The unions are coming, the unions are coming!

[Ch. 12]

700UW asked you a specific question and you give a random reply.

I attended a meating in the UA BK where Tilton was questioned as to why 'HE' did not sacrifice his retirement along with the rest of us. His answer was 'I have a contract'. His 'arrogant' but 'factual' reply speaks volumes as to where the 'ruling class' has control over us as he managed to take ‘our’ contract away in BK.

He has a ‘contract' that supercedes ours, they all do.

It is criminal that the ruling class can do this but we Mericans allow it.

If you have not been paying attention, everyone has been taking it in the shorts but the ruling class.

So, why shouldn’t the ‘minions’ have a contract that is as BK proof.

B) UT

700 asked me nothing. I answered his rather-generalized 'question' that was made to sound much deeper than it truly was. I answered it though and used communism because THAT is what equal pay and equal treatment at every level is about. All of you that get hyped-up and Birched-up don't even know that Communism is an economic theory as already explained in this thread. Just like Dumbya has created the "Axis of Evil" to divert our attention from what he is doing domestically, Reagan played up Communism as the evil in the 80's. It wasn't the economic theory that was our enemy, though, it was the aggressive military stance of the USSR...that had nothing to do with Communism and everything to do with pride. Communism/Capitalism were simply the flags behind which the armies built up forces.

That being said...I point out Communism (which anyone in their right mind can see is an extremely flawed and failed theory) in my response to 700 b/c his question was Communist. Execs have contracts, why don't I? Execs make 6 figures, why don't I? Don't we live in a free-market Capitalism? If that is the case, then there should be different treatment. And I should not be forced by unions to sign a contract that means that my maximum potential is tied to how many breaths I take rather than the quality of work that I do. How meaningful does that make your job? Why should my wages be capped if I am working twice as hard as the people next to me? Conversely...if I am wasting time at work and being very inefficient in what I do, why should I make as much as the people next to me that are working twice as hard as me? That's not the free market. That's Communism.

The problem with Unions is that they, like Reagan's use of "Communism", have become a rallying cry and the people rallying behind them don't even know that they are rallying for. And yes...it has become extremely emotional b/c the highly vocal members (I say "highly vocal" b/c there are the vast majority of union members that are more practical) can only cry "if so-and-so gets it, then I should too...even if I have a different job, work in a different company, or do 1/4 of the work". All the while, the Unions themselves are raking in the dough from their minions and giving back little. Kind of ironic (moronic?) that those that are speaking out against getting taken advantage of are being taken advantage of by their own unions, eh?

So...I have said time and time again that I DO NOT agree with the level of exec compensation at most companies. I will say that the little link that was provided on exec compensation truly points out why DAL people are not as up-in-arms. And exec SHOULD get paid $300k. They work 7 days a week and 18 hours a day. Not the life for me. DAL's execs are right in line with where I view they should be. UAL? NWA? AMR? You all should be fighting mad and b/c of that I do understand why you go on your parades. But look at the numbers and understand why DAL people do not get as worked up.

Now...how do we fix the executive compensation issue? In an industry that is plagued by high costs and cannot afford to increase them any further, wouldn't it make more sense to put the effort on reducing the disparity through some sort of controls on exec compensation rather than through increasing labor costs across the board? Sure...it would be nice to take home more $$ but it is idiotic to look to do it now. Get Tilton, etc to take home less. Perhaps some form of exec compensation regulation is in order? Of course...it would NEVER happen under Dumbya's watch and then again...aren't we talking Communism with either approach since we would be artifically controlling wages/the economy and not allowing the free market to play out?

See...you're a Communist and didn't even know it. Here you though that a Communist simply built nukes and flew MiGs but in fact that has nothing to do with it. A Communist feels that everybody should get the same treatment...and is driven by the working class.

 

[USAir757]

For instance if industries and corporations are allowed to form powerful lobbies and expand globally into areas of the world where they can exploit human beings, then we should have the right to form labor unions, unimpeded by unionbusting, and fight back.

Unfortunately, as you suggest, corporations do have that right... and are quick to exersize it in today's economic environment. As a corollary to that, an economic, social and cultural downturn in our country must be defended. The thing is - you do have the right to form labor unions... but not without argument. Not everyone feels the same way as the next guy, yet unions force you to think the way of your brother (or at least act his way).

Now, please don't pound on me for this - I know many of you feel that union is the only way, and I have no problem admitting that I've been wrong before. But think for a second, hypothetically - what if collectively the "American corporation", calls your bluff? Let's not forget that today's larger [and smaller] American corporation has the resources available to ship jobs offshore, and insource here at home. Again, we may not like it (I certainly don't), but it's happening nonetheless. Picture a scenario where "united we stand, together we fall" brings down the whole house? Corporations start operating offshore, union strikes are early and often, and the domino effect continues? I think what we need to realize is that now more than ever, the "American corporation" doesn't need us like they used to.... as workers or customers. It's a global economy, and we're only a slice of the pie.

Of course, we're in a unique industry where insourcing isn't as readily available (think of three illegal mexican immigrants doing safety presentations in the aisle or wrenching a new Pratt & Whitney :blink: )... but what happens when average Americans can no longer afford to fly? Then we're out too. The us vs. them needs to stop, or this trend will continue.

 

[UnionAMT]

Unfortunately, as you suggest, corporations do have that right... and are quick to exersize it in today's economic environment. As a corollary to that, an economic, social and cultural downturn in our country must be defended. The thing is - you do have the right to form labor unions... but not without argument. Not everyone feels the same way as the next guy, yet unions force you to think the way of your brother (or at least act his way).

Now, please don't pound on me for this - I know many of you feel that union is the only way, and I have no problem admitting that I've been wrong before. But think for a second, hypothetically - what if collectively the "American corporation", calls your bluff? Let's not forget that today's larger [and smaller] American corporation has the resources available to ship jobs offshore, and insource here at home. Again, we may not like it (I certainly don't), but it's happening nonetheless. Picture a scenario where "united we stand, together we fall" brings down the whole house? Corporations start operating offshore, union strikes are early and often, and the domino effect continues? I think what we need to realize is that now more than ever, the "American corporation" doesn't need us like they used to.... as workers or customers. It's a global economy, and we're only a slice of the pie.

Of course, we're in a unique industry where insourcing isn't as readily available (think of three illegal mexican immigrants doing safety presentations in the aisle or wrenching a new Pratt & Whitney :blink: )... but what happens when average Americans can no longer afford to fly? Then we're out too. The us vs. them needs to stop, or this trend will continue.

I realize that many of you might not want to read or try to understand what I'm saying here, so I've included a link at the bottom with more information.
Two presidential candidates; Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee have stated that the Federal Reserve should be shut down. Question; why?


The house of cards scenario you're are suggesting doesn't take into account that there exists people and groups, some might call the powers that be, that see the world as their oyster.To be used as they please. The American people are a thorn to them. They have the money and means to feed the world, yet they'd rather starve people. Labor unions stand in their way. These people control global banking. In fact they,the World Bank, devalued the Peso several years ago, while the Mexican government was suggesting to its' people ways to enter the U.S. illegally. Setting up a scenario of illegals entering the U.S. creating an ultra low wage labor force for the service sector, while our country was being deindustrialized. A direct attack on the unions that have fought for living standards for all.
It's suggested and stated that there's an oil shortage. In fact over 78% of the worlds available oil is untapped. The resource argument. Global warming. History shows that every attempt to usurp Americans follows a steady dose of environmental scare tactics, and suggestions of depleted resources.
One of the architects of Globalization,David Rockefeller, put together the World Trade Organization. His organization is behind the Most Favored Nation trade staus of China. Not surprising. His family has supported trade with communist countries for decades. Ever thought about the Soviet Bloc? Where their operating capital came from? War,arms build-ups, big money makers that keep people employed and at odds. A house of cards, or a house of mirrors?
Here's something to stimulate the thought processes. About ten years ago, survivors of the Holocaust had to sue the Swiss Bank to get back what was stolen from them during Hitlers reign. Curious isn't it. Switzerland was supposed to be neutral.Why did they have to sue to get back what was stolen from them?
The U.S. was in a unique position as an industrial power. Until 1913 we were independent from the global powers. Something the founders tried to assure through our constitution. In 1913 the supreme dupe of the land took place, the signing of the Federal Reserve Act. President Wilson signed it, and then realized, after he read it, that he'd made a bad mistake. The Federal Reserve is not as the name suggests a federally controlled banking institutiton. It is in fact controlled by the Central Bank of Europe.
Khrushchev once said,"if we can't beat the U.S. militarily, we'll beat them economically".

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve.htm Credits to the American Patriot Friends Network

 

[yoyodyne]

I realize that many of you might not want to read or try to understand what I'm saying here, so I've included a link at the bottom with more information.
Two presidential candidates; Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee have stated that the Federal Reserve should be shut down. Question; why?


The house of cards scenario you're are suggesting doesn't take into account that there exists people and groups, some might call the powers that be, that see the world as their oyster.To be used as they please. The American people are a thorn to them. They have the money and means to feed the world, yet they'd rather starve people. Labor unions stand in their way. These people control global banking. In fact they,the World Bank, devalued the Peso several years ago, while the Mexican government was suggesting to its' people ways to enter the U.S. illegally. Setting up a scenario of illegals entering the U.S. creating an ultra low wage labor force for the service sector, while our country was being deindustrialized. A direct attack on the unions that have fought for living standards for all.
It's suggested and stated that there's an oil shortage. In fact over 78% of the worlds available oil is untapped. The resource argument. Global warming. History shows that every attempt to usurp Americans follows a steady dose of environmental scare tactics, and suggestions of depleted resources.
One of the architects of Globalization,David Rockefeller, put together the World Trade Organization. His organization is behind the Most Favored Nation trade staus of China. Not surprising. His family has supported trade with communist countries for decades. Ever thought about the Soviet Bloc? Where their operating capital came from? War,arms build-ups, big money makers that keep people employed and at odds. A house of cards, or a house of mirrors?
Here's something to stimulate the thought processes. About ten years ago, survivors of the Holocaust had to sue the Swiss Bank to get back what was stolen from them during Hitlers reign. Curious isn't it. Switzerland was supposed to be neutral.Why did they have to sue to get back what was stolen from them?
The U.S. was in a unique position as an industrial power. Until 1913 we were independent from the global powers. Something the founders tried to assure through our constitution. In 1913 the supreme dupe of the land took place, the signing of the Federal Reserve Act. President Wilson signed it, and then realized, after he read it, that he'd made a bad mistake. The Federal Reserve is not as the name suggests a federally controlled banking institutiton. It is in fact controlled by the Central Bank of Europe.
Khrushchev once said,"if we can't beat the U.S. militarily, we'll beat them economically".

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve.htm Credits to the American Patriot Friends Network

My God, what kind of aircraft do you work on? UFO's?
Did we party too much in our younger years?

I can see that this is not an issue of union vs. non-union but rather of "New World Order" conspiracies. Please, just this week, another chunk of the Antarctic Ice shelf broke off, Hurricanes are now more destructive, and occur in the Southern Hemisphere, and you state that Global Worming is just a scare tactic!! bah.

Please go back and work on your UFO, I think the Galactic FAA put out a AD on the Oscillation Overthruster, put on your Aluminum Foil helmet, and make sure you close the hatch behind you.

 

[Nor'Easta]

My God, what kind of aircraft do you work on? UFO's?
Did we party too much in our younger years?

I can see that this is not an issue of union vs. non-union but rather of "New World Order" conspiracies. Please, just this week, another chunk of the Antarctic Ice shelf broke off, Hurricanes are now more destructive, and occur in the Southern Hemisphere, and you state that Global Worming is just a scare tactic!! bah.

Please go back and work on your UFO, I think the Galactic FAA put out a AD on the Oscillation Overthruster, put on your Aluminum Foil helmet, and make sure you close the hatch behind you.

For someone who has no clue as to how the airline industry operates, you sure do have a BIG MOUTH!

Take a hike!

 

[Chicken or Beef??]

I believe what AA1016 was stating is, what would be BEST for DELTA F/A's.
The PanAm AQUISITION (not merger as some believe) was fair and equitable for Delta F/A's.

I'm sure AA flight attendants thought the integration with TWA, OZARK, AIR CAL..., etc. Straight to the bottom of the list was fair and equitable for them also. 😱

 

[bagboy]

My God, what kind of aircraft do you work on? UFO's?
Did we party too much in our younger years?

I can see that this is not an issue of union vs. non-union but rather of "New World Order" conspiracies. Please, just this week, another chunk of the Antarctic Ice shelf broke off, Hurricanes are now more destructive, and occur in the Southern Hemisphere, and you state that Global Worming is just a scare tactic!! bah.

Please go back and work on your UFO, I think the Galactic FAA put out a AD on the Oscillation Overthruster, put on your Aluminum Foil helmet, and make sure you close the hatch behind you.

yo yo, Don't go. Please stay. Some of these egg-heads need to relax and laugh a little.

 

[Kev3188]

Kev have you ever been a member of the Birch Society?

Uh, no. I thought my previous responses would have made that patently obvious. Why would I willingly join a group whose principles I'm diametrically opposed to?

Or have you ever picked up and read their magazine "New American".

No. I have no time for propaganda. I have, however, read plenty of other articles (from both sides) about this group as part of research for a term paper done while in college.

This is an organization that is very much pro-constitution and pro-civil rights.

Not according to their past record.

I think that true unionism is precisely in line with my personal beliefs.

true unionism is "all inclusive" (my term), and means a better tomorrow for everyone; not just a select sliver of the populace.

For instance if industries and corporations are allowed to form powerful lobbies and expand globally into areas of the world where they can exploit human beings, then we should have the right to form labor unions, unimpeded by unionbusting, and fight back.

We do. It's call organizing.

 

[NYCDelta]

You dislike the fact that Delta FAs would be working NY-LA turns (ala JB), if it weren't for "Unions" forcing Delta to compete with Union terms. How bout we put two to a room on layovers to save money for Exec.Bonuses?

Actually, there are NY-LA turns already. They go VERY senior. Believe it or not, one thing anti-union people are afraid of is losing things like satellite bases and high-time turns. Of course, if that was important to the FA's they could still keep it-even with a union. I'm sure the AFA will poll FA's as to what is important to them before they start negotiations.

 

[Nor'Easta]

Actually, there are NY-LA turns already. They go VERY senior. Believe it or not, one thing anti-union people are afraid of is losing things like satellite bases and high-time turns. Of course, if that was important to the FA's they could still keep it-even with a union. I'm sure the AFA will poll FA's as to what is important to them before they start negotiations.

We have satellite bases at AA and we're union! We don't want transcon turns and the company does. The union has put their foot down and said no way, no how! Without a union, they would have been implemented.

 

[NYCDelta]

[quote name='Nor'Easta' post='586642' date='Mar 28 2008, 02:18 PM']We have satellite bases at AA and we're union! We don't want transcon turns and the company does. The union has put their foot down and said no way, no how! Without a union, they would have been implemented.[/quote]

When DL started transcon turns (or "over 8 hour turns") we thought the junior people would get stuck with them. It hasn't turned out that way. A turn worth 11.5 hours means 80.5 hours for working 7 days in a month. AND, they're home every night sleeping in their own beds. They go VERY senior. Unfortunately, some people have used scare tactics such as "a union won't allow you to keep these turns" or "a union will want to get rid of satellite bases". The only thing I want to make clear is that the flight attendants at a particular carrier ARE the union. They will decide what to keep and what they don't like. It doesn't matter if AA F/A's don't like high time turns-we do! It doesn't matter if AFA at United doesn't want satellite bases-we do! That's the great thing about polling your own membership; you can see what is important to different people!

 

[JakesWorld]

When DL started transcon turns (or "over 8 hour turns") we thought the junior people would get stuck with them. It hasn't turned out that way. A turn worth 11.5 hours means 80.5 hours for working 7 days in a month. AND, they're home every night sleeping in their own beds. They go VERY senior. Unfortunately, some people have used scare tactics such as "a union won't allow you to keep these turns" or "a union will want to get rid of satellite bases". The only thing I want to make clear is that the flight attendants at a particular carrier ARE the union. They will decide what to keep and what they don't like. It doesn't matter if AA F/A's don't like high time turns-we do! It doesn't matter if AFA at United doesn't want satellite bases-we do! That's the great thing about polling your own membership; you can see what is important to different people!

Yes, we like the high time transcon turns and I for one would not want to see them go. The biggest issue is that if the powers that be with AFA in D.C. see transcon turns adversely affecting another carrier we could not have it in our contract either. Delta's contract should be about DL F/A's only, not what AFA's national officers think it should be. BTW Chris...didn't think you were with DL anymore....

 

[North by Northwest]

Hey you guys. Each carrier negotiates it's individual contract. AFA only offers the legal expertise to seek what the rank and file of Delta orders them to do. The AFA organization works for YOU. You have hired them to represent YOUR wishes. The Delta AFA will be represented by elected Delta Crew members. That is the only affect AFA has on your flight patterns.

At NWA, we have what is called HVTs, high value turns. Trips that are outside of the normal pattern making. Most value in the shortest amount of time (pop. with the sen./mom/husband crowd)

 

[JakesWorld]

Hey you guys. Each carrier negotiates it's individual contract. AFA only offers the legal expertise to seek what the rank and file of Delta orders them to do. The AFA organization works for YOU. You have hired them to represent YOUR wishes. The Delta AFA will be represented by elected Delta Crew members. That is the only affect AFA has on your flight patterns.

At NWA, we have what is called HVTs, high value turns. Trips that are outside of the normal pattern making. Most value in the shortest amount of time (pop. with the sen./mom/husband crowd)

Oh...I must have misread the AFA Constitution and Policy Manual. I understood it to say that all negotiated contracts must go through the national officers, as it could not advesely affect any other AFA carriers, prior to being presented to the membership. I had also read that Pat Friend was directly involved in the NW negotiations, is this true or false? The AFA Constitution/Policy Manual also stated that AFA President Pat Friend must give one the o.k. before speaking with upper management, is this true?

 

[Nor'Easta]

When DL started transcon turns (or "over 8 hour turns") we thought the junior people would get stuck with them. It hasn't turned out that way. A turn worth 11.5 hours means 80.5 hours for working 7 days in a month. AND, they're home every night sleeping in their own beds. They go VERY senior. Unfortunately, some people have used scare tactics such as "a union won't allow you to keep these turns" or "a union will want to get rid of satellite bases". The only thing I want to make clear is that the flight attendants at a particular carrier ARE the union. They will decide what to keep and what they don't like. It doesn't matter if AA F/A's don't like high time turns-we do! It doesn't matter if AFA at United doesn't want satellite bases-we do! That's the great thing about polling your own membership; you can see what is important to different people!

If you want and like them, have it negotiated into your contract (if the AFA is voted in). We at AA don't want to extend our duty day to have them. Extending our duty day is a concession and we will not give any more concessions, period. We have line with 7 on and 23 off, built at 80 hours. The only difference is we still have a 10 hour layover with them, to rest before we go back. Domestic is not International! This is why we have them seperate and they have different legalities then domestic. You at Delta have no legalities. They keep you on-duty for up to 20 hours a day. No thanks. The only legalities you have are the ones the FAA can enforce on Delta.

You can have your transcon turns with a union. Just have it negotiated into the contract. You can also have eveything you currently have and still have it; legal and binding in a CONTRACT!