U.S. May Ease Rule On Labor Vote

[bagboy]

James Obersar who is the Chairman of the House Committe on Transportation and Infrastructure and George Miller who is the Chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor strongly support this change. A letter from them was sent to the NMB dated October 29th.

Tom Harkin the Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee in the Senate is currently spearheding efforts to gain support in the U.S. Senate.

James Obersar publicly supported stopping this bastard ass merger before he rolled over and kissed RA in bed.

 

[Dignity]

someone needs to start and show some Leadership ability.. making a decision, so we can move forward with an election.

 

[southwind]

If this article is correct, then -- "paging BB, dapoes and aislehopper to the storage room": you guys better get in there and toss out the "Don't Click; Don't Dial" and "Give It A Rip" posters and hand-outs left over from the last elections!!!! Y'all gonna have to click and dial 'NO' this time 'round. :bleh:

http://www.twincities.com/business/ci_13664666?source=rss

And let the games begin...............woo-hoo !

No more excuses for delaying ..........................right ? :blink:

 

[southwind]

RLA states companies must remain neutral. How does "Don't Click, Give a Rip" show neutrality?
We've been down this road before. Turn the page.

How does changing the rules , during the game, show fairness ?

 

[Dignity]

delaying the outcome does not change what the majority decides to do.

 

[BoeingBoy]

delaying the outcome does not change what the majority decides to do.

No, but it may change the meaning of the word "majority" which may change the result. Since I don't know the actual numbers, say 20,000 people would be eligible to vote under the current rule - 10,001 "Yes" votes would be the majority needed for the AFA to win. Say the rules change to only requiring a majority of those who vote and 17,000 votes are cast (there'll always be those who don't vote) - AFA needs only 8,501 votes to win. I have no idea of the number of FA's leaning one way or the other, but just numerically it's easier to get 8,501 votes than it is to get 10,001 votes.

Jim

 

[Dignity]

it's easier to get 8,501 votes.

right.

then,

harder to have any leverage.

 

[BABABOOY]

Well its official :


US agency proposes change for airline union votes

http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentF...244267620091102

Strap yourselves in, its going to be a bumpy ride.....

 

[dapoes]

Strap yourselves in, its going to be a bumpy ride.....

Weeeee!!!!!!!

 

[BoeingBoy]

right.

then,

harder to have any leverage.

That will depend on the sentiment of the employees in the group after the election. If they get involved and run/support the union for the benefit of the workers, there'll still be leverage - it's the workers that make the union, not the union that makes the workers.

However, if the union dismisses the workers and is run as a private club only catering to the few the union will have little leverage no matter what method was used to elect it.

Jim

 

[goodgirl37]

How does changing the rules , during the game, show fairness ?

Because the rules arent on a level playing field right now, when someone doesnt vote, it goes as a vote for the company, that is not fair, imagine if it were the opposite, the company would be throwing fits to get it changed! Get real southwind.

 

[700UW]

AWESOME, about time, level the playing field!

 

[dapoes]

Wasn't unanimous by no means...Link

That's the rationale of the board, where two of its three members say current procedures are at odds with "the basic principles of democratic elections" and the idea of employee participation in workplace matters.

But NMB chairwoman Elizabeth Dougherty wrote a feisty dissent, questioning the board's authority to modify a rule that goes back to the time of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. She argues that the current rules reflect the goal of keeping stability in the airline and railroad industries and avoiding any interruption in commerce.

Most large airlines, including Delta, also oppose the change. The Air Transport Association further claims it is unfair to change the rule on forming unions without also making it easier for airline workers to decertify a union.

 

[Dignity]

That will depend on the sentiment of the employees in the group after the election. If they get involved and run/support the union for the benefit of the workers, there'll still be leverage - it's the workers that make the union, not the union that makes the workers.

a hopeful theory.

However, if the union dismisses the workers and is run as a private club only catering to the few the union will have little leverage no matter what method was used to elect it.

a tragic reality.

 

[southwind]

Because the rules arent on a level playing field right now, when someone doesnt vote, it goes as a vote for the company, that is not fair, imagine if it were the opposite, the company would be throwing fits to get it changed! Get real southwind.

How 'bout this for real! When Delta starts throwing it's weight around with memos , flyers and such, saying, " Make sure to vote, every no vote counts as much as a yes vote", don't start yer whining, they're just playing by "YOUR" new rules !