Voting Results

[Tim Nelson]

PHX voted today and is still in process but thus far it is an incredibly 'very large turnout' and a very convincing "YES" vote based on my information. It seems only a few seemed to be voting No.
CLT is a bigtime NO vote, perhaps as much as 90% no's but will not vote until later in the week. Based on several key sources.
The only way this thing can possibly get shot down with the impressive and almost unanamous showing in PHX today is if PHL joins in with their brothers and sisters in CLT and does a slam dunk No vote with a large participation. In fact, 20% of fleet service is based in PHL.

This whole method of voting is insane since stations are voting over a period of a couple weeks and IMO it is a violation of the IAM 141 Bylaws. Time will tell. Anyways, if you know your stations results then feel free to post them here. Or you can contact me at [email protected] if you want me to post them.

The idea is to keep the IAM accountable as much as possible regardless of how someone votes. Their secret regime is always a concern. The more info, the more upfront everything will be.
Below is the information I've obtained to this point and not official. FWIW:

DCA unofficial tally 99 NO 37 Yes
RDU unofficial tally Big No vote

regards,

 

[hack73]

Pit votes next Tuesday and will be an overwhelming NO !

 

[Tim Nelson]

Pit votes next Tuesday and will be an overwhelming NO !

My understanding is that CLP will be a convincing No, quite possible over 95%. PIT ramp will be about a 70% No. Together, CLP and ramp, how many is that? I heard CLP was over 100 and ramp another 300...is this true?

Anyways, if PIT can join in with the other east side stations and bring a no vote into the 90%ile, it could nip PHX and the westies that are voting yes, in the bud. I say it's time for the east to flex its muscle. PHX just attempted to eliminate your profit sharing and flush your arbitration down the john.

regards,

 

[Frontier69]

There is no question that this agreement is not equitable for both East and West. But I do not belive that PHX should be blamed for losing the profit sharing issue. It looks like the IAM negotiated its demise from the agreement. Why did the IAM permit the company to take it away? I think the rank and file membership should scrutinize the IAM leaadership for this point.

 

[727_4_Ever]

The IAM can only give away what we vote to let them give away. Anyone who votes yes for this is volunteering to give away their profit sharing. Anyone out west is giving away much more than that. It adds up to a bunch. We need to let the IAM know that we won't give away our profit sharing or the other things. The concessions are bad enough and the profit sharing was a knife in the back. Then the retro profit sharing was a twist of the knife just to make it worse.

 

[nutts]

im pretty dam sure that sna will be a solid 98% vote NO but were only a small station with to many new hires. also i belive from sorces that las vegas will be atleast from what i have heard 80%NO but im not acurate so...

 

[sunnyinsd]

I posted this on the wrong thread...sorry about that. So I thought I would post here as well.

Hello all...I've been checking this site for the last two years and finally signed up to let you know what I have heard. I'm a westie and can tell you that LAX also voted today and that the US East employees mostly voted "yes" and the US west employees voted "no". As far as PHX goes I have heard from a very reliable source that the guess is about 60% showed up for the vote and majority voted "yes".
I really didn't sign up for this site to debate my position but wanted to let anyone who is interested know what I have heard . I have had the pleasure to meet some very senior (30+) year US East employees and work with them.. So before anyone jumps on the band wagon and tells me I have now idea what I'm talking about etc,etc, I do know everyone's pain and suffering that each has endoured.
I've got a letter that I want to share with everyone that was written by a PHX ramper. I'm totally new to this so forgive me if I totally screw this up, but here goes nothing......well that didn't work so I'll just type it out. I'll also ask in advance for a little slack in the misspelling dept. because I'm going to be typing very fast and I'm sure I'll make some mistakes....without further delay....

August 21, 2007


For the better par of a week, I have been listening to my coworkers comments and reading the many message boards writing s regarding this Transition Agreement contract offering.

As a "westie", I must admit that the lure of a long overdue pay increase is very enticing. Working the same jobs as our "eastie" counterparts for the past two years at a pay level substantially below what tthey have been getting has been hard to swallow. On the surface, it looks that this offer is "a slam dunk" or " a no brainer" to quote what I have been hearing from my "westie" coworkers.

But there has been something about this whole porcess that has bee n troubling me and I had been unable to my finger on it. In listening to and reading about all of two prime emotions, fear and greed. And although these emothins are quite valid, I have tried to keep them out of my decision making process.

Then yesterday, as I was cutting the grass ( and sweating like a pig) it finally dawned on me why I was troubled by this agreement. It was that the processfor handling a grievance, any grievance, was being circumvented. Now I will be the first to tell you that I am not a strong union person. Although I have worked under labor union in the past )most notably the UAW). I was never at the front of any fight. But two things I have always believed in are principal and integrity, For me, that is what this comes down to.

As I said before, on the surface, the lure of a pay increase is very enticing. But there is something larger at work here. If the show were on the other foot and it was the "westies" that thought they had been wronged and had filed a grievance to remedy the situation, our perspective on this being a "slam dunk" or "no brainer" might be different. Even if it wasn't about the Change of Control, which we can all agree is a big issue, the fact that someone has filed a grievance and we are going to be denied the "due process" to have the situation remedied doesn't sit well with me. Perhaps the next grievance that is filed will be the one that more directly affects me. I want to know that I will get my "due process" and have that situation resolved.

You can certainly call me naive on this issue. I'm sure that "back room" deals are made all the time and on a variety of issues. I must also admit that I have many questions remaining on this agreement and the negotiations that got us to this point. But for me, this remains a bigger picture issue, one of principal and integrity.

Every one of us will have their own reason for voting one way or another. It is not my intent to sway you in either direction. All that being said, I have no choice but to vote no on this transition agreement. I hope that you can respect the reason for my vote just as I respect yours.

I have not made wide distribution of this rambling. I have instead chosen to give you a copy as I feel you are an informed and objective person. After you read it , feel free to shred it, burn it, flush it or share it. That choice is yours.


So there you have it...it hit home with me and I hope it does the same with you. I'll be voting "NO" and thanks for your time.

 

[wings396]

Tim, any updated voting results yet???

 

[DCaf]

DCA unofficial tally 99 NO 37 Yes
RDU unofficial tally Big No vote

DCA, for example, must have way more eligible voters than 136. Am I right in assuming that
50% plus 1 of total eligible voters are needed to defeat this TA? Looks like many people in DCA did not vote.
A NON vote is a YES vote?

 

[Tim Nelson]

DCA, for example, must have way more eligible voters than 136. Am I right in assuming that
50% plus 1 of total eligible voters are needed to defeat this TA? Looks like many people in DCA did not vote.
A NON vote is a YES vote?

My understanding is that nothing was posted in DCA so many workers didn't know the vote was happening. Also, RDU has many shifts but the vote was said to only be from 6am-1pm. Many couldn't vote is what I was told.

OTOH, PHX was kept well informed.

regards,

 

[DCaf]

My understanding is that nothing was posted in DCA so many workers didn't know the vote was happening. Also, RDU has many shifts but the vote was said to only be from 6am-1pm. Many couldn't vote is what I was told.

OTOH, PHX was kept well informed.

regards,

In other words, and I know you're not a fan of the IAM Tim, but you're saying the IAM is pushing the turnout in some places and being less aggressive in others?
If a NON vote is considered a YES vote, this thing should pass easily.

 

[perserverance]

Only the votes' cast will be counted....PHL vote Thur.
0700-1900 and I am being told the commitee chair was
asking stewards to drive people down to the hall all day
to get this passed. Thier pushing the less experienced
workers to vote this in.......we'll see.Let me rephrase
that ''he's pushing to get this passed'' ...my guess is he's
looking to get in Canales' good graces (looking for that
union job)........
Thanks

 

[sunnyinsd]

PHX unoffical voting totals Yea's 578, Nea's 42 as of 5:40 pst 8-22-07

 

[freedom]

isn't this just a little bit exciting! it's almost like a national election (except people care) .. i think next time we have a vote we need buttons and posters!

 

[Awa Contract]

Yep - real amusing watching you guys cash in your futures -- hope it was worth it!