Oh Where Oh Where Has The Iam Gone ?
- Thread starter IAM1776PHL
- Start date
pitguy
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2002
- Messages
- 1,509
- Reaction score
- 0
I am not a fan of the IAM, but I have to ask why are all of you crying when the majority voted 'yes' for what they got. I personally would have voted 'no'. I would not die on my knees.
-Some sold their soul for less than $15,000. In your lifetime it is change.
--I truly feel sorry for a lot of hard wroking people at 'U', but I have to ask what did you think was going to happen here?
-Some sold their soul for less than $15,000. In your lifetime it is change.
--I truly feel sorry for a lot of hard wroking people at 'U', but I have to ask what did you think was going to happen here?
ELP_WN_Psgr
Senior
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2003
- Messages
- 419
- Reaction score
- 0
You know, I would almost swear 700UW is boof1967 from the Yahoo boards back when Metrojet was attempting to "hold the line" in BWI versus Southwest Airlines Co. He used to quote employee newsletters showing load factors as evidence that Metrojet was cleaning Southwest's clock. He also went on and on about cleaning aircraft and having to wear surgical gloves to keep from pricking one's finger on hypodermic syringes in the seat back pockets. I remember asking if junkies were a big frequent flyer demographic on U but never did get a real good response.
But, back to the subject at hand. This from a dispassionate and neutral observer with no dawg at all in this fight.
If IAM (and the other U unions) would do what they are supposed to do, and management did what it was supposed to do, everyone would be in pretty good shape. Alas, such is not the case.
Management has badly mismanaged this airline for years.
Unions squeezed the golden goose for as much as they could for years (parity plus one, anyone?) with total disregard for the effects it had on the business model. I doubt there is an employee who would argue that the company isn't badly in need of a rational fare structure. By the same token, when life looked good, everyone was fat, dumb, and happy, laissez les bon temps roulez....none of those employees nor their union representatives were looking at what high wages and blofares were doing to their company's future prospects.
Now, the union's true colors are beginning to show and the bottom line is, they're only in it for the money. They are no different and certainly no better nor worse than U's management (taking a meat axe to the company and trying to walk away with bags of money) or Frequent Fliers (buying $79 transcon tickets and upgrading to F and wondering why the company is in a financial jam).
I think the Southwest Airlines pilots have it about right. Their own little intra company union. They've gotten a pretty good deal for themselves, their representatives are right there from within, and they aren;t paying anything to subsidize any outside agency.
Being affiliated with a union that represents other airline employees strikes me as the height of absurdity anyhow. Does anyone really think the IAM members at NW or CO or any other carrier will stand in solidarity with their brothers and sisters (brethren and cistern?) at U when push comes to shove?
I just find it hard to imagine how or why people would have put their trust and confidence in a labor organization that really didn't have its best interests at heart.
But, back to the subject at hand. This from a dispassionate and neutral observer with no dawg at all in this fight.
If IAM (and the other U unions) would do what they are supposed to do, and management did what it was supposed to do, everyone would be in pretty good shape. Alas, such is not the case.
Management has badly mismanaged this airline for years.
Unions squeezed the golden goose for as much as they could for years (parity plus one, anyone?) with total disregard for the effects it had on the business model. I doubt there is an employee who would argue that the company isn't badly in need of a rational fare structure. By the same token, when life looked good, everyone was fat, dumb, and happy, laissez les bon temps roulez....none of those employees nor their union representatives were looking at what high wages and blofares were doing to their company's future prospects.
Now, the union's true colors are beginning to show and the bottom line is, they're only in it for the money. They are no different and certainly no better nor worse than U's management (taking a meat axe to the company and trying to walk away with bags of money) or Frequent Fliers (buying $79 transcon tickets and upgrading to F and wondering why the company is in a financial jam).
I think the Southwest Airlines pilots have it about right. Their own little intra company union. They've gotten a pretty good deal for themselves, their representatives are right there from within, and they aren;t paying anything to subsidize any outside agency.
Being affiliated with a union that represents other airline employees strikes me as the height of absurdity anyhow. Does anyone really think the IAM members at NW or CO or any other carrier will stand in solidarity with their brothers and sisters (brethren and cistern?) at U when push comes to shove?
I just find it hard to imagine how or why people would have put their trust and confidence in a labor organization that really didn't have its best interests at heart.
The IAM has lost a lot of dues payers over the years; CO in the 1982 Lorenzo union bust, EAL, TWA, Western (bought by Delta) ,UAL and NWA mechanics. So they need to try to keep what they have left at any cost in order to keep the dues flowing.They did not follow the instructions of their members' very first "no" vote. In the last round of concessions, the IAM did not come to a tentative agreement with U management but submitted U management's last proposal to the membership for a vote. Of course the IAM had no recommendation but by the way most of them were talking one could sense they mentally endorsed it. Since they did not come to a tentative agreement or have a recommedation for managements last proposal and the members voted "yes" the IAM can put the blame on the members. Now that the compensation is at or below what non-union people make, the job is not worth having. This is evidenced by resignations, early retirements, people who are ecstatic that they are getting laid off, and people who are still there but waiting for the buyout, and the fact they can't hire people off the street for these wages . Being in the union used to mean you made a higher than average wage that you could live on. But sadly, now it just means making the same or less than non-union people while paying union dues.fanlube said:
Maybe you should learn how things work LGA, before you attempt a slam.
Oh I do know how things work , and It was a slam and a sarcastic one towards the I.A.M. ! You dont think the I.A.M. could have waited more than 24 hours to replace the ( UAIR ) Utility workers ? What a slap in the face AND a sellout to the employees whom paid their dues well for many years !
[post="260267"][/post]
[/quote]Oh I do know how things work , and It was a slam and a sarcastic one towards the I.A.M. ! You dont think the I.A.M. could have waited more than 24 hours to replace the ( UAIR ) Utility workers ? What a slap in the face AND a sellout to the employees whom paid their dues well for many years !
U
UAL_TECH
Guest
delldude said:
I hear you Brother!!!
But I am impressed with the UAL AMFA membership.
There is no chest thumping and embarrassing T'Shirts.
Just a quiet resolve in solidarity.
Take Care,
B) UT
Makes me wonder why the IAM touts "strength in numbers". 700's arguments are idealistic but not practiced in todays enviroment. Maybe if they actually took advantage of that line, things might be different...not sure how though.
I recall some of the arguments the IAM put out during the AMFA certification drives at a couple airlines, and while all I know about these drive's was what I read on the internet, it seems to me the strength in numbers line came up quite a bit. Also mentioned was the "strike fund". But after a little digging, come to find out the stike fund finances their headquarters operating fund and pays only after the second or so week of a strike...that is if you haven't found other employment to keep ends meet. Seems to be a conflict of interest in following through with strike threats.
Sorry, but it seems unions are/have becoming ineffective...unless you are a longshoreman or a government worker.
I am sure 700 or some other IAM gentleman will correct me, but these are the impressions of alot of people I work with.
2 cents worth
I recall some of the arguments the IAM put out during the AMFA certification drives at a couple airlines, and while all I know about these drive's was what I read on the internet, it seems to me the strength in numbers line came up quite a bit. Also mentioned was the "strike fund". But after a little digging, come to find out the stike fund finances their headquarters operating fund and pays only after the second or so week of a strike...that is if you haven't found other employment to keep ends meet. Seems to be a conflict of interest in following through with strike threats.
Sorry, but it seems unions are/have becoming ineffective...unless you are a longshoreman or a government worker.
I am sure 700 or some other IAM gentleman will correct me, but these are the impressions of alot of people I work with.
2 cents worth
The strike fund does not finance IAM Headquarters.
Some of the interest of the strike fund pays for the operation of the William W Wipinsinger Education and Technology Center, (the IAM's School).
And in the airline industry, a union is necessary, just ask the fleet and customer service agents what the company did to them in 1992 when they were non-union.
And in 1992 when the mechanic and related went on strike at US, fleet service was non-union, the m&r strike made the company ground planes and operate a reduced schedule, if the fleet service were in the IAM at the time, they would have honored the picket line and then the company would have stopped flying.
So there is validity in the strength in numbers point.
Some of the interest of the strike fund pays for the operation of the William W Wipinsinger Education and Technology Center, (the IAM's School).
And in the airline industry, a union is necessary, just ask the fleet and customer service agents what the company did to them in 1992 when they were non-union.
And in 1992 when the mechanic and related went on strike at US, fleet service was non-union, the m&r strike made the company ground planes and operate a reduced schedule, if the fleet service were in the IAM at the time, they would have honored the picket line and then the company would have stopped flying.
So there is validity in the strength in numbers point.
It took the bankruptcy court to force concessions upon its workers, what can you say about your beloved TWU and AA?
And the company still did not impose unilateral changes even though they had the right to when the judge abrogated the contracts.
And the company still did not impose unilateral changes even though they had the right to when the judge abrogated the contracts.
