Brothers and Sisters on Forum who are employed by LCC and are Members of D-141 do you think WE would be better represented going forward to join our Brothers /Sisters at D-142 ? The Politics at D-141 IMO is hurting US !
August/September 2013 Fleet Discussion
- Thread starter Falcon
- Start date
- Status
pjirish317
Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 1,240
- Reaction score
- 743
PSA,
While I agree that the political climate here at US is a potential hazard for Fleet, I do not think we should go running to DL142. Do you recall 141M? Strength in numbers, and then we were left high and dry?
Brother irish to much bad blood between LCC Members and UA Members. At both the Local Level and District Level the UA Brothers/ Sisters don't care what happens with US at LCC . You see it first hand when your at the D-141 Burlingame Office where L-1781 is controlled by UA Members. The UA/CO merger, LCC/AMR merger, IAM/UA CBA #2 , Leadership Election #3 at D-141, and I could go on/on, makes D-142 a viable option IMO ? UA IAM Members is not LCC IAM FS Members STRENGTH IN NUMBERS ! After defeating the IBT finally and forever its our IAM Brothers/Sisters in D-142.
pjirish317
Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 1,240
- Reaction score
- 743
Because they were so welcoming when we voted in the IAM right? If that was the case, why the split in the first place? Why the need for 141M, and ultimately MTC going to 142, or however the eventual split worked out. the IAM's slogan to get in with fleet was the "strength in numbers" and look what happened there.
ograc
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2012
- Messages
- 1,868
- Reaction score
- 1,624
When the IAM won the representation election for US Fleet there were many US MTC. members and District Representatives who were opposed to Fleet being part of their bargaining unit and/or District. The mindset back then was; being liscensed mechanics, set them apart from an unskilled labor group such as Fleet in terms of contract negotiations. Hell, they didn't like the fact that utility was part of their bargaining unit. Utility was accused of "riding the coat tails" of the mechanics. Subsequently, DL 141M was created for the Maintenance&Related group and DL 141 was created for Fleet. Eventually, DL 141M was dissolved and the MTC. & Related Group, rather than being put in DL 141, was assigned to DL 142. Based on past history; it seems the International has given into the thought process that the two groups at US (MTC. & Related & Fleet) should be seperated. This past practice has certainly diminished the "strength in numbers" campaign pitch the IAM used during the representation election back then. Not sure if this can be fixed.
LCC IAM Brothers/Sisters MX/Related have become the Minority in the Airline Division of the Transportation Division. There are only two large groups of IAM MX/Related left LCC/HA both in D-142. So, comparing what happened when US/LCC FS voted in the IAM in 1995 is comparing apples to oranges. Those that no the History will understand why now is the time for US to leave UA/CO dominated D-141. I will give ALL a clue AMR Group/TWU and UA will be #2 . Some LCC Brothers/Sisters have benefited with the current status of being part of D-141 and the bias . My bet is if there was a LCC/FS vote WE would now join our D-142 MX/Related Brother's in SOLIDARITY !
JFK Fleet Service
Veteran
Hmmm,"unskilled rabble" in an aircraft maintenance local?
Yeah,that'll end well.
Yeah,that'll end well.
Harry Callahan
Veteran
Still doesn't change the fact that mtc. hated fleet & considered us as unskilled labor.
Harry
That is bs, I was maintenance and worked on the campaign to organize fleet.
You are taking a few bad apples and painting everyone with the same brush.
There are some elitist, and they hated the and relateds,the majority of mechanic and related dont think that way.
You are way off base.
You are taking a few bad apples and painting everyone with the same brush.
There are some elitist, and they hated the and relateds,the majority of mechanic and related dont think that way.
You are way off base.
pjirish317
Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 1,240
- Reaction score
- 743
So a majority on M&R voted to split from the "unskilled" fleet group, Strength in numbers my arse.
pjirish317
Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 1,240
- Reaction score
- 743
Please reference post #1390 of yours. You contradict yourself here. Tha fact is that a majority of M&R wanted nothing to do with Fleet, period. I do not want a mechanic AGC representing Fleet. And before you bash, I am sure there are some fine AGC's in DL142, however, me personally, do not want them for my representation.
- Status
Similar threads
