United Pensions

[goingboeing]

For all you "strike" voters (who happen to not work at UAL), I guess it looks like we didn't have the GUTS to do it. So who's it gonna be? Who is going to show us how to shut down their company, get in line for unemployment, and show us how striking yourself out of work is a good idea? Step right up! 🙂

[post="269488"][/post]​

"My"company hasn't taken my pension or went to court to abragate the collective bargaining agreement.Thus,there is no reason to strike at this point.

We are still making more money that most legacy carriers are paying,even after the concessions of 2003.And we still have our defined benefit pension plan.

I guess if what UAL management has done so far is acceptable then there is no reason to strike against them either.

 

[Fly]

When AA decides to dump their pensions, is it enough for you? I doubt it.

 

[delldude]

Two options

1. Contract is thrown out. Better than 50% chance at this point in time.

2. Since Amfa is broke, they negotiate a provision to pay amfa national and legal council in exchange to bring back the final offer from United!!!!

[post="269005"][/post]​

shoulda stayed at iam at least you know them...

 

[Emil.Howes]

shoulda stayed at iam at least you know them...

[post="269508"][/post]​

CIO is a twu stooge with AA and has no play in this.
FYI, AMFA will not cross a picket line, can you say the same for rest of the afl-cio affiliated unions?

 

[proAMFA]

Shamefully it is unpredictable whether the great AFL-CIO unions will or will not scab across an AMFA line. AMFA has already announced they will honor any UAL picket lines.

The AFL-CIO affiliated TWU allows headhunters to come into MCI in order to hire scab labor. It's hard to support the AFL-CIO under these conditions.

What part of unionism do they not understand?

 

[Bob Owens]

"My"company hasn't taken my pension or went to court to abragate the collective bargaining agreement.Thus,there is no reason to strike at this point.

We are still making more money that most legacy carriers are paying,even after the concessions of 2003.And we still have our defined benefit pension plan.

I guess if what UAL management has done so far is acceptable then there is no reason to strike against them either.

[post="269492"][/post]​

If your company is AMR and you are a mechanic then you are wrong. When the time to take a stand came in 2003 you didnt do it.

When you figure in the loss of holiday pay, doubletime and other concessions we are making less than many other airlines, even UAL.

Our DB plan, which is underfunded by the way, is cheaper(especially when you short the payments) than a DC plan.

As time goes by a portable DC plan is looking better and better. A DB plan becomes a liability if the company can use it as a means to other concessions. They get the concesions today then later come back for that tomorrow. With a DC plan they cant touch it. The fact that you have a promise from AMR means nothing. When the company took away 25% and you did nothing proves that when they come back for the pension (which equates to a less than 5% reduction in pay) you will once again do nothing.

The fact is that the workers at AA have no grounds to criticze those at UAL because AA workers are the scabs of the industry. Workers at AA gave up more outside of BK than those in BK gave up. In fact the UAL proposal is nearly an exact copy of what the TWU gave AMR.

But then again, thats always been the case. The unions at AMR have always been company unions. Those of us who are stuck in such unions have benifitted over the years because workers at other carriers such as UAL, USAIR, NWA and EAL took a stand where ours did not.

That said, until we can get rid of our useless unions, I hope that these workers do take a stand. Will UAL "cease to exist"? I doubt it. Why? Because the system is already running with historically high load factors and too many other industries and communities will be impacted by the loss of that much system capacity. Lets not forget that even though UAL claims they are losing money those that do business with UAL are still making tons of money. Look at the amount of cash that UAL takes in, then triple that for what the service they provide helps generate. If UAL ceases operations all those other entities see their cash cut off too. The other carriers lack the ability or the cash to absorb UAL.

Sure its a gamble, but the path we are following in this industry is just the long road to financial ruin. We will end up with nothing in the end, everything that we sacrificed for when we chose this career will be gone, however those in control will have made their fortunes. Instead of the money generated from the service our labor provides going to us, it will go to the lendors, lessors, fuel companies, airport owners and stockholders. All people who who sat safely on the ground, in bed at night and home with their loved ones on holidays and weekends. Why put in years of work if you end up in the same place you could end up in if you fight back? Why not just fight back now? In a worst case scenario at least they get to feel a little pain too, when the planes stop flying, they will feel pain, instead of just the workers feeling all the pain.

 

[Bagbelt]

Got to keep that "rent" coming in to your local airport "authority" to pay some state rep.'s kids coach his $70 k. a year for walking around with a clip board. Wait, I'm sorry, they're "hero's" too.

 

[Bob Owens]

Got to keep that "rent" coming in to your local airport "authority" to pay some state rep.'s kids coach his $70 k. a year for walking around with a clip board. Wait, I'm sorry, they're "hero's" too.

[post="270309"][/post]​

Thats right.
What I would like to see happen here is for the workers at UAL to vote "NO" and strike. But wait, I'm not done.

When they go on strike the ALPA, IAM and CWA/AFA should request help from the AFL-CIO in that all affiliated unions assist in the strike. THat means that workers from UAL set up pickets at all the airlines and workers there that are unionized honor those pickets. So UAL would not be the only Airline to cease operations, all the unionized carriers would cease operations. The hundreds of thousands of people that board aircraft daily would have to squeeze onto Jet Blues 60 aircraft. The Hotels, car rentals, tourist spots etc would simply have to do without, like we have been told to do.

The fact is with all thats going on at the AFL-CIO and within the labor movement there is a need to prove that the labor movement is relevant. If you vote to give away more, you take them all off the hook. They sit back, collect their six figure salaries and blame the decline of living standards on the unwillingness of the workers to fight for a better life. Vote NO and then they have to do something.

One thing we could count on is government response. But then it gets more interesting. The RLA grants us the right to secondary picketing. For the last two years the government, the airlines and even our own unions have been treating us like we should be greatful that they allow us to work, therefore we should agree to alter our contracts and allow the airlines to pay us whatever they feel like. If thats their position, that we should be greatful to have a job at all, then how could they justify forcing us back to work? I'm sure they will once again cite their actions based upon the fact that we provide an essential service.

 

[aafsc]

Even if the unionized employees of the non-bankrupt carriers decided to shut the industry down in support of the UA people, the UA people themselves would probably not participate. Why? Because a strike would quickly kill UA forever (along with US,DL,and CO). Only NW and AA could sustain a shutdown; and only a very very short one at that because of their cash levels. So the very people (UA people) that this action would intend to help, would actually put them on the street permanantly. So I would not envision the UA employees participating in an industry wide shut down. I think that they will ratify the agreements. The industry conditions for an industry wide shutdown were perfect at the time of the EAL battle. As we all know, it did not happen and now all the employees are paying the price for their lack of action at the EAL situation.

 

[Bob Owens]

Even if the unionized employees of the non-bankrupt carriers decided to shut the industry down in support of the UA people, the UA people themselves would probably not participate. Why? Because a strike would quickly kill UA forever (along with US,DL,and CO). Only NW and AA could sustain a shutdown; and only a very very short one at that because of their cash levels. So the very people (UA people) that this action would intend to help, would actually put them on the street permanantly. So I would not envision the UA employees participating in an industry wide shut down. I think that they will ratify the agreements. The industry conditions for an industry wide shutdown were perfect at the time of the EAL battle. As we all know, it did not happen and now all the employees are paying the price for their lack of action at the EAL situation.

[post="270461"][/post]​

Well you have some good points but do you really think that the government wants a supercarrier to arise from the ashes? We saw how just a few short years ago the government blocked the merger of USAIR and UAL because it would create an uncompetative enviornment. If they both dissapeared then we would end up with even less major carriers. These remaining carriers would then focus on wiping out the smaller upstarts like they did before (Laker, Capitol, Air Florida, Peoples Express etc.)

 

[alexander66]

Thats right.
What I would like to see happen here is for the workers at UAL to vote "NO" and strike. But wait, I'm not done.

When they go on strike the ALPA, IAM and CWA/AFA should request help from the AFL-CIO in that all affiliated unions assist in the strike. THat means that workers from UAL set up pickets at all the airlines and workers there that are unionized honor those pickets. So UAL would not be the only Airline to cease operations, all the unionized carriers would cease operations. The hundreds of thousands of people that board aircraft daily would have to squeeze onto Jet Blues 60 aircraft. The Hotels, car rentals, tourist spots etc would simply have to do without, like we have been told to do.

The fact is with all thats going on at the AFL-CIO and within the labor movement there is a need to prove that the labor movement is relevant. If you vote to give away more, you take them all off the hook. They sit back, collect their six figure salaries and blame the decline of living standards on the unwillingness of the workers to fight for a better life. Vote NO and then they have to do something.

One thing we could count on is government response. But then it gets more interesting. The RLA grants us the right to secondary picketing. For the last two years the government, the airlines and even our own unions have been treating us like we should be greatful that they allow us to work, therefore we should agree to alter our contracts and allow the airlines to pay us whatever they feel like. If thats their position, that we should be greatful to have a job at all, then how could they justify forcing us back to work? I'm sure they will once again cite their actions based upon the fact that we provide an essential service.

[post="270322"][/post]​

all i can say to you, Owens, is that you are as dumb as a door stop.

 

[Bob Owens]

all i can say to you, Owens, is that you are as dumb as a door stop.

[post="270755"][/post]​

Well if thats all you can say then obviously you are dumber than a doorstop.