Regional Elite Ground Handling Shutting Down

[Kev3188]

Demonization is a bit extreme

I'll respectfully disagree. There has been a concerted effort over the last 30 years to vilify organized labor in general. In recent years, that has shifted to add public sector members as well.

So are you of the belief that the DL-NW merger occurred largely to break heavily unionized NW and merge with largely non-union DL?

I think it played a role, but I'm not sure how much of a driver it actually was. I do think that is part of why the DL name survived, though.

Makes sense. It's entirely conceivable that restrictive union work rules may make it necessary to perform a job with 13+ that could be performed with fewer though.

That sort of restriction didn't exist at NW, and- at least in my experience- DL's procedures while not forcing extra bodies into the operation, leave me with much less efficient options on how to allocate my crew.

Well if unions are meant to be a professional service and not a dues whore then why is the UAW pursuing graduate teaching assistants at private and public universities coast to coast, why is the IAM pursuing campaigns for janitorial workers? It’s clear the unions are desperate, I'll need to search the archives but back in circa November 2010 the WSJ had a great article on new organization efforts by the UAW including several ill-fated campaigns at the foreign plants in right to work states.

There's a difference between expanding (or maintaining) your base, and hiring just anyone in order to fill a spot. I'm not sure I made that as clear as I should have earlier.

If what Tim said before is true that the IAM encouraged ready reserve at Hawaiian to drum up membership, why did they produce these deceiving videos during the DL election: https://www.youtube....h?v=RB6LMx-lJwA
http://www.takingbac...serve blues.pdf
http://www.takingbac...otes6.12.12.pdf

Where's the deception? BTW, not sure of the date on the video, but both flyers were made after the last election. Also, the TakingBack site is not an official IAM page, but is run by grassroots activists at the carrier.

Obviously some will like the idea of joining a union others not as much. As I've said before it seems all the DL employees I have come in contact with are happy, professional, and appear to enjoy their jobs even employees that have identified themselves to me as RRs. I'm not saying injustices and usual workplace politics don't exist at DL but if people were being treated unfairly I'm sure we would hear about it and DL has adequate controls in place to deal with those internal matters.

DL is quite good at controlling the message, and suppressing dissent. And let's be honest; while I'm glad the people you run into are professional, that's more a testament to their character than what may or may not be happening behind the scenes.

Kev if all hiring is done through RR isn't that a good thing if you don't like DL's interview and hiring process?

Josh

I'm not sure what you're asking here?

 

[WorldTraveler]

That sort of restriction didn't exist at NW, and- at least in my experience- DL's procedures while not forcing extra bodies into the operation, leave me with much less efficient options on how to allocate my crew.

simply noting the facts, DL and NW had nearly idential labor costs per ASM as well as very similar levels of productivity at the time of the merger.
They reached the same goal but in very different ways.

Your statement about villifying labor is absolutely correct... and the AA situation is providing yet more proof that labor cannot win in the eyes of the public regardless of the outcome.

 

[Airlinelifer]

Right now the Chamber of Commerce in Florida is airing anti-union commercials, yes they are demonizing the unions.

http://articles.orla...r-union-leaders

 

[737823]

Right now the Chamber of Commerce in Florida is airing anti-union commercials, yes they are demonizing the unions.

http://articles.orla...r-union-leaders

Without going too far off topic I completely agree with the video you linked. I know it maybe not be difficult and unpleasant for some to grasp but onerous union regulations and work rules *do* drive up the costs of doing business compared to a non-union business. If you look at all the favors the current administration has done for organized labor like changing the NMB rules just in time for the DL elections to countless White House visits for SEIU officials to support for the employee free choice act (which is anything but free choice) to increasing government represented worker headcounts since 2008 it becomes clear. I know you will probably say they haven't done nearly enough but the past four years the administration has been very hospitable to organized labor. Obama conveniently stayed out of the Chicago teachers strike, and while Rahm may want to cast the image of a true reformer its all an act and I can see through it. Sure the strike cancelled classes for several days and the CTU gave in some, most the reforms that focused on performance evaluations stemmed from changes at the state legislator NOT as a result from the negotiations.

Look at how much influence the AFL-CIO had at the DNC, all the work various unions around the country are doing to campaign. Its clear the current administration is OWNED by organized labor. Over the years organized labors clout, leverage and influence has diminished considerably and will likely continue to do so but they still have considerable influence over national labor policy and campaign funding.

Josh

 

[737823]

I'll respectfully disagree. There has been a concerted effort over the last 30 years to vilify organized labor in general. In recent years, that has shifted to add public sector members as well.

We'll have to agree to disagree. There have been changes that people have need to adapt to but organized labor has not been vilified, many contracts especially those in the public sector are not sustainable in the current economic environment and due structural changes that have occurred in the past 30 years.

There's a difference between expanding (or maintaining) your base, and hiring just anyone in order to fill a spot. I'm not sure I made that as clear as I should have earlier.

You don't see how it is far fetched that the United Automobile Workers are representing teaching fellows at a private university in New York City? That's almost as far from the UAW's base as they could get, they're also pursuing clerical and technical workers at universities and government agencies as well.

Where's the deception? BTW, not sure of the date on the video, but both flyers were made after the last election. Also, the TakingBack site is not an official IAM page, but is run by grassroots activists at the carrier.

As indicated, the video is from March 2009. It's deceptive because on the one hand the IAM wants to protect the job security and benefits of their members yet according to Tim and the Hawaiian CBA they encouraged and facilitated a similar scheme at Hawaiian Airlines. That's the deception.

I'm not sure what you're asking here?

You were saying that DL's interview and hiring process were inadequate to screen applicants. My point is RR is better since it's a temporary employment arrangement rather than bringing someone on fulltime and providing them benefits. If an RR employee has unsatisfactory performance can management simply not schedule them in the next round of bidding and "conference/coach" the employee out?

Josh

 

[737823]

Looks like Tim's post about ready reserve at HA was spot on. I got a hold of the Hawaiian IAM CBA and Article 26 states the following:

It is the intent of this Reserve Part-time (Reserve PT) classification to
cover any Regular PT and WPT employees' absences, and to cover
extended hours that regular PT employees do not volunteer to work
per Clause 23.6 (a). It is understood by the parties that this Article
governs work rules, rates of pay, employee benefits and conditions for
Reserve PT employees

26.2 Reserve Part-Time will not be included in computation
towards the 45% ratio mentioned in Clause 23.6 (j) (same
concept as WPT, 23.6 (a)).
26.3 Compensation
(a) There is no guaranteed pay for Reserve Part-time.
Reserve PT will be paid only for hours worked when called
in to report.
( B) Reserve Part-time employees shall be paid only straight
time and will not be eligible for overtime except as
required by law.
© Reserve PT employees shall be paid according to the
minimum rates set in Attachment B to this Agreement.

26.4 Benefits
Reserve Part-time employees are not eligible for medical,
dental, 401k Company contribution or match, sick leave
(except as required by state law), and vacation.
26.5 Uniform allowance will be 3 sets of uniforms, replenished
every 18 months. Uniform pieces may be traded in on a 1 for
1 basis for normal wear and tear.
26.6 All employees will pay no more than $5.00 per month for
Company provided parking.
26.7 Travel
Reserve Part-time employees will be eligible for the same
flight benefits as Regular PT (ref. Clause 23.14).
26.8 The probationary period for Reserve Part-time employees will
be 180 days.

http://www.iam141.or...014clerical.pdf

So it looks like Hawaiian is free to hire however many Reserve PTs they'd like so long as they maintain 45/55 PT/FT ratio, which is essentially a moot point since 26.2 states Reserve PTs are not considered "part-time".

Anyone know how many of Hawaiian's agents are reserve? I know they have a new flight to JFK leaving from T5 and an interline agreement and FF partnership with JetBlue so they may well do the ground handling there.

I also wonder how this will play into negotiations at United. The CO agents were of course non-union while UA was heavily unionized and the IAM will prevail once the integration is complete. I know CO management outsourced several cities when the IBT was ramping up for an election maybe the IAM will give UA the same cost advantage DL and HA.

Josh

 

[Kev3188]

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Okay.

As indicated, the video is from March 2009. It's deceptive because on the one hand the IAM wants to protect the job security and benefits of their members yet according to Tim and the Hawaiian CBA they encouraged and facilitated a similar scheme at Hawaiian Airlines. That's the deception.

I can't explain what the mindset of DL141's negotiators was; I was in 143. If there was some sort of quid pro quo, I don't know what it was. That said, I won't defend it, either. That's a prime example of how NOT to write contract language.

You were saying that DL's interview and hiring process were inadequate to screen applicants. My point is RR is better since it's a temporary employment arrangement rather than bringing someone on fulltime and providing them benefits. If an RR employee has unsatisfactory performance can management simply not schedule them in the next round of bidding and "conference/coach" the employee out?

Makes sense, but these aren't limited term positions. Even if you don't schedule them for the next bid, you still have to terminate them. Makes more sense to make sure you're doing everything you can to get the right person in the first place.

Looks like Tim's post about ready reserve at HA was spot on. I got a hold of the Hawaiian IAM CBA and Article 26 states the following:





http://www.iam141.or...014clerical.pdf

So it looks like Hawaiian is free to hire however many Reserve PTs they'd like so long as they maintain 45/55 PT/FT ratio, which is essentially a moot point since 26.2 states Reserve PTs are not considered "part-time".

Anyone know how many of Hawaiian's agents are reserve?

No clue, but likely not many yet, since this is new language.

I know they have a new flight to JFK leaving from T5 and an interline agreement and FF partnership with JetBlue so they may well do the ground handling there.

IIRC, B6 handles the ramp for them at JFK. HA doesn't have any ramp agents on the mainland. HA may have it's own customer service agents there, though...

I also wonder how this will play into negotiations at United. The CO agents were of course non-union while UA was heavily unionized and the IAM will prevail once the integration is complete. I know CO management outsourced several cities when the IBT was ramping up for an election maybe the IAM will give UA the same cost advantage DL and HA.

CO was slated to close (I think) 7 cities. That was stopped before it got underway, and they remained open.

 

[737823]

I can't explain what the mindset of DL141's negotiators was; I was in 143. If there was some sort of quid pro quo, I don't know what it was. That said, I won't defend it, either. That's a prime example of how NOT to write contract language.

Fair enough but its all under the umbrella of the IAM. The district lodges may be decentralized and have their own leadership but its the same organization. On an off topic note, what is the significance of lodge? Is it meant symbolize a place for workers' solidarity, support, etc or is it just IAM lingo for local (like most other unions refer to them)?

CO was slated to close (I think) 7 cities. That was stopped before it got underway, and they remained open.

I have to say its a really stupid thing management did. Think about it, when there is the threat of unionization management moves to outsource/close the stations. All that proves to everyone is that 1) they are afraid of the union and/or 2) validates that they are getting away paying below market wages/benefits/terms of employment. I can understand why a manager would do such a thing but all it does is probably encourages support for the union at the remaining stations.

Josh

 

[Kev3188]

Fair enough but its all under the umbrella of the IAM. The district lodges may be decentralized and have their own leadership but its the same organization. On an off topic note, what is the significance of lodge? Is it meant symbolize a place for workers' solidarity, support, etc or is it just IAM lingo for local (like most other unions refer to them)?

Go with the latter. There's the Grand Lodge (ie headquarters), which over sees District Lodges, which in turn oversee Local Lodges. I suppose it's just easier to say "lodge?"

So in my case, we had:

The Grand Lodge
District Lodge 143 (DL143), made up of AS, NW, Great Lakes, and Air Wisconsin.
DL 143 was divided geographically into Local Lodges. In my previous station, that included members of DL141, 142, & 143. In my current one, it was 141 & 143.

143 no longer exists, BTW. AS was folded into DL142...

I have to say its a really stupid thing management did. Think about it, when there is the threat of unionization management moves to outsource/close the stations. All that proves to everyone is that 1) they are afraid of the union and/or 2) validates that they are getting away paying below market wages/benefits/terms of employment. I can understand why a manager would do such a thing but all it does is probably encourages support for the union at the remaining stations.

Josh

Preachin' to the choir...

 

[WorldTraveler]

I have to say its a really stupid thing management did. Think about it, when there is the threat of unionization management moves to outsource/close the stations. All that proves to everyone is that 1) they are afraid of the union and/or 2) validates that they are getting away paying below market wages/benefits/terms of employment. I can understand why a manager would do such a thing but all it does is probably encourages support for the union at the remaining stations.

Josh

it probably just said that CO knew they were going to have a union so they did what they were going to do before the vote when it was easier.

CO employees undoubtedly were concerned about not having representation in the event of a merger with UA and that influenced the results.

It still says that CO mgmt had lost alot of the concern for HR relations in CO's final years... it is easy to be nice to labor when the company has a labor cost advantage as CO did but as the gap narrows, the gloves start to come off. The same thing is happening at WN... WN has enough of a different business model and has very good relations w/ labor going into it all that so far they only have to put one mitten on one hand...