AMFA at AA- consolidated thread

[robbedagain]

How is it that AA could have had the list soo quickly submitted just short time after the IBT filed and if they filed after AMFA filed something does not sound right here I may be just a FSA at US but this whole thng with AMFA IBT and AA for you mechanics is sure interesting

 

[Bob Owens]

Where is Ken, Chuck and especially Bob?

Been pretty busy trying to get this local formed. Its like 1999 all over again but 5 times more. Waiting for a flight so I had a little time to kill.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

In AMFA's letter it states, and I quote; "The NMB then denied the right of AA mechanics to submit their authorization cards in favor of AMFA's intervenor status." Therefore if AMFA was denied submission of cards then they should not be considered as filed. Now let's say teamsters do not have enough cards, which we will know within a month. Then could AMFA file at that time since the cards were not submitted this time? Think about it guys.

Worse case scenario; Let's say no vote comes from the teamsters filing, TWU stays in place during merger, then could AMFA file under the other terms of a merger?

Now let's say for some mirical that the teamsters do get a vote, after this freakin fiasco, everyone could write AMFA in.
Just thinking out loud here guys. But per the NMB's ruling "AMFA's cards were never submitted". This tells me AMFA has a second chance to file if teamsters fail to get an election, or, at merger time, or if there really is an election, "write in AMFA". Give it some thought guys and let's throw some ideas around. Maybe a last resort is a class action law suit for rights violation of the AA mechanics. I am only going by the AMFA letter and I have no idea how the actual ruling is written by the NMB. Any input???

§ 1206.4 Time limits on applications.
Except in unusual or extraordinary circumstances, the National Mediation Board will not accept an application for investigation of a representation dispute among employees of a carrier:
(a) For a period of two (2) years from the date of a certification covering the same craft or class of employees on the same carrier, and
( B) For a period of one (1) year from the date on which:
(1) The Board dismissed a docketed application after having conducted an election among the same craft or class of employees on the same carrier and less than a majority of valid ballots cast were for representation; or
(2) The Board dismissed a docketed application covering the same craft or class of employees on the same carrier because no dispute existed as defined in § 1206.2 of these rules; or
(3) The Board dismissed a docketed application after the applicant withdrew an application covering the same craft or class of employees on the same carrier after the application was docketed by the Board.

[44 FR 10602, Feb. 22, 1979, as amended at
75 FR 26088, May 11, 2010]

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

Maybe a last resort is a class action law suit for rights violation of the AA mechanics. I am only going by the AMFA letter and I have no idea how the actual ruling is written by the NMB. Any input???

No violations of anything. Face it AMFA screwed up. Even in AMFA release they say they first filed electronically. That is violation of rules and didn't count.

Applications
Applications for the services of the NMB under Section 2, Ninth, to investigate representation disputes among a carriers’ employees must be made on Form NMB-1, available from the NMB’s Office of Legal Affairs or at www.nmb.gov. Only applications with original signatures submitted to the NMB’s office in Washington, DC, and accompanied by original authorization cards will be accepted. Applications and authorization cards will not be accepted by facsimile or electronic mail. The application must meet the following requirements set forth in NMB Rules §1203.2 (29 CFR §1203.2):
1) It must be signed by the chief executive officer of the international or national organization or other specifically designated and authorized officers.
2) It must specify the craft or class of employees and the estimated number of employees in the craft or class.
3) It must identify whether there is an incumbent representative.
4) It must be accompanied by signed authorization cards from the employees in the craft or class in dispute. The authorizations must comply with the requirements in Manual Sections 3.0 and 18.0 and NMB Rules § 1206.4 (29 CFR § 1206.4).

http://www.nmb.gov/representation/representation-manual.pdf

http://www.nmb.gov/documents/nmbrules1099.html#1206

 

[Thomas Paine]

Seems to me this thread should be called "AA beats AMFA in filing".

In the court of public opinion, which nowadays is probably more just, AA is without a doubt complicit. 6 hours and they produced a list!

If the IBT falls short it will surely sully the image of every worker in this industry against the IBT. The IBT will be ruined in Aviation, they will never get another card signed by a mechanic because regardless of what Union people support they support the right to vote.

The worst part would be all those who bought in and supported the IBT. Those who truly believed that the IBT would be the right choice for our profession. They will be humiliated and feel used. They will never again support the IBT. Look at how many non-mechanics have already commented on this. Die hard IAM supporters and FSCs who have no dog in the fight are taken aback. Colluding with a company to prevent a vote, no matter what union is involved is unacceptable, it would just goes to show how low and how unprincipled that the leaders of the labor movement have become.

Hopefully I'm wrong, hopefully Labor has not become that corrupted that they would put rivalries ahead of the right to vote. If true, they would have undermined all their reform efforts, how can they gain support for card check and other representation election reforms when they try to deny workers what they claim they are trying to get workers?

Guess we will find out in a few weeks. AMFA should take this to court, if the IBT has enough cards, drop the complaint and move on, if the IBT comes up short continue with the suit. If the IBT comes up short I'm sure some of those AA-IBT organizers would be willing to testify that the IBT knew they were short cards and filed to prevent an AMFA vote.

Big gamble for the IBT, if they have enough they look bold, daring which is good, but if they don't then they look like they sold. It may not matter to a Judge but it will matter to the workers.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

a three way run off.

A run-off election is only between the two that receive the most votes in the initial election when there are multiple choices and one doesn't get a majority of the valid ballots cast. (i.e. 50% +1)

Assuming the IBT does have enough cards and an election is authorized the ballot will look like this and in this order. If there was an intervenor they would be #3 and the rest would move down one number

1. Incumbent TWU
2. Applicant IBT
3. Write in option
4. No Representative

If none get a majority (50 +1) then only the top two vote receivers go to a run-off election.

AMFA can win the initial election or force a run-off. So don't give now AMFA supporters yet

It is NMB practice to list the incumbent, the applicant, the intervenor, the "write-in" option, and the "no representative" option in descending order on the Instructions. If there is no incumbent and more than one applicant, the Investigator will determine the placement of the names.

Valid Votes
Voters will have the opportunity to vote for representation by an organization or individual or for "no representative." Where the voter’s intent to vote for representation is clear, the vote is valid and will be counted as a vote for representation. If an organization or individual receives a majority of votes cast, it will be certified as the representative. If the majority of votes cast are for "no representative," there will be no representative certified. In the event of a tie vote between votes for representation and votes for no representation, no representative will be certified.
Valid votes for representation include "write-in" votes which clearly indicate the voter’s desire for representation. A voter must affirmatively "speak in" (telephone) or "write-in" (Internet) the name of an individual or organization to cast a valid vote.

When an election results in no option receiving a majority of the valid ballots, or in the event of a tie, the Board shall hold a run-off election between the two options receiving the largest number of votes. The procedures for run-off elections are set forth in the NMB Rules § 1206.1 (29 CFR § 1206.1).
In a run-off election, the ballot will not include a space for "write-in" votes. The option receiving the highest number of votes in the run-off is declared the winner. (See 29 C.F.R. § 1206.1).

I highly suggest all read the Representation Manual especially the information about the voting procedures and valid votes.

http://www.nmb.gov/representation/representation-manual.pdf

 

[bigbear52]

AMFA says it filed names, but NMB won’t let it on ballot for American Airlines ..........
From Dallas Morning News click link to read article

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2013/05/amfa-says-it-filed-names-but-nmb-wont-let-it-on-ballot-for-american-airlines-mechanics.html/

AMFA rejected again

 

[Rogallo]

Big gamble for the IBT, if they have enough they look bold, daring which is good, but if they don't then they look like they sold.

Forged cards or not??

 

[700UW]

How does a write a write in work when voting by phone?

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

How does a write a write in work when voting by phone?

If you read or knew the Representation Manual you wouldn't ask.

Valid votes for representation include "write-in" votes which clearly indicate the voter’s desire for representation. A voter must affirmatively "speak in" (telephone) or "write-in" (Internet) the name of an individual or organization to cast a valid vote.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

The courts have uniformly held that the validity of the showing of interest is an administrative determination and "may not be litigated by either the Employer or the Union"

 

[AMFAinMIAMI]

Been pretty busy trying to get this local formed. Its like 1999 all over again but 5 times more. Waiting for a flight so I had a little time to kill.

Bob

12k post in all the yrs, one of the most here advocating for the membership and with all that has transpired in the last two days this is what you got?

I been busy with setting up the TWU's new line local ????????

I would think you would have a little bit of rage, since that is the way alot of us feel.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

Bob

12k post in all the yrs, one of the most here advocating for the membership and with all that has transpired in the last two days this is what you got?

I been busy with setting up the TWU's new line local ????????

I would think you would have a little bit of rage, since that is the way alot of us feel.

Rage for what? AMFA's failure? That rage I would understand

 

[swamt]

The courts have uniformly held that the validity of the showing of interest is an administrative determination and "may not be litigated by either the Employer or the Union"

The AMFA committee needs to retain Seham for a buck and litigate it as a private group, not company and not the union. Protest it AMFA!!!

 

[Anomaly]

A run-off election is only between the two that receive the most votes in the initial election when there are multiple choices and one doesn't get a majority of the valid ballots cast. (i.e. 50% +1)

Assuming the IBT does have enough cards and an election is authorized the ballot will look like this and in this order. If there was an intervenor they would be #3 and the rest would move down one number

1. Incumbent TWU
2. Applicant IBT
3. Write in option
4. No Representative

If none get a majority (50 +1) then only the top two vote receivers go to a run-off election.

AMFA can win the initial election or force a run-off. So don't give now AMFA supporters yet

It is NMB practice to list the incumbent, the applicant, the intervenor, the "write-in" option, and the "no representative" option in descending order on the Instructions. If there is no incumbent and more than one applicant, the Investigator will determine the placement of the names.

Valid Votes
Voters will have the opportunity to vote for representation by an organization or individual or for "no representative." Where the voter’s intent to vote for representation is clear, the vote is valid and will be counted as a vote for representation. If an organization or individual receives a majority of votes cast, it will be certified as the representative. If the majority of votes cast are for "no representative," there will be no representative certified. In the event of a tie vote between votes for representation and votes for no representation, no representative will be certified.
Valid votes for representation include "write-in" votes which clearly indicate the voter’s desire for representation. A voter must affirmatively "speak in" (telephone) or "write-in" (Internet) the name of an individual or organization to cast a valid vote.

When an election results in no option receiving a majority of the valid ballots, or in the event of a tie, the Board shall hold a run-off election between the two options receiving the largest number of votes. The procedures for run-off elections are set forth in the NMB Rules § 1206.1 (29 CFR § 1206.1).
In a run-off election, the ballot will not include a space for "write-in" votes. The option receiving the highest number of votes in the run-off is declared the winner. (See 29 C.F.R. § 1206.1).

I highly suggest all read the Representation Manual especially the information about the voting procedures and valid votes.

http://www.nmb.gov/r...tion-manual.pdf

😱

Thanks for the clarification.