TWU-GOTTA-GO
Advanced
- Nov 22, 2006
- 151
- 0
I was in disagreement with most of your post regarding AMFA's attitude towards the lesser skilled workgroups until your last statement regarding its supporters, which is correct regarding some--not all. With that said, I've talked to Dell countless times and have never heard him put down another workgroup, and witnessed a strike at NWA where the last offer would have dealt the equivalent to our "title 2" and the cleaners a fatal blow in jobs compared to AMT's, but they chose to strike for all jobs. At AA, it seems as all workgroups blame other workgroups for their workgroups shortcomings in their contract. I highly doubt, in fact guarantee, that even one workgroup within our own union would strike for another workgroup, let own for another station, etc.; just not going to happen. We do have a large population of elitist within not only our ranks, but the ranks of many workgroups on the property. So while there are some AMFA supporters who have or are preaching an elitist tone, remember that most of their union experience comes from working under a union who thrives on dividing and conquering, and a company who is among the best at union-busting. I could agree with you more if we actually worked in a union environment and had unity amongst all workgroups, but heck, we don't even have unity between union leadership or locals for that matter.Don't try to sell a partial story; that turns people away. amfa should embrace all skills, trades and jobs required to make an aircraft/airline function correctly uniting the membership against the so-called management rather than the way things have been handled in the past. amfa preaches 'unity', yet makes it a point to piss off half of its prospective membership because of their supporters' elitist attitude.