Wow a distorted view of History.
The IBT CBA only covered BOS, BUF, PHL and PIT.
If it was the best in the industry why did it cover only four cities?
Why were the four cities paid less then the non-union fleet service at US?
If it was the best in the industry, why was the IBT voted out at merger time?
And Tim filed short of cards and caused a one year bar on organizing and the company enacted the bloodbath of non-union workers in 1992.
Don't let the facts get in your way?
First off, 700aw was busting on you for no reason, so in humor I said what I said, you must have misread it.
Second off, I was one of the lead advocates and lead presenters to the NMB in establishing a second election for the IBT, and getting an interferance charge against your previous company.
Yes, I think I've done some things in poor taste but filing short on cards wasn't necessarily one of them. Actually it was a 'withdrawal' after legal counsel advised us that the company stacked the list of eligibles and that it was most likely justified.
At any rate, even after a short filing [if that's what you want to call it], the ticket counter still voted out union the next year anyways. So I'm not sure I follow your reasoning.
Filing short is common for all unions BTW, including the IAM. It's usually a result of a company 'stacking' a list, but I assume you know this so why do you make a big deal about this when even your 'own blood' does it?
700UW, we've been over the so called blood bath you speak of before and the only bloodbath that fleet has gone through is one with the IAM. At any rate, I would bet you the mortgage that if you allowed fleet service to vote to get everything they had in 1993 without the IAM, or vote for the quality of work like established by the IAM in 2007....over 95% would rather go back to the wages/benefits of 15 years ago. The IAM has accomplished nothing and only does what the company allows it or tells it to do.
Funny how you forget that 6 months after the IAM got voted in, it was the IAM that said fleet should take even more cuts and drop more blood. Thankfully, the stews voted out their contract so fleet never had to vote down the IAM bloodbath it wanted fleet to take, which included another 8% pay cut that would have put fleet down to $16 something.
Regardless of bloodbaths, we have seen the IAM can do nothing. In the bloodbath of 2003, your chief IAM loyalist canale quoted "We have a knife to our back and a gun to our head". Essentially he just washed his hands and 'punted' but not before pimping fleet service and 'cutting' fleet service by agreeing to a $48 million concession with the IAM pension. The IAM pension was the second biggest concession 'ever' taken by fleet as far as dollar amount goes.
The prevous 401k plan looks 'golden' compared to the 'entry level' IAM pension plan. At United, Canale didn't offer the entry level IAM pension plan, the United folk got an enhanced IAM pension plan. Kinda like Blue Cross/Blue Shield....different plans, just because it sez IAM pension, or Blue Cross/Blue Shield, doesn't make it a good plan. Any plan is always based on the contributions going into it.
Which do you think employees will prefer, a plan that puts in up to 10% of your earnings including overtime OR a plan that contributes a meager 4% of wages and caps it at 40 hrs if you're full time, and if you're part time [insert 40% of the workforce] you get doubly screwed with more limited contributions?
C'mon 700 do the math, it's basic second grade stuff, don't babble things just to stamp the IAM on something. You sound like the typical IAM loyalist that believes everything the IAM sez.
regards,
