Nwa Distorted Report On Pfaa's Lawsuit

[justanadd]

PFAA Special Hotline for February 22, 2005

Despite distorted company newswire reports to the contrary, PFAA's lawsuit regarding member-observer participation in the collective bargaining process has NOT been dismissed.

In fact, late last Friday, U.S. District Court Judge Michael J. Davis denied PFAA's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, one of several remedies requested in our lawsuit.

The sudden denial of PFAA's Motion for Preliminary Injunction - brought specifically to stop Northwest Airlines from barring PFAA observers from negotiations of their contract - only a day and a half after NWA's request for National Mediation Board (NMB) intervention between the company and union - appears to be an attempt to silence and suppress organized labor's Constitutional rights and to favor the air carrier industry.

PFAA is considering whether to appeal the denial of its Motion to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, so that members' rights to observe negotiations can be protected during the very early stages of what historically have been several-year-long bargaining sessions.

We're shocked and dismayed by the court's decision to insulate NWA's management negotiators from the very employees from whom they have demanded excessive and outrageous concessions. This decision is discouraging to anyone who believes in democracy and in open and fair bargaining. Contract workers across America should take pause - clearly NWA has convinced the courts that its self-imposed financial woes allow it to ignore PFAA members' rights contained in their own Constitution.

While the recent distortion of facts - as noted in the company's daily newswire and then spread to various media outlets - is disappointing, it is not necessarily surprising given the company's recent filing to involve the National Mediation Board in contract negotiations.

Please visit pfaa.com for accurate information regarding the lawsuit (http://www.pfaa.com/News/Legal/observers/CrtDocs/Default.asp ), as well as a copy of a statement PFAA will be releasing to the press later today (http://www.pfaa.com/News/Press/PRelease.asp ).

This concludes the hotline for today - this message will be updated at the end of this week or sooner if necessary. Until then, join us in recognizing the Flight Attendants who remain on furlough. We look forward to the day that all our flying partners return to the line.

Fly safe, and remember: Demand and do not decline Union representation!



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Kev3188]

NW distorting information to put itself in a better light?! Say it isn't so!

As someone in another NW group currently in negotiations, good luck to all of you in Inflight!

 

[North by Northwest]

Bargain in good faith? Ha! Guess the legal interpretation of good faith is all legalese to be translated into what is legal for one who's native tongue is legalese. Translation>>>> Northwest Airlines, your erroneous statement on the PFAA pending legal matter is DISMISSED!

 

[mweiss]

Could one of you explain what the legal arguments are on both sides?

 

[7.5victim]

Playing devil's advocate....

So why not rent out the Target Center to hold the negotiations then? It would seem to me that the membership decided to allow the PFAA to represent them at the table when negotiating with the company, right? So now the membership wants it both ways? Representation to negotiate on their behalf, and direct negotiations? Pick one. There are line FA's on the negotiating committee, right? They have a responsibility to report back to the membership, right? Members get to observe the negotiations through their appointed representatives. I've never heard of any labor negotiation in any industry where the rank and file was allowed to walk in and out at will. It would gridlock negotiations by allowing thousands of members direct access to the table, as all would come with their own personal agendas. It doesn't make sense, unless you are trying to gridlock the talks.

 

[North by Northwest]

Member observers. It is very diffirent than negotiators. The same method used to ensure an open Jusdicial system in court. Has been used many times. Limited number of observers with no input. Seen and not heard. Two max. rotatiing.

 

[NWA/AMT]

Playing devil's advocate....

So why not rent out the Target Center to hold the negotiations then?  It would seem to me that the membership decided to allow the PFAA to represent them at the table when negotiating with the company, right?  So now the membership wants it both ways?

[post="250340"][/post]​

No, they simply wish to have a very limited number of observers present to, as the name implies, observe, not participate in, and thereby better understand, the negotiating process.

There are line FA's on the negotiating committee, right? They have a responsibility to report back to the membership, right? Members get to observe the negotiations through their appointed representatives.

Pilots have flight instruments, why do they need flight deck windows? They get to observe the flight environment through their instruments. Should that be enough for them? Will it help them understand the process better?

I've never heard of any labor negotiation in any industry where the rank and file was allowed to walk in and out at will.

Nor has anyone asked to do so at NWA. "Walk(ing) in and out at will" was not part of the request, nor was it part of the NWA/AMFA negotiations conducted between Oct, 1999 and May, 2001 with observers in attendance every day. Incidentally, at the end of those negotiations NWA management commended the observers for their demeanor and thanked them for their participation. AMFA has also held negotiations with members present at Alaska, Mesaba, ACA and many of the other airlines they represent.

It would gridlock negotiations by allowing thousands of members direct access to the table, as all would come with their own personal agendas. It doesn't make sense, unless you are trying to gridlock the talks.

Yet that somewhat insulting supposition is not borne out by reality in any of the negotiations I have mentioned. As the members are not allowed to participate directly in the negotiations, and are not even allowed to speak when in the negotiating room with the company unless spoken to, one can hardly argue that their presence would cause 'gridlock'. The number of observers allowed each day is very limited, as is their direct participation, so your image of 'thousands' of members with 'access to the table' causing 'gridlock' at the table is erroneous.

Having attended the NWA/AMFA negotiations on many occasions in 1999-2001, and participated in discussions with our negotiators when each side retired to their respective caucus rooms, I can tell you that having the members present gave us a much better understanding of the process, helped the union better understand the needs of the members, and served to keep the anxieties and emotions that normally arise during negotiations to a minimum. It also ensured that there were none of the 'surprises' that can lead to a contract being summarily rejected by the membership, as had happened with the IAM/NWA negotiations for the mechanics in 1998-1999.

Rather than the observers hindering negotiations, it was our experience that the infighting and Machiavellian power struggles within the company's negotiating committee, and NWA's refusal to bring the real decision-makers to the table, did far more to hinder negotiations. Unfortunately there's no way for the unions to seek to exclude corporate ladder-climbing from negotiations.

Considering NWA's previous acceptance of, and even praise for, the presence of observers at negotiations, one would have to wonder what NWA's 'agenda' is in suddenly rejecting their presence.

 

[North by Northwest]

"Considering NWA's previous acceptance of, and even praise for, the presence of observers at negotiations, one would have to wonder what NWA's 'agenda' is in suddenly rejecting their presence. " Enough said.

 

[Kev3188]

Would anyone be suprised to hear that they are just objecting "because they can?" NWA's labor/mgmt. relationship (especially during contract times) is nothing if not eristic....

 

[NWA/AMT]

Would anyone be suprised to hear that they are just objecting "because they can?"  NWA's labor/mgmt. relationship (especially during contract times) is nothing if not eristic....

[post="250438"][/post]​

Surprised? Not really. NWA has historically tried to drive a wedge between the unions and their members and this is simply another such tactic.

Blaming bad labor relations on the employees and their unions is like blaming forest fires on the trees. NWA in the last few years has had historically unique opportunities to change the nature of its labor relations with its mechanics and flight attendants; their response to these opportunities was more of the same.

Sow=Reap

 

[North by Northwest]

United we stand/ Divided we beg.

 

[mweiss]

Let me try this again...

Could one of you explain the legal arguments on both sides?

 

[North by Northwest]

nutshell: PFAA position. Under RLA guidlines Unions are entitled to have member observers present during negotiations. Additionally, it is an integral part of the PFAA constitution that ALL matters affecting members shall be addressed in an open demoncratic forum. NWA contends that because of it's pressing need for concessions, observers would impede that process by their mere presence.

 

[7.5victim]

Unless the PFAA Constitution is accepted by both sides under the current CBA, it really is a moot point. One could make an argument that the PFAA constitution applies to PFAA internal business, not a contract negotiation. NWA isn't denying members from having a say in the negotiations, however, they are opposed to a revolving door situation. As I said earlier, it'll only slow down negotiations. Revolving "Member observers" will observe a small part of the negotiations, and take it back to the line, where it will be presented to coworkers out of context. The union has a responsibility to inform the membership of the overall progess of negotiations, or lack thereof.

If there are already PFAA members serving on the negotiating committee, then you have "member observers" in place.

Allowing any members to have direct access to the table is nothing more than an attempt to slow down the process. There's an eternal hope that the state of the industry will improve. This certainly looks like a delaying tactic by the PFAA, in hopes that the industry will begin to recover by the time the drawn out RLA process would come to a boiling point.

 

[mweiss]

NxNW, thanks for the info.