The TWU AAdvantage

[FWAAA]

----------------
On 7/29/2003 3:39:14 PM Bob Owens wrote:

The union that we belong to is an extension of our professional identity. How does a union that has nothing to do with aviation bolster the professional image of a mechanic or any other airline worker? Its more than just the money.​

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

My bad - I thought it was all about the money.

Doesn't the public already hold airplane mechanics in high regard? Does the identity of their union have anything to do with it? Or are we talking about self-esteem here?

Hey, no skin off my nose which union collects your dollars. But if you're gonna beat the TWU, you may need to do better than simply point out to your members how well the Teamsters have performed during crunch time.

 

[FrugalFlyer]

----------------
On 7/29/2003 5:02:49 PM RV4 wrote:

It's pretty simple really, the conlusion I reach is money, organization, and exposure. The same reason AA needs a Marketing Department.

I do agree with you that individual responsibility is above all, most important.
----------------​

IMHO, unions do not bolster the image of professionalism for the airline worker. IMHO, unions (whether they are airline unions, or UAW or doctor associations, or even the faculty association at a university) give the image that their members are whiners / complainers. How did Dubinsky's comment about ckoking the goose for all the eggs bolster the image of airline pilots? I'm not saying that airline workers, autoworkers, doctors, professors, etc. are whiners and complainers, on the contrary, they have my respect due to the work they do. But, their unions / associations, have their own agendas which they place first, and the interests of their members second (or third).

I won't debate what union has a better representation or can negotiate a better contract, I just strognly disagree that membership in a certain union bolsters the image of professionalism or the ariline worker, or any worker.

 

[Bob Owens]

----------------
On 7/29/2003 427 PM FrugalFlyer wrote:


I guess what you're trying to say is that working at AA sucks?
Why not then apply at one of the other top 6 airlines?


----------------
Because in this industry job hopping is counterproductive. A better strategy is to stay put if at all possible and fight.
​

 

[Bob Owens]

----------------
On 7/29/2003 5:29:13 PM FrugalFlyer wrote:

I'm not saying that airline workers, autoworkers, doctors, professors, etc. are whiners and complainers, on the contrary, they have my respect due to the work they do
----------------​

You claim to respect their work but you dont want them to get a fair price for their labor. Thats contradictory. Respect and fairness go hand in hand. If you respect someone you would treat them fairly.

 

[FrugalFlyer]

----------------
On 7/29/2003 4:38:33 PM FWAAA wrote:

----------------
On 7/29/2003 3:39:14 PM Bob Owens wrote:

The union that we belong to is an extension of our professional identity. How does a union that has nothing to do with aviation bolster the professional image of a mechanic or any other airline worker? Its more than just the money.​

----------------​

Doesn't the public already hold airplane mechanics in high regard? Does the identity of their union have anything to do with it? Or are we talking about self-esteem here?

Hey, no skin off my nose which union collects your dollars. But if you're gonna beat the TWU, you may need to do better than simply point out to your members how well the Teamsters have performed during crunch time.

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

I agree with FWAAA,
The flying public, or at least this member of the flying public, doesn't care what union (trade or craft) a mechanic, pilot, bag handler, gate agent, flight attendant, etc. belongs to. Their professionalism is shown in the outstanding job they do, but certainly not their union, IMHO.

 

[Bob Owens]

----------------
On 7/29/2003 4:38:33 PM FWAAA wrote:



My bad - I thought it was all about the money.
That figures.

Doesn't the public already hold airplane mechanics in high regard?
Well you are part of the public, your posts dont imply that you hold us in high regard. The fact is what you are paid is a reflection of what the person paying thinks you are worth. AA management feels that their mechanics are worth much less than any of the other major carriers.
Does the identity of their union have anything to do with it?
Of course it does. Look at what a job ALPA has done with the pilots image. As unbeleivable as it sounds AA spent more on building up the public image of mechanics than the TWU,IAM,IBT and even AMFA put together. Remember that commercial with the Crew Cheif " Even a junior mechanic can put this plane out of service".(Sure he could but he might not pass probation.) AMFA had the excuse of their limited resources but what was the other unions excuse? Lack of interest. However as AMFA grows they will have more resources. UAL will make a big difference, plus it looks like USAIR may be next. If the numbers of cards collected are accurate there is a good chance that AMFA has nearly 50% already after all the retirements and resignations are taken into account (assuming that most of the signed cards are not from those workers). With the additional 20 million in concessions that the company is demanding through health benifit cuts (works out to approximately an additional $1000 cut in gross pay/year for each member) you can expect to see a flood of more cards. Wait till the company comes back for the pension!
​

 

[RV4]

----------------
On 7/29/2003 4:54:14 PM FrugalFlyer wrote:

RV4,
Honestly, I was going to read it, but the document / PDF file shows up as 143 pages so I didn't bother (I'm too lazy to).
Can you give me the gist of it in a couple sentences, because I'm curious why one needs a union to bolster the image of professionalism?


----------------​

It's pretty simple really, the conlusion I reach is money, organization, and exposure. The same reason AA needs a Marketing Department.
I do agree with you that individual responsibility is above all, most important.

 

[KCFlyer]

----------------
On 7/29/2003 3:39:14 PM Bob Owens wrote:

Should lawyers belong to The International Brotherhood of Floral Arrangers and Hairdressers? How about Doctors, Plumbers, Electricians, or Pilots? Its more than just the money.​

----------------​

It's more than just the money, but this is the umpteenth thousandth post about how the TWU represented unions are paid less than the other airlines. IMHO, if you put out a vote that said the International Brotherhood of Floral Arrangers and Hairdressers would come in and get you the same contract they got the mechanics at "X" airlines, then you would most likely have 10,000 signatures on you cards by now.
Funny, how this "it's not about the money" really boils down to "It's about the money". Because from what RV4 and Bob and Hopeful have posted, you know, about the concessions that the TWU is giving back to the company....if the AMFA found themselves in the same situation, I doubt that the membership would say "Yes, I'm giving it up....but by God, I'm a member of a trade union that represents mechanics and mechanics only (well, except for the refuelers at UAL). " FAce it Bob...it's about the money...look at the initial post...entitled Industry Wage and Benefits. If that isn't about money, then what is it about?

 

[KCFlyer]

----------------
On 7/29/2003 7:08:47 PM nonrev343434 wrote:

I think Aretha Franklin said it best...R E S P E C T!

Kc Flyer go find a manager to suck up to with your drivel!



----------------​

Well Ryan...are you saying that if AMFA found themselves facing a company that was trying to protect jobs (and keep those union dues that AMFA apparently doesn't need) by asking concessions, and if by chance the AMFA found from a vote of their membership that, yes, this is what we want, that everyone would say "It was an election fair and square, and while we are giving this up, we still are blessed to be represented by a union of and for mechanics"? Or would RV4 have to change his name to IBTDave and fight to have the Teamsters voted in?

BTW - I notice you are a newbie on these boards. I hope for your sake that you aren't a newbie in the mechanic ranks - for if the AMFA is voted in, you will be the first to go, in the name of "class and craft".
Oh yeah...note to RV4 and Bob - since union dues are not the driving force with the AMFA, why not suggest that they make an offer the mechanics can't refuse - waive the dues for the first year after they are voted in....I'll betcha you'll get 10,000 more signature real quick.

 

[nonrev343434]

I think Aretha Franklin said it best...R E S P E C T!

Kc Flyer go find a manager to suck up to with your drivel!

 

[AAmech]

I love these arguments! The only way amfa can brag and beat their chest about pay and bennies is when the TWU GIVES BACK money. Too bad they can't just negotiate a better one themselfs!

 

[RV4]

----------------
On 7/29/2003 915 PM AAmech wrote:


I love these arguments! The only way amfa can brag and beat their chest about pay and bennies is when the TWU GIVES BACK money. Too bad they can't just negotiate a better one themselfs!
----------------
​

What is really amazing is how you defend the "give backs of the TWU".
Who's side are you on anyway?
By the way, is isn't "AMFA" beating their chest. It is your own TWU members complaining. What part of that do you keep failing to understand?

 

[Bob Owens]

----------------
On 7/29/2003 6:18:31 PM KCFlyer wrote:




It's more than just the money, but this is the umpteenth thousandth post about how the TWU represented unions are paid less than the other airlines. IMHO, if you put out a vote that said the International Brotherhood of Floral Arrangers and Hairdressers would come in and get you the same contract they got the mechanics at "X" airlines, then you would most likely have 10,000 signatures on you cards by now.
Funny, how this "it's not about the money" really boils down to "It's about the money". Because from what RV4 and Bob and Hopeful have posted, you know, about the concessions that the TWU is giving back to the company....if the AMFA found themselves in the same situation, I doubt that the membership would say "Yes, I'm giving it up....but by God, I'm a member of a trade union that represents mechanics and mechanics only (well, except for the refuelers at UAL). " FAce it Bob...it's about the money...look at the initial post...entitled Industry Wage and Benefits. If that isn't about money, then what is it about?

----------------​

Do you know what "just" means? Or did you choose to ignore that word because it suited what you wanted to say?
Of course its about the money. But its also about representation, its about nurturing and protecting the craft.Not JUST the money! Understand?

 

[KCFlyer]

----------------
On 7/30/2003 4:13:43 AM Bob Owens wrote:




Do you know what "just" means? Or did you choose to ignore that word because it suited what you wanted to say?
Of course its about the money. But its also about representation, its about nurturing and protecting the craft.Not JUST the money! Understand?

----------------​

I stand corrected...It's not JUST the money, but this is the umpteenth thousandth post about how much less TWU represented unions are paid. It may not JUST be the money, but judging from the threads it would appear to represent about 90% of the issues, 8.5 percent make up a personal thing about a guy named Jim, and 1.5% about the class and craft. Is that better?

 

[Hopeful]

KCFLYER:
The point about getting rid of the TWU does not stem just from this five year rape of its members to stave off bankruptcy. It's about decades of stripping mechanics of the their due compensation because they have always had to "take care" of their majority fleet service. Prior to mechanics having their own seperate bargaining and locals, the TWU voted "collectively" on all issues. So, for instance, if the TWU had negotiated a 10% increase for AA its members BUT called for, say, a $1.00 license increase, it would have been voted down because fleet service felt that mechanics were getting more of an increase even though they held licenses. As, a matter of fact, it HAD turned out that way several contracts back. Ever since 1983, the TWU has given mechanics jobs, not to outside contractors, but to their fleet service members. In the past you were never even able to get anyone from the mechanics' ranks to get elected as local presidents, vice presidents and treasurers because the fleet people DID NOT want mechanics in those positions.

Those are just some of the reasons the TWU has to go. I have stated many times, AMFA may not be the solution, but the TWU needs to pay a price by nor getting millions of dollars in union dues anymore.

For years we have been told by the same TWU leadership that mechanics didn't deserve anything more that mechanics bcause the fleet service jobs were just as important. Because the mechanics have been required to hold A&P licenses, the TWU would then negoatiate with our "necessary certificates" to get maximum increases for "all its members."