Northwest lives up to tough image

whaledriver

Advanced
Jan 20, 2003
140
0
Northwest lives up to tough image: experts
Thursday August 24, 12:28 pm ET
By Kyle Peterson


CHICAGO (Reuters) - Northwest Airlines (Other OTC:NWACQ.PK - News), facing a potentially devastating flight attendants' strike on Friday, is living up to its reputation as an unflinching, no-nonsense labor negotiator, experts said.

With a threatened job action looming, the airline is standing tough and not retreating from a decision last month to void the workers' contract to reach a cost savings goal.

Some say Northwest's tack against the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA) has become increasingly common as airlines balance their desire for good employee relations against their need to pinch every penny.

"The last several years have pushed (industry) labor relations into a new frontier," said Joe Schwieterman, transportation expert at DePaul University. "Both sides are playing hardball tactics."

Top U.S. carriers have been forced to exact worker concessions to offset the pressures of low-fare competition and soaring fuel costs.

Northwest, which entered bankruptcy in September, last month terminated its flight attendants' contract and imposed terms that save the carrier $195 million a year.

Although the airline had court permission, the AFA said the action triggered its right to strike. The union has demanded that Northwest negotiate a contract that members will ratify.

Barring government interference, the union could strike as early as 9:01 p.m. CT on Friday. The airline has said a strike could erode bookings and ultimately ruin the carrier.

Bob Brodin, a retired senior vice president in charge of labor relations at Northwest, said the carrier is no tougher in negotiations than it has to be in a troubled industry.

"Northwest has over the years had some difficult negotiations with its unions," Brodin said. "I think it's true of most airlines."

The industry is rife with examples of stormy relations. UAL Corp. (NASDAQ:UAUA - News), parent of United Airlines, demanded two pay cuts during a three-year stint in bankruptcy that ended last year. The carrier achieved the savings through negotiations but came to the brink of a flight attendants' strike.

Earlier this year, bankrupt Delta Air Lines (Other OTC:DALRQ.PK - News), negotiated a labor contract with its pilots in the shadow of a strike threat.

STRAINED LABOR RELATIONS

Northwest is no stranger to union showdowns. It has faced four strikes since industry deregulation in 1978, according to data from the National Mediation Board. Only Continental Airlines (NYSE:CAL - News), with five strikes in 28 years, has seen more.

Experts are divided over whether Northwest's tough reputation is an effective bargaining tool or unnecessarily provokes employee wrath. The carrier has recently negotiated deals with its other unions and has achieved a labor savings goal of $1.4 billion.

Bankrupt airlines frequently ask for court permission to void labor contracts, but they usually reach deals with unions before the judge rules on the request.

"I think the way they handle negotiations has been very abrupt and confrontational," said Stuart Klaskin at KKC Aviation Consulting. "Northwest certainly has a reputation ... for having attracted some of the industry's more aggressive and tough-minded managers."

Northwest reinforced that image last year during a confrontation with the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association. After failing to reach a labor deal, AMFA sent its members on strike. The airline simply replaced the workers.

Northwest has said it is ready for a flight attendants' strike but has declined to outline its contingency plan.

Airline expert Darryl Jenkins praised Northwest's straightforward approach to union negotiations.

"Certainly it helps them because everybody at the table knows that the other party carries out what it says it's going to," Jenkins said.

Former Northwest executive Brodin said critics sometimes underestimate Northwest's compassion for its employees. He noted the carrier's successful efforts this year to get Congress to reform pensions laws.

The pension measures, signed into law this month, gave airlines more time than other industries to meet their pension contribution obligations, thereby preserving employee retirement plans that otherwise might have been scrapped.

"From a purely economic standpoint, that probably wasn't the best choice," Brodin said.

AFA General Counsel David Borer agreed that Northwest is not unique in its contentious labor relations. In fact, he reported a mostly positive experience in negotiations with the airline.

"Our initial experience has been a professional attitude at the bargaining table. The problem is they're just asking for too much," Borer said.
 
What a pile of bias BS. Dougie Stealin' ain't tough, he and his thugs are a group of greedy corporate a$$holes that couldn't manage a flea market. Scab Air has screwed the state of Minnesota taxpayers and its employees' for years. This, while upper management enrichs themselves with bonuses, stock options, and filthy rich BK proof pensions while they cry poor mouth to the U.S. Government and its crooked federal judges.

Why was it acceptable for AMFA to strike last year and the AFA cannot now? Why is it "illegal" now and not last year? Is that because the cards are not stacked in managements favor today? Seems to be the case!

It's time for a f'in worker REVOTE in the good 'ol USA!!!! :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:
 
i agree with you Hackman. Enough is Enough and its high flying time that a group of employees stands up to the corporate cronies of Scabby Patch Air
 
.....said Stuart Klaskin at KKC Aviation Consulting. "Northwest certainly has a reputation ... for having attracted some of the industry's more aggressive and tough-minded managers."....

....Northwest reinforced that image last year during a confrontation with the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association. After failing to reach a labor deal, AMFA sent its members on strike. The airline simply replaced the workers.....

Northwest has said it is ready for a flight attendants' strike but has declined to outline its contingency plan.

Airline expert Darryl Jenkins praised Northwest's straightforward approach to union negotiations.

My, my, my...how the nwa spin machine has gone into overdrive in the last hours before a potential strike. They dragged out every pro company "expert" in the country to fill this article. The reporter, Mr. Peterson, also is in the company's pocket when he refers to the AMFA strike, "the company SIMPLY replaced them". Simply...SIMPLY :angry: $100M of company cash to hire a bunch of losers (or as Necrophilias calls them, the "duct tape gang") and then have the costs for maintenance increase by 35% and 22% in the following quarters. Add it all up and the reputed "tough managers" nwa has hired are a bunch of idiots and they are "playing" manager and CEO with a once-fine company.

Steenland says he's ready for a F/A strike. A contingency plan is in place. Here is where the F/A group finds out what their made of. In the face of nwa's "straight forward approach" I hope you don't become a buch of snivelling fools.
 
I don't think NW is as ready for this work action as they were for the mechanics. I think if AFA has any backbone they will have a successful work action.

On the other hand, NW practically begged AMFA to strike so they could get them off of the property. AMFA was a bunch of guillible suckers.
 
It's time for a f'in worker REVOTE in the good 'ol USA!!!! :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:





HACKMAN,


Please clarify, whom would you care to RE-VOTE for?


Or are you trying to say REVOLT?


re·volt (r-vlt) KEY

An uprising, especially against a state of authority. e.g., NWA Management. An act of protest or rejection. The state of a person or group in rebellion: labor in revolt over company policies. e.g., AMFA Strike.
 
Northwest CEO: Strike threat latest challenge in restructuring
Northwest Airlines Chief Executive Doug Steenland sees a possible flight attendants strike as the latest challenge in the carrier's effort to lower costs and restructure. "When I accepted the position, I accepted the responsibility to fix the airline, to make the decisions to place this company in safe harbor," he says. "When you go through a restructuring, it's never a straight line. There is sometimes a zigzag and you have to manage to it." The Wall Street Journal

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

So what we have here ladies and gentlemen is a mere "zigzag" in the management of the airline. The labor groups at nwa should recognize themselves for what we are..."the whole problem with nwa". Dougie says he has to "fix" the airline and he has done nothing but cut wages of a formerly very loyal workforce. He has closed several of the finest maintenance facilities in the world as his repair of the airline continues. So is BK the "safe harbor"? Safe in the arms of your "paid for" judges. Safe in the arms of your "in-pocket media". Oh and don't forget...safe from all of the pre BK creditors. This is your leader labor groups. This is the pencil-neck and his little fire plug that will take all of you to "safe harbor".

I don't think NW is as ready for this work action as they were for the mechanics. I think if AFA has any backbone they will have a successful work action.

On the other hand, NW practically begged AMFA to strike so they could get them off of the property. AMFA was a bunch of guillible suckers.

STOP thinking so much Dog...you're going to hurt yourself.
How long have you boon reading these boards? Get a clue Dog...using extreme concession language and acting outside of a collective bargaining process (ie. replacements) nwa backed us into a corner. To say nwa "begged" us to strike is a real misleading statement.
 
STEENLANDS UPDATED BIO....

Steenland can count a number of accomplishments achieved during his time at Northwest, including:

2005-2006: Negotiated in bad faith with Northwest Flight Attendants Union, AFA, which eventually led Northwest into Chapter 7.
2004-2005: Negotiated in bad faith with Northwest Mechanic Union, AMFA, which led to the replacement of those workers. Thus saving Northwest absolutely nothing, sending Northwest into Chapter 13 bankruptcy.
2002-2003: Negotiated a marketing agreement with Northwest-Delta-Continental to form the largest U.S. airline alliance and obtained necessary approvals from regulatory agencies, labor unions, and third parties to permit its implementation.
2001-2004: In response to an economic decline and the events of September 11, 2001, Steenland helped implement eight cost reduction programs which reduced expenses on an annual basis by $1.6 billion.
1999-2000: Helped settle a 14-day pilot strike. Negotiated long-term collective bargaining agreements with pilots, flight attendants, mechanics, and airport personnel.
1998-1999: Key participant in Northwest's acquisition of controlling block of Continental Airlines over a competing offer by Delta Air Lines and formation of long-term alliance agreement between Northwest and Continental.
1997: Negotiated precedent-setting long-term joint venture agreement with KLM Royal Dutch Airlines.
1994: Led efforts for Northwest's initial public offering.
1992-1993: Key participant in multi-billion company restructuring involving three-year employee wage reductions, bank debt restructuring, aircraft order cancellations, and concessions by equity holders.
 
...How long have you boon [sic] reading these boards? Get a clue Dog...using extreme concession language and acting outside of a collective bargaining process (ie. replacements) nwa backed us into a corner. To say nwa "begged" us to strike is a real misleading statement.

I don't know about how long Dog has been around this board, and maybe the term "begged" is incorrect. But NW "knew AMFA would", and "was prepared for", and maybe NW even "wanted" - a strike; but that is not "acting outside of a collective bargaining process".

In all of the federal laws relating to employee-employer relations [beginning with the 1935 FDR New Deal Wagner Act and the later Taft-Hartley Act], there is nothing that makes an employer lockout, or an employee strike, or the hiring/training of replacement workers in anticipation of a strike, either illegal, or not bargaining in good faith, or "outside of a collective bargaining process".

Back in the 1950s Lemuel Boulware who was a GE VP used the same tactics as did NW. At contract renewal time he would make what he called a "fair but firm" offer; and GE took strikes and obtained settlements with only the numbers shuffled.

This tactic became known as 'Boulwarism'; and it was union-vilified as "take it or leave it" bargaining. However, it had been practiced in the past as a union tactic by John L. Lewis of the UMW and (to a lesser extent) by Philip Murray of the USW - even during WW2.

Admittedly, the RLA may make the NW actions a different can of worms; but this will be played out in the courts.
 
Get a clue Dog...using extreme concession language and acting outside of a collective bargaining process (ie. replacements) nwa backed us into a corner. To say nwa "begged" us to strike is a real misleading statement.
I agree with upsilon. How is management negotiating concessions and hiring replacement workers "acting outside of a collective bargaining process"? Those are no more outside the legal process than a union negotiating wage increases or exersicing its right to strike.
 
I agree with upsilon. How is management negotiating concessions and hiring replacement workers "acting outside of a collective bargaining process"? Those are no more outside the legal process than a union negotiating wage increases or exersicing its right to strike.

I see it is time for a little bootlicker education session.
The very term "Collective bargaining" is a tried and true method of union/company negotiation for a mutually agreed upon outcome of said labor negotiations. The right to strike (or self-help in the RLA) is only allowed after months of futile bargaining in which no agreement can be reached. In the case of nwa, no agreement could have been reached. When I say, "they backed us into a corner", their unreasonable demands were designed to do just that. nwa made an initial offer and the AMFA countered. Our negotiating team looked at the data that nwa put forward and conceded that a concession was required. We just disagreed on the amount of the concession. When the company came back with it's "counter offer" the terms sudenly were worse than the first offer. Still the same concession amount they asked for before but now instead of keeping 2,500 employees they now said they would only keep 1,500. When the AMFA countered again the company's counter was to reduce the number retained to 1,000. The last bout with nwa saw the number reduced to 500. They have taken Boulwarism to a new low.
In truth, the AMFA was the only one in the party that bargained in "good faith". Spending $100M and a years time training a replacement workforce shows me a decided lack of ethics in the "bargaining" process.
 
Don,

Where is it written that in business you have to "Play Fair" or be "Ethical". One persons Fair is anothers Unfair.

This is why I have always counseled to avoid the court room at all costs if you're a union. The deck IMO is stacked and will remain so for the future.

The only court that a union can win in is the court of public opinion and not playing fair. The average Corporation had best hope i never get to be president of a union because I don't play fair. Finishing second is really first loser and I'm a poor loser.

For the life of me I can't understand why some union doesn't hire a PI to investigate the personal lives of executives. Who cares about the RLA, hit 'em where they live. A cheating Hubby is going to have to part with half his assets is going to be distracted and it will have chilling effect.

Start playing to win and stop playing by the rules as you are the only ones who are.

Good Post.
 
I see it is time for a little bootlicker education session.
That's nice. (Is it possible for you to have a discussion without resorting to insults and name-calling?)

It is remarkable that your post did not seem to take note of the fact that NW is BANKRUPT. As in, IT CAN'T PAY THE BILLS. It is BROKE. It CANNOT meet all of its contractual obligations -- with labor and with many, many other creditors. You cite the RLA a lot, but conveniently ignore bankruptcy law.

So what should NW do since it cannot meet all of its contractual obligations? Simply close the doors yesterday? How well do you think labor would make out in that scenario?
 

Latest posts