Burchette's Assertions

[TWU informer]

Are those TWU Guru's still looking in the history books for ONE example of "confrontation"?

The last confrontation I remember management having with the mechanics were the attempts to stop the Eating of AMFA Hot Dogs on dock 2B.

That Supervisor was screaming that "these dogs" had to go.

One mechanic with a mouth full of dog and another in each hand said he "was doing his part to get rid of them".

But I still wait patiently while the TWU supporters search for a single example of a confrontation with AA Management. At this point, I would even allow an example as petty as the AMFA Hot Dogs just to see if they can come up with one.

 

[local 12 proud]

That Supervisor was screaming that "these dogs" had to go.

One mechanic with a mouth full of dog and another in each hand said he "was doing his part to get rid of them".

Thats just to damn funny...

I had never heard that story, but thanks for sharing Informer!

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

Is it burchette or bullsit
a classic quote

"If this model succeeds, I hope it spreads because this model is a lot better -- it's harder -- but it's a lot better for workers and the company. If we kept going at the company in a confrontational manner, there's no doubt we would lose and the company would lose.

There is no doubt we lost.We lost our arse and the shirts off our backs.
Arpey of course got his 23 percent raise. And the gang of greed got their bonuses. What did the members get?

Oh thats right we got to keep our jobs.

More twu rhetoric

Never mind arpeys pay
The membership should start looking at the twu leadership and how overpaid they are.
Maybe if the twu leadership payscale was more in-line with the members they represent they would work a little harder to get a little more.

My bet is you wouldnt hear all this pull together win together BS.
And when do we start sharing in the sacrafice or is that at the next round of concesssions.

Blah blah blah blah
:angry:

 

[Birdman]

Never mind arpeys pay
The membership should start looking at the twu leadership and how overpaid they are.
Maybe if the twu leadership payscale was more in-line with the members they represent they would work a little harder to get a little more.

Speaking of TWU leadership pay, how about that $100,000 DB is pulling in?

http://erds.dol-esa.gov/query/getOrgQry.do

File #036-291

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

Speaking of TWU leadership pay, how about that $100,000 DB is pulling in?

http://erds.dol-esa.gov/query/getOrgQry.do

File #036-291

Selling your soul doesn't come cheap.

 

[High Speed Steel]

Selling you soul is an interesting topic. Not to make change to the topic of the thread but I was interested on who will be eligable to vote in the AMFA TA over at NW.

Are all who struck eligable? I have read were the $203 million in concessions from AMFA represented members is still part of the settlement. Does that include the classifications that were to be eliminated. As I can best recall I think it was cleaners and custodians. I'm not sure but there was some who were to lose their jobs permenantly. These same people were awarded unemployment benifits through the courts. The loss of these positions were included in the reasoning to strike. Are those people eligable to vote, and if ratified have the option to be converted to "lay off" status?

just curious.....

 

[TWU informer]

Selling you soul is an interesting topic. Not to make change to the topic of the thread but I was interested on who will be eligable to vote in the AMFA TA over at NW.

Are all who struck eligable? I have read were the $203 million in concessions from AMFA represented members is still part of the settlement. Does that include the classifications that were to be eliminated. As I can best recall I think it was cleaners and custodians. I'm not sure but there was some who were to lose their jobs permenantly. These same people were awarded unemployment benifits through the courts. The loss of these positions were included in the reasoning to strike. Are those people eligable to vote, and if ratified have the option to be converted to "lay off" status?

just curious.....

Why don't you come up with one single example of TWU confrontation with AA management and dispense with hi-jacking this thread with your AMFA opinion rubbish?

In other words, WHO gives a #### what is happening at Northwest Airlines? Your own union is selling your ass out to the dogs and you are worried about who is getting a ballot at Northwest. PULL YOUR HEAD OUT AND TELL US WHAT PART OF UNION WE DON'T UNDERSTAND!

 

[High Speed Steel]

Why don't you come up with one single example of TWU confrontation with AA management and dispense with hi-jacking this thread with your AMFA opinion rubbish?

Sorry, I didn't realize you had ownership of the thread.

 

[TWU informer]

Sorry, I didn't realize you had ownership of the thread.

Not even ONE example?

 

[High Speed Steel]

Not even ONE example?

If it is an answer you seek I will try to reply in a manner that you might be able to understand by using "skill, knowledge and integrity".

If you want to know about confrontations between TWU and AA all you have to do is research "Boards of Adjustment" in our agreement and their respective dockets. We do indeed have a professional way of settling our disputes.

That should satisfy your complaint!!!

 

[AMFAMAN]

Are those people eligable to vote, and if ratified have the option to be converted to "lay off" status?

just curious.....

Why don't you post your question on the NWA board, or e-mail someone who works over there. Better yet, contact one of your scab friends at NWA, you know the ones you proudly introduced to the twu membership and are now scabs.

 

[Bob Owens]

If it is an answer you seek I will try to reply in a manner that you might be able to understand by using "skill, knowledge and integrity".

If you want to know about confrontations between TWU and AA all you have to do is research "Boards of Adjustment" in our agreement and their respective dockets. We do indeed have a professional way of settling our disputes.

That should satisfy your complaint!!!

And what percentage of those so called "disputes" does the TWU win?

By the way the last time the TWU mechanics at AA struck was 2-27-69, it lasted 21 days. 37 years ago. Fewer than 1% of todays active members ever saw the TWU fight. Since the early 80s the TWU has been the leader in concessions. Perhaps thats why Continental just rejected the TWU for the second time in two years. http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/061012/airlines_co...union.html?.v=2
(How much did that drive cost??)

 

[TWU informer]

If it is an answer you seek I will try to reply in a manner that you might be able to understand by using "skill, knowledge and integrity".

If you want to know about confrontations between TWU and AA all you have to do is research "Boards of Adjustment" in our agreement and their respective dockets. We do indeed have a professional way of settling our disputes.

That should satisfy your complaint!!!

If that is what is meant by "confrontational" relations of the past, is Burchette now saying the TWU will longer arbitrate? He is, afterall claiming that the confrontational relations of the past are outdated, and you are claiming the only confrontation you can name is Board of Adjustments.

Think about this and get back with me about WHAT PART OF UNION I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

 

[High Speed Steel]

If that is what is meant by "confrontational" relations of the past, is Burchette now saying the TWU will longer arbitrate? He is, afterall claiming that the confrontational relations of the past are outdated, and you are claiming the only confrontation you can name is Board of Adjustments.

Think about this and get back with me about WHAT PART OF UNION I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

I will try to address the spin within your post. There will always be disputes between two parties over the intent of negotiated language. I doubt that the process of arbitration will experience much change and will still be intact.

 

[Bob Owens]

I doubt that the process of arbitration will experience much change and will still be intact.

And no doubt it will remain as ineffective as ever for the members.

The best way to avoid arbitration is to get clear and precise language. The TWU rarely gets that, in fact the only place you see it is with union security, making sure the TWU gets their dues. Often the only means to get clear and precise language is to be willing to strike for it, well we know thats something the TWU will never do-Ed Koziatek told me that back in 2000. Jim Little is even more terrified of the "S" word than Koziatek, after all Jim has never experienced a strike.

In the past we have seen the TWU sell concessionary agreements with false promises "Dont worry we have a me too clause"(1995), and pure lies "AA might go straight into liquidation" (if the concessions are not passed-Jim Little 2003). So the TWU and AA sit down, create vague language to make the members believe that the contract provides them something it doesnt, then when the issue comes to a head and they lose in arbitration they write it off as "a tough break", but they still keep the arbitrators that ruled against them. On the rare occasions when the TWU wins a language dispute the company changes the language during the next round of "negotiations".

Try to spin it any way you want HSS, Burchette is the one who claimed that confrontation is not the way to go. Its much easier to sit back and collect your dues without doing anything for it. In essence he is saying that we do not need a union, because if there is no confrontation then the company is meeting the needs of workers. If the needs of the company are the unions primary concern then perhaps the company should pay dues to the TWU, oh yea, they already do $3.1 million a year! The question is if the company is allowed to unilterally set terms, as they did in 2003, then why do we need the TWU?