Union elections and the RLA....POLL!

[BABABOOY]

Certainly they are not the same, but if the current voting method is fair enough for those other two carriers why is it not fair enough for DL/NW FA's? Conversely, if the current voting procedure is so unfair for the DL/NW FA's why was it not also so unfair to those two situations?

Thank you, This is what I have been asking! But an honest answer hasn't been given.
Call it what it is.. the AFA is only looking at $$$ when they see Delta.
The F/A's are just an afterthought.
Mr Luke, It's so transparent I am surprised you can't see it. I think your
honest enough to just admit what they
are really doing here. The AFA could have stepped in and petitioned to change
the voting for those two carriers. They chose NOT to.
As far as your questions about drug testing/christmas lights etc.... I think many of
us would rather take our chances, than choose the infighting, incestuous, power hungry, no due paying,
self serving, pie in the sky promises that is AFA.
Yes they are that bad in my eyes, and no I don't need glasses. At least not yet

BTW, if the AFA were intellectually honest, they would support a change for de-certification
as well.

 

[jalbalpa]

Many more people supporting the YES/NO ballot wrote personal letters then those who opposed it.

 

[Dignity]

Many more people supporting the YES/NO ballot wrote personal letters then those who opposed it.

Since this affects the entire industry how many?

20 thousand? 30 thousand? 40 thousand?

 

[BoeingBoy]

those were form letters with some just having a signature and some of the signatures were not legible.

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I was referring to the poll here as being unscientific, although that could apply as well to the comments received by the NMB. With no controls over the number or representativeness of the sample the comments represent nothing more than an unscientific poll.

Jim

 

[Dignity]

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I was referring to the poll here as being unscientific, although that could apply as well to the comments received by the NMB. With no controls over the number or representativeness of the sample the comments represent nothing more than an unscientific poll.

Jim

I think the comments are important.

however, when I see a lot of form letters with just signatures used as a basis to determine it just does
not give the feeling of sincerity to me.

Its easy to take a copy of a form letter and just sign it and pass it on.

if someone is very passionate about something changing, it would be nice to see that individual sit down and take the time to write down their own thoughts.


these polls..

100 "friends" should not speak for 19,900 other people.

it is so obviously biased when they have these "polls".

 

[BoeingBoy]

Don't worry - the comments from individuals will have little or no bearing on the outcome. Those with the power in the NMB will do whatever they want unless stopped by legislative or legal action.

Jim

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

Thank you, This is what I have been asking! But an honest answer hasn't been given.
Call it what it is.. the AFA is only looking at $$$ when they see Delta.
The F/A's are just an afterthought.
Mr Luke, It's so transparent I am surprised you can't see it. I think your
honest enough to just admit what they
are really doing here. The AFA could have stepped in and petitioned to change
the voting for those two carriers. They chose NOT to.
As far as your questions about drug testing/christmas lights etc.... I think many of
us would rather take our chances, than choose the infighting, incestuous, power hungry, no due paying,
self serving, pie in the sky promises that is AFA.
Yes they are that bad in my eyes, and no I don't need glasses. At least not yet

BTW, if the AFA were intellectually honest, they would support a change for de-certification
as well.

BB,
I am certainly aware of ALL the possibilites, ALL the good and bad involved in this issue.
But the bottom line is that corporate raiders are also interested in "$$$ when they look at Delta."
They spend a lot of "$$$" to keep unions off Delta's property. (BTW, I didn't have a vote in them spending $$$ that could have helped to get f/a's to industry standard on Ford and Harrison.)
My other bottom line is I want a contract. I want things in black and white. I am tired of the inconsistencies, favoritism, excuses and blame-the-flight attendant mentality when it comes to issues such as CBS and unlike you, I am NOT willing to "take a chance" on losing my income, even for 2 weeks, because of a lazy, faulty lab or someone in the back of the a/c making a poorly thought-out decision to leave a Christmas light in the galley in a security sensitive environment when I wasn't even involved. No, I don't want to take the fall for someone's poor decision that I was not remotely involved in. And I don't want to spend my hard-earned "$$$" on an attorney. And I would also like to have a shot at a more realistic retiree health plan than the $582/mo PMDL (single) retirees pay vs. the $182 (single) PMNW retiree f/a's pay.
I can see you have been reading the FB site and see the in-fighting amongst the PMNW f/a's regarding PFAA vs. AFA and the f/a's that took sides with each respective group, didn't have dues check-off, etc...but I am more positive. I say: VOTE THE BUMS OUT!! if AFA comes to Delta, toss out the Drama Queens from PMNW. Get new PMNW "blood" in our AFA leadership but more importantly, get PM DELTA "blood" in leadership positions.
If AFA fails miserably, then get a better union or our own if possible and if worse comes to worse, decertify using the Russell v. NMB case and go back to non union status. (Personally, I wouldn't care if the new decision comes with another way to decertify.)

That's how I feel. You should respect it as I respect your decision. You should also start thinking of how you are going to deal with a unionized environment because if the NMB changes the voting procedures, then I would be very surprised if the "NO" votes outweigh the "YES" votes. (I think MGT feels the same or they would not be so up in arms about the change.)
In closing, I do NOT support several of the tactics or individuals associated with AFA. I'm not a "rubber-stamp" type person. I'm an individual and am not naive. I was not particularly fond of them filing the "lawsuit" about the Seniority Integration. I did not like the "letter to Ed" and I really wasn't crazy about this latest stunt of them painting R.Anderson into a corner with the last letter regarding "Let's Vote Now." But I still want, for business puposes, a CONTRACT and nothing anyone else says is going to change my mind. Just like I'm not going to change your mind.
PS: FYI, this thing about unions keeping "bad" employees in their jobs ...well, they are here at Delta. I know of one FA in particular who is a mess and has been written up, gone into the office about, etc...she's still here. Year after year. So just for the record, that holds no water with me.

 

[Dignity]

It is simply amazing to me, some are absolutely recognizing they are in fact pulling stunts.. but it is all or nothing
as long as some get that contract, as though this will be the only time in the history of aviation to secure a union. it doesnt matter if the working environment falls back to the total dysfunction we have always known, poor labor relations, real division.. as long as some get that promise of an industry leading contract.

Just some words of wisdom, it may be a little blunt..

You will only have a contract that the actual majority finds acceptable and ratifies, so you best hope the AFA will deliver all those promises made to get the group to accept whatever they come up with..because I am not voting for a two bit contract just to make someone feel comfortable and secure...this time, especially if they create a negative working environment fighting with upper Management.. like your AFA Activists have been showing all over the Internet their intent to create as much friction as possible to justify their existence.. while keeping their one sided voting structure that keeps the members voice isolated at the base. While proceeding with whatever plan they have laid out and commence without our input. The division they create is real, pay attention to the other AFA represented carriers if you just do not believe what they do once they are on the scene.

also,

DL is the senior airline in this merger and some still try to convince they are out to get us,

the fact you are the senior airline proves they are not..

totally unbelievable.

The grass is not greener, and some will absolutely find that out for themselves the hard way.

Good luck to us all.

 

[BABABOOY]

I say: VOTE THE BUMS OUT!! if AFA comes to Delta, toss out the Drama Queens from PMNW. Get new PMNW "blood" in our AFA leadership but more importantly, get PM DELTA "blood" in leadership positions.
If AFA fails miserably, then get a better union or our own if possible and if worse comes to worse, decertify using the Russell v. NMB case and go back to non union status. (Personally, I wouldn't care if the new decision comes with another way to decertify.)

Under present rules, you know it won't be easy to vote them out.
You should care if they change the rules to decertify. So should the AFA. It's only fair,
its only honest.

That's how I feel. You should respect it as I respect your decision. You should also start thinking of how you are going to deal with a unionized environment because if the NMB changes the voting procedures, then I would be very surprised if the "NO" votes outweigh the "YES" votes. (I think MGT feels the same or they would not be so up in arms about the change.)

I do respect your decision, I hope that has come through in the past,
if not it should now. Also I have thought if the AFA does get on the property, then
I will get involved and also motivate those who I know who have been outspoken
against Delta, but respectful, get involved as well. There are some great f/a's out there
who are against the AFA but will make great Union reps! Also I will pay dues ;-)
However, I don't think it will come to that. If, and I mean a big IF the NMB decides to
change the rules, then look for a legal battle going to the Supreme Court. This decision
goes way beyond the Airline industry.

PS: FYI, this thing about unions keeping "bad" employees in their jobs ...well, they are here at Delta. I know of one FA in particular who is a mess and has been written up, gone into the office about, etc...she's still here. Year after year. So just for the record, that holds no water with me.

I don't remember stating anything about "bad" employees ??
Trust me when I say I know that there are a few that Delta protects for some reason.

 

[Dignity]

There are some great f/a's out there who are against the AFA but will make great Union reps!

O.M.G.

that is a horrifying comment!

you mean to say there are those who are against the whole idea of Unionism..AFA in particular.. but there is an idea to
secure them into Union positions into an organization that we cannot vote for Officer positions outside our base?

(I really hope that was just your personal opinion!)


guess what?

that is how the Union internal infighting is created.

you think the current reps are just going to give into that idea and freely hand it over to someone who was against them?

I am very sorry but some have no idea what they are talking about! or a clue thinking that is going to be embraced, that is going to go over like a ton of bricks!


I am not buying this dog and pony show people who are against the Union and those fake nice facade people will automatically embrace Unionism, secure themselves into office and everything is going to be peachy!

you are not fooling me sister!

I know what happened the last time those who were "against" the AFA got in office and those who were for them who didnt pay their dues and their rapport!

It is not what I consider harmonious.

PS:

Also I will pay my dues ;-)

whats up with that wink?

 

[BoeingBoy]

O.M.G.

that is a horrifying comment!

you mean to say there are those who are against the whole idea of Unionism..AFA in particular.. but there is an idea to secure them into Union positions into an organization that we cannot vote for Officer positions outside our base?

I took BB's comments to mean those who wheren't necessarily against the idea of a union but weren't especially happy about the AFA.

Think about this - you're not going to change AFA's policies complaining on here. Since you can't vote for anyone but local reps, what better way to attempt to bring about change than to elect local reps who agree with you? Get enough of them on the MEC, and maybe somewhere down the road change will take place - remember that the DL/NW FA's have the chance to elect a number of new people as local reps since no PMDL bases currently have union reps.

Change starts at the bottom, with an involved and informed employee group. If you wait for it to come from the top, you'll be waiting a long time...

Jim

 

[Dignity]

I took BB's comments to mean those who wheren't necessarily against the idea of a union but weren't especially happy about the AFA.

Against the AFA making Great Union reps is pretty crystal clear.

Jim,
I know exactly what I am talking about and witnessed it all.

with all due respect you have no idea what you are talking about here and furthermore.. if there is a remote possibility, a repeat of what happened between those against the AFA going into union positions like what happened the last time?

No way.

Not going down that road again!

Think about this - you're not going to change AFA's policies complaining on here. Since you can't vote for anyone but local reps, what better way to attempt to bring about change than to elect local reps who agree with you?

you may take it as complaining but I actually care so it is all your perspective.

Get enough of them on the MEC, and maybe somewhere down the road change will take place - remember that the DL/NW FA's have the chance to elect a number of new people as local reps since no PMDL bases currently have union reps.

we do not vote for the MEC and very limited who they actually allow us to vote for as a member.

that is the problem now, they do not let us vote for all Officer positions within our own airline!

Change starts at the bottom, with an involved and informed employee group. If you wait for it to come from the top, you'll be waiting a long time...

change can also start by "complaining" or is it caring?

take your pick.

 

[BoeingBoy]

with all due respect you have no idea what you are talking about here

You're right as it pertains to whatever problems you've (NW FA's) had with the AFA or other unions in the past. But the things you dislike are the same as I saw for much of my 27 year career - cronyism, MEC disregarding the desires of the members (and members blaming the union for things the members ratified), recall election games, etc.

and furthermore.. if there is a remote possibility, a repeat of what happened between those against the AFA going into union positions like what happened the last time?

No way.

Not going down that road again!

You can only escape that remote possibility by being non-union which presents it's own set of unpleasant possibilities - remote or not.

you may take it as complaining but I actually care so it is all your perspective.

You apparently see "complaining" as having a negative connotation but people generally don't complain about things they don't care about. I have no doubt that you care greatly about these subjects, but will effect no change by commenting on them here - I doubt that 1% of DL/NW FA's even read these forums (the same hold for other groups and other airlines).

we do not vote for the MEC and very limited who they actually allow us to vote for as a member.

I'm still confused then - I thought, like ALPA, the AFA MEC was composed of the local reps but that, like ALPA again, the MEC officers weren't voted on by the membership.

that is the problem now, they do not let us vote for all Officer positions within our own airline!

And this is why I'm confused - what seem to be conflicting statements. Is it the MEC that isn't elected by the members, just the MEC officers, or both?

change can also start by "complaining" or is is caring?

Both mean the same in this context as far as I'm concerned. As I said, those who don't care about something usually don't complain about it. I think we've enter the realm of a previous discussion where I asserted that the membership can effect change if they're involved and informed while you enumerated the "reasons" why the membership couldn't be involved or informed.

As I said in the last post, change starts at the bottom. If those at the bottom - the membership - just _______ (complain or care, take your pick) among themselves but take no action to effect change, change will never come. I firmly believe that.

Jim

 

[Dignity]

You're right as it pertains to whatever problems you've (NW FA's) had with the AFA or other unions in the past. But the things you dislike are the same as I saw for much of my 27 year career - cronyism, MEC disregarding the desires of the members (and members blaming the union for things the members ratified), recall election games, etc.

I will tell you what they need to do regarding these proposed YES/NO formats.

going forward there needs to be the ability to have three elections using the YES/NO.

1. initial election determining Union representation- the group will vote using a YES/NO ballot and determine they actually wish to have Union Representation. (there are no Unions on the that ballot) as this election will simply determine how to proceed. If the group majority chooses to secure Representation a second election will commence using a YES/NO ballot with a list of eligible Unions. If the group majority chooses not to have any Representation its over right there.

if the vote is majority YES, the second election is established with a list of Unions, if the majority vote is NO, thats it!

that would allow those who are determined they must have a contract an ability to maintain a Union going forward,
if the majority chooses YES.

2. second election determining the Union Representative- the group will vote using a YES/NO ballot and will choose from a list of eligible Unions and will mark YES for a particular Union on the list or simply vote NO for all Unions on the list. The actual majority in that election will determine who is the winner. If a particular Union has the most YES votes they are the representative, if the majority of votes is NO, there is no winner/no Representation.

3. election removing a Union from the property- the group will have an opportunity to vote out a Union using a YES/NO ballot and the majority of either YES or NO will determine if the Union stays...or goes.

You can only escape that remote possibility by being non-union which presents it's own set of unpleasant possibilities - remote or not.

well!

sometimes you just gotta do what ya gotta do!

You apparently see "complaining" as having a negative connotation but people generally don't complain about things they don't care about. I have no doubt that you care greatly about these subjects, but will effect no change by commenting on them here - I doubt that 1% of DL/NW FA's even read these forums (the same hold for other groups and other airlines).

you see it as complaining and a negative connotation, I simply clarified that I do not see it that way,

at all.

I'm still confused then - I thought, like ALPA, the AFA MEC was composed of the local reps but that, like ALPA again, the MEC officers weren't voted on by the membership.

the LEC votes for the MEC and we, members only vote for the LEC.

its like this, you vote for Mayor in your city, but you cannot vote for the Governor of the State or President.. the way AFA has it set up. You only vote for those at your base, as a member. You do not participate in the vote of MEC or National, as a member.

excuse me? I pay them dues not the other way around.

hello?

And this is why I'm confused - what seem to be conflicting statements. Is it the MEC that isn't elected by the members, just the MEC officers, or both?

the point is simply it should not be a confusing process. it should be a clear and to the point.

the members elect all Officers.

the way they have it set up is like..

:blink:

Both mean the same in this context as far as I'm concerned. As I said, those who don't care about something usually don't complain about it. I think we've enter the realm of a previous discussion where I asserted that the membership can effect change if they're involved and informed while you enumerated the "reasons" why the membership couldn't be involved or informed.

those who care are actually the ones who make the most noise.

those who dont care dont do anything.

As I said in the last post, change starts at the bottom. If those at the bottom - the membership - just _______ (complain or care, take your pick) among themselves but take no action to effect change, change will never come. I firmly believe that.

thats great you believe that as everyone is entitled to their personal opinion!

 

[jalbalpa]

Dignity, Jim is correct.

The membership votes for the MEC.

The MEC is every LEC President. So at NWA, the 10 Council Presidents make up the MEC.....they then vote for the 3 MEC officers. But the MEC officers carry no votes, only the LEC Presidents have votes.

So YOU DO vote for the MEC!