. All of us who did not vote said that we did not want any union. Those who voted for the IBT, TWU, ALPA and an in-house Delta union actually voted against the afa.

IMHO, the afa loses a lot of credibility because it is always someone else's fault when it fails. In this case, it is blaming the NMB and Delta collusion.

The key point is that we did not have our democratic voice taken away. We just did not want the afa, so we did not use it.

 

[North by Northwest]

The NMB has set up the process for a reason. This was not an election between two individuals or groups like Obama/McCain, or PFAA/afa. This was an election to see if Delta flight attendants actually wanted a union.

For a non represented group, the NMB conducts an investigation to see if the group wants representation. To do this, it holds an election.

In this type of election, a voter is saying "Hey, I want a union" by voting. If enough (50% +1) vote, the NMB investigator(s) find that there is interest in a union and certifies the union. If someone does not want a union, they simply do not vote.

That is why there is no place to vote no. It is incumbent on the union to bring forth enough people to say "we want representation, and we want the afa to represent us."

In this case, the afa could not get enough people to call in or click in over a five week time period. This is with the constant phone calls and a constant airport presence.

It was not voter apathy that killed the afa drive. Delta flight attendants made a statement. If enough of us had wanted the afa, we would have made our voices known.

The afa is also not telling the truth when it says that no one voted against the afa. All of us who did not vote said that we did not want any union. Those who voted for the IBT, TWU, ALPA and an in-house Delta union actually voted against the afa.

IMHO, the afa loses a lot of credibility because it is always someone else's fault when it fails. In this case, it is blaming the NMB and Delta collusion.

The key point is that we did not have our democratic voice taken away. We just did not want the afa, so we did not use it.

What the hell kind of mumbo jumbo are trying to spin. An election is when you vote YES or NO. Not some corporate swindle made up by a group of flunkies on the payroll. "All of you who VOTE NO will say you don't want a Union" that's how that works.

Clearly, you are afraid of a democratic election (as most crooked corporate bacon are). There will be a Union at Delta (if this merger happens)...so get used to it.

 

[dapoes]

On the contrary, the NMB rules have been the same since the Railway Labor Act of 1926.
http://www.nmb.gov/publicinfo/mission.html

This is nothing new that just happen this past may. AFA is only making a fuss because they lost. They did the same thing back in 2001 and guess what. The NMB ruled against them as well.

Over decades, dozens of elections and various mergers have played out using the very same rules, long before you were probably born. It is not a Yes or No vote, its up to the Union to garner enough support to via yes votes. The majority of Yes votes win. Plain and simple.

So get used to that.

 

[North by Northwest]

A little homework for you...to bring you up to speed. Read up on the Congressional hearings held last week...and they are NOT finished. You know the ones, the ones regarding VOTING in UNION ELECTIONS.

 

[dapoes]

Oh trust me I watched every last minute. It was more of a NMB 101 learning session for the members (painfull).

When the constant line of questioning was directed about the historical practices, it showed that they were inline with how the recent DAL election took place. There was nothing unique in this past election then any other. Ever. The NMB has all the data to back it up as well. Even Pat couldn't disagree with that.

The only thing I see them possibly changing would be having the employee lists handed over to the unions. Although I can see that get squashed with privacy advocates.

Chairman Oberstar did let slip one thing tho, about meeting "next year". I seriously doubt that this issue will ever see the light of day again. Especially after seeing how this session went. If anything AFA opened up a can of worms that will come back to haunt them.

 

[yoyodyne]

Hey NxNW, are you sure it wasn't the 'kind of "innocent" illegal aliens' that stole the election? Let's make a deal, go back to listening to Rush Limbaugh, and I'll forget that you probably voted for Bush twice, and because of that, I'll have to work 'till am about 85 to retire!!!

BTW, in about 20 years, it won't matter, because by then Español will be the official language, so enjoy it while you can.

 

[North by Northwest]

Hey NxNW, are you sure it wasn't the 'kind of "innocent" illegal aliens' that stole the election? Let's make a deal, go back to listening to Rush Limbaugh, and I'll forget that you probably voted for Bush twice, and because of that, I'll have to work 'till am about 85 to retire!!!

BTW, in about 20 years, it won't matter, because by then Español will be the official language, so enjoy it while you can.

Obviously you have difficulty with English because your post is a rambling hodge podge of mumbo.

Poor thing...did my dislike of illegal alien criminals hit a nerve? Yeah, I voted for Bush twice... for Impeachment. It is quite clear that you have some kind of close connection with Illegal Aliens... you just keep dreaming if you think anything but English will rule this country. Clearly, your math is as bad as your respect for law. Yeah, you will have to work till ya 85 because your beloved illegal aliens have depressed wages so much that you can't retire...that is if one of them don't murder or kill you while driving drunk first.

I got an idea for you, since you are such an Illegal Alien lover, move to Mexico, that way you can retire and sit on your a$$ right now.

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

On the contrary, the NMB rules have been the same since the Railway Labor Act of 1926.
http://www.nmb.gov/publicinfo/mission.html

This is nothing new that just happen this past may. AFA is only making a fuss because they lost. They did the same thing back in 2001 and guess what. The NMB ruled against them as well.

Over decades, dozens of elections and various mergers have played out using the very same rules, long before you were probably born. It is not a Yes or No vote, its up to the Union to garner enough support to via yes votes. The majority of Yes votes win. Plain and simple.

So get used to that.

I watched much of the hearings as well. The problem with the original statute lies within its age.
The Congressional members made this very known. There is no other electoral system in our country like this (even the NLRA doesn't have this type of voting) and in order to preserve true representational democracy, the RLA needs to be updated. I understand what you're saying regarding the union being able to get interested f/a's to vote, but it begs the question..in both elections, over 50% signed cards. The cards are what shows expression of interest. In this past election, 10% of the f/a's who signed cards decided not to vote for various reasons. But I truly believe that a portion of that 10% were either conflicted or didn't care one way or another (remember, we have a large portion of f/a's who drop trips and fly very low hours, just enough to maintain health benefits.), therefore they did nothing. I think that perhaps those same f/a's would still sit-out even if the statute was changed to require a 'no' vote as well.
As an aside: It's a good thing Ms. Vandewater doesn't plan on running for public office (her position is an appointment) as she came across very defensive, strident and harsh. Thank goodness for Harry Hoglander (who, by the way disagreed with 02 decision that there was no interference).

 

[dapoes]

I think Ms. Vandewater was very well spoken. Like I said before it was a painful NMB learning session for the members of the committee. She was very factual and to the point. It wasnt meant to be a warm and fuzzy committee. As for Harry Hoglander he couldnt have come across any worse for wear, mumbling, never looking up from his desk, fractured sentences, etc.

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

I think Ms. Vandewater was very well spoken. Like I said before it was a painful NMB learning session for the members of the committee. She was very factual and to the point. It wasnt meant to be a warm and fuzzy committee. As for Harry Hoglander he couldnt have come across any worse for wear, mumbling, never looking up from his desk, fractured sentences, etc.

I guess I should have been more specific. I wasn't complimenting his style but rather his having actually been a front-line airline employee. (TWA pilot)
As for your statement "it was a painful NMB learning session for the members of the committee".....
-How and why was it "painful"?
You may want to bone-up on your civics: The NMB doesn't dictate to House Committee Members. That's why they are down below and the Commitee members are sitting above asking the questions. If the House Members don't like the answers and/or the receive enough feedback from constituents, then they have the power to bring a bill forth to change the statute....not the other way around.

 

[dapoes]

I guess I should have been more specific. I wasn't complimenting his style but rather his having actually been a front-line airline employee. (TWA pilot)
As for your statement "it was a painful NMB learning session for the members of the committee".....
-How and why was it "painful"?
You may want to bone-up on your civics: The NMB doesn't dictate to House Committee Members. That's why they are down below and the Commitee members are sitting above asking the questions. If the House Members don't like the answers and/or the receive enough feedback from constituents, then they have the power to bring a bill forth to change the statute....not the other way around.

EX-Frontline PILOT with a different union. Would have been more compelling for AFA's case for an actual frontline FA.

Painful meaning the committee had absolutely no knowledge or understanding of union issues RLA, NMB. So watching them with repeatedly ask the same questions with the same answers was painful.

Like I said before, chances of this matter going any further would be slim to none. AFA has opened a can of worms to which will bury any credibility they have left. And with the economic climate turning dim, that last thing Washington will do is hinder companies in keeping the lights one. Period. End of story.

 

[Dignity]

And with the economic climate turning dim, that last thing Washington will do is hinder companies in keeping the lights on

with all due respect, that comment could absolutely justify the need of a contract to protect labor best interest (but I understand what you were attempting to imply)