AMFA sold us out.
- Thread starter 1withIntegrity
- Start date
High Speed Steel
Veteran
- Feb 14, 2004
- 1,375
- 136
Hey thirdseat, This may help to get the subject back on topic. This was the running order for the achievements of the amfa as of Feb. 2005. As you can see items 1-8 were their achievements at NW. Then items 9-14 were their achievements at UA. I thought that since you cared to venture over to the AA forum and spew your opinions that I should return the favor and just be neighborly.
I'm sure their will be plenty to add to the list begining with item #15. That will reflect the failed strike that generated the topic of this particular forum.
You know, "amfa sold us out".....
See below>>>>
1. FM1= Dead issue
2. FM2= Dead issue
3. 50%+1 at AA for a vote= Dead issue
4. Recall of national officers= Too many holes in it
5. Willing to debate in public forum= Lack charisma to face truth
6. Lead by a realestate tycoon= Proven Fact
7. Vote on all letters of agreement= Bull $hitttt
8. Leading industry on outsourcing= Proven Fact
9. Does not negotiate concessions= """""Oooooooop's""""
10. Negotiates "Snap Back"= Sorry, folks!!!
11. National negotiates their cut="da-money, da-money is mine"
12. 60 day's to, "tweak the language"= "Hmmmmmm???"
13. Membership votes for strike= "Without Further Ratification" :wub: "Delle"
14. Better off in "Bankruptcy"= The proof is in the "PUDDING"
15.
----------------------------
amfa: The YUGO of the labor movement
Where bargaining means YOU GO.....!
I'm sure their will be plenty to add to the list begining with item #15. That will reflect the failed strike that generated the topic of this particular forum.
You know, "amfa sold us out".....
See below>>>>
1. FM1= Dead issue
2. FM2= Dead issue
3. 50%+1 at AA for a vote= Dead issue
4. Recall of national officers= Too many holes in it
5. Willing to debate in public forum= Lack charisma to face truth
6. Lead by a realestate tycoon= Proven Fact
7. Vote on all letters of agreement= Bull $hitttt
8. Leading industry on outsourcing= Proven Fact
9. Does not negotiate concessions= """""Oooooooop's""""
10. Negotiates "Snap Back"= Sorry, folks!!!
11. National negotiates their cut="da-money, da-money is mine"
12. 60 day's to, "tweak the language"= "Hmmmmmm???"
13. Membership votes for strike= "Without Further Ratification" :wub: "Delle"
14. Better off in "Bankruptcy"= The proof is in the "PUDDING"
15.
----------------------------
amfa: The YUGO of the labor movement
Where bargaining means YOU GO.....!
HSS,
You left out the most important parts:
1) Union Members actually allowed to vote for their reps.;
2) Union Members actually allowed to vote on contract language:
3) Union Members actually being allowed to recall any elected representative;
4) Union Members actually being allowed to attend negotiations;
5) Union Members actually being allowed to determine the course of their futures;
6) Union Members actually being required to posess the balls to take hold of their futures.
HSS: people like you will never understand the IAM at EAL or the AMFA at NWA. You would also never understand the ALAMO, the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, Battan, or the Chosin Resevoir. You are a product of the TWU: if you never fight; you cannot loose.
You left out the most important parts:
1) Union Members actually allowed to vote for their reps.;
2) Union Members actually allowed to vote on contract language:
3) Union Members actually being allowed to recall any elected representative;
4) Union Members actually being allowed to attend negotiations;
5) Union Members actually being allowed to determine the course of their futures;
6) Union Members actually being required to posess the balls to take hold of their futures.
HSS: people like you will never understand the IAM at EAL or the AMFA at NWA. You would also never understand the ALAMO, the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, Battan, or the Chosin Resevoir. You are a product of the TWU: if you never fight; you cannot loose.
U
UAL_TECH
Guest
You guys still beating this horse?
'IF' there was a monetary advantage for AMFA to call a strike, then please outline your hypothesis as I may be too ignorant as to how loosing dues during a strike would benefit 'any' union. 'IF' a union were more concerned about the influx of capital over their 'membership', then they would do everything in their power to ratify a contract before a strike to save dues.
IMHO, the only misstep AMFA made is believing the these tough talking ‘unionists’ would support ‘Unionism’ over their own self interests.
Bagbelt
Senior
- Apr 3, 2004
- 454
- 6
The problem I see everyday is guys who sell each other out for the hell of it. Guys in my fathers generation, (like at EAL), while certainly having exceptions seemed to tolerate far less crap and stick together. I can even remember CAL employees being treated as pariahs by everyone on the airport- and that was only 16 years ago. Now there's a picket line people shrug their shoulders and whatever.
PlayTheOdds
Veteran
The AMFA members were required to pay dues during the strike to remain in good standing with the union. They also had to walk the strike line to recieve any union payouts from their charity funded strike fund. AMFA has nothing to lose from calling a strike. If they won the strike they could say, "Look what we did!", and retain more union members paying dues. If they lost the strike, which they did, they simply ended up with what was offered and now get to collect dues from the scabs, which they have wasted no time doing. AMFA had nothing to lose by going on strike. The members however got screwed.You guys still beating this horse?
'IF' there was a monetary advantage for AMFA to call a strike, then please outline your hypothesis as I may be too ignorant as to how loosing dues during a strike would benefit 'any' union. 'IF' a union were more concerned about the influx of capital over their 'membership', then they would do everything in their power to ratify a contract before a strike to save dues.
IMHO, the only misstep AMFA made is believing the these tough talking ‘unionists’ would support ‘Unionism’ over their own self interests.
ThirdSeatHero
Veteran
Ah more of your inane gibbering I see.
Well since you brought up UAL which it seems you know next to nothing about, lets review....
9. Concessions were forced in bankruptcy, Period. Unless of course you can point to ANY union that did not take concessions. Looks like its you that gets the "oooops".
10. Snap backs. Again, bankruptcy is NOT section six. Can you show me one union that negotiated snap-backs? Didn't think so.
11. What money are you referring to here? If you are talking about expenses granted by the company, A-G-A-I-N, show me a union at UAL that DIDN'T have their expenses for 1113 paid. Oh you can't? That figures.
12. 60 days? I noticed when I asked you for specifics in the other thread on this, you went strangely silent. As you were then, you are now. WRONG. You don't return HEAVY OVERHAUL with a "TWEAK" of the language.
13. How does this apply to UAL? The AMT contract was voted on and ratified.
14. More idiotic babbling. Hey genius, the iam was still in charge when UAL went bankrupt.
Get back to me when you know alittle more about what it is you "think" you're talking about.
Not only that, but when an AMFA member gets furloughed (which was what happened to about 60% of the NW AMTs before the strike) AMFA still expects them to pay dues! I heard this directly from a furloughed UA AMT.
ThirdSeatHero
Veteran
Offering layed off AMTs the ability to stay involved through associate memberships is not "expecting" them to pay dues.
Some members wished to stay involved with their union, even while furloughed.
Wrong scab genius. We were not "required to pay dues during the strike". I suppose you held your head high while riding the scab bus. :blink:
According to this UA AMT I talked to, after his furlough, they repeatedly sent letters to his home demanding dues. He repeatedly sent them return letters stating that he was laid off. It sure sounds like they were "expecting" union dues from him even though he was furloughed.
ThirdSeatHero
Veteran
"IF" this story is true, it is most likely a clerical error. AMFA doesn't "demand" dues from furloughees.
Clerical error? Perhaps. However in the AMFA constitution, Article 4, section 4-Inactive members, line A. "All inactive members SHALL BE REQUIRED TO PAY DUES in the amount of ($40.00) per year."
ThirdSeatHero
Veteran
Yes, thats what the constitution reads.
Maybe you forgot to add the constitutional definition of an inactive member, maybe you'd realize there is nothing preventing this "person" from seeking a union withdrawl card.
What should be asked is why, if this "UA AMT" is on furlough, did he not receive an honorary withdrawl card?
I just made a quick call to AMFA Local 9, the largest AMFA Local, and was told that ALL furloughees are given an honorary withdrawl form prior to their seperation date.
Either this individual did not bother to make sure he received one. Or perhaps he has some other issues that prevented the membership from granting him one. Either way makes little difference, if hes not working, theres little more AMFA can do than ask, you can't be fired for non-dues payment if you're not working.
In other words......NON-ISSUE.
Since you put the words "person" and "UA AMT" in quotes, I assume you think I am making this up. The fact is that this individual is real, was/is a laid off UAL AMT, and told me that AMFA kept sending him letters demanding dues; that is all he told me, he did not elaborate. If I knew his last name and had his permission, I would post it and you could look for yourself on the list.
Correction: A furloughed member would be considered an active member under the constitution, not an inactive one.
