As I read yours and others posts that reference outsource, benefit cuts, layoffs, work rule changes etc. the understanding I get from what is typed is that you and others try to debate this like it is just new term negotiations when in FACT this is BK somewhat negotiations where the law of the land resides in the companies corner. I Promise I have really tried to look at it as you and others do but I just don't understand and that is where I am stuck. Right or Wrong depending on who you ask I really can not justify in my own mind that vision of the big picture.
Well I will try to sum up my view. Outsource, benefit cuts, layoffs, and work rules changes are indeed part of this industry.
What is not part of it, is the idea of peddling concessions for jobs that will be lost anyway while taking the same actions and expecting a different result.
In my mind, any company that wants to compete must have a happy and productive work force. Cutting pay under the claim to keep heads when we are in my opinion not productive and not accountable now and it is obvious headcount reductions will exceed the claimed numbers. The 2003 concessions for jobs made that problem worse and we still lost thousands of jobs from the work group. We didn't get what we paid for then, and we will not get what we paid for this time either. There have been for along time too many employees not doing enough. And to cut the pay of those that should have stayed just to keep those that shouldn't have stayed compounded the problem not corrected the problem.
My complaint with your earlier posting was that you volunteer to allow what you keep attacking Ken for and that is outsource of work.
Ken is not to blame anymore than you are, but you cannot attack one person for outsourcing and then turn around and vote yes for an increase in outsourcing. At least not and maintain any credibility in this discussion. It is that double standard that gets me complaining.
Most that are low in seniority are not going to agree with the idea about keeping less heads that are more porductive while paying them better. I can understand why that is. But at some point it will be realized that this is the only way for overhaul to survive. Cutting pay and benefits which does nothing to increase productivity and bringing in more work to keep those left busy is another attempt at a previous failed policy. Cutting pay and benfits angers those staying, while RIF's and higher pay will keep those still working willing to improve production and help management. Angry workers are not going to help turn this sinking ship around.
All management did was address the false excuses they have been using to explain to upper management why they have failed to meet measurement goals. (shift rotations, 7 day coverage, PV days, Overtime Rules,4 x 10's shift work ect. ) Once the excuses are gone, we will soon find that the real problem still remains and that most if not all of the coming changes did nothing but prove they were less than honest about what the problem is. Angry workers will still be digging the hole deeper, not helping to dig out.
But don't deflect away from the double standard you invoked regarding the outsourcing of work. Sure Ken might have been better served politically to not be involved with an organization that promotes outsourcing of work. But neither should you have voted a massive headcount cut and increased outsourcing because your feared what might happen if you took a stand. The TWU has been using the same tactic for years to exact concessions for AA Management. It just so happened that this time they used the bankruptcy laws. But you casn be assured that everytime we enter into negotiations with the TWU there always has been some form of fear to control the voting outcome. Everytime, not just this time.
I doubt this got you seeing any big picture, because I have not seen that myself after 29 years of TWU supporters claiming that picture exist. The only big picture is that which is true and just, and this farce of a Union and farce of a management team is far from that definition.
We can change Unions and my hope is that this will force a change of management. Just a hope, not a promise. But I know doing the same thing over and over is not going to even provide any hope.
