Class Warfare

[Hopeful]

You know, if a degree was a requirement to start a company, we wouldn't be driving Ford automobiles, and there wouldn't be any GE engines on airliners.

I've seen a bunch of MBA's who graduated at the top of their class, but they still push when the door clearly says pull.

Do a corporate chieftain's college years justify his seven figure salary...and his seven figure bonus..even when his company is heading for the toilet?

I've not been much of a union guy in the past (ask NHBB), and I don't belong to a union today. But I don't lose sight of the fact that were it not for unions in the past, none of us, union or not, would be earning nearly what we earn today. Gosh...back in the day, they called some guys "robber barons", and they didn't even earn a 6 figure income...and what they did earn certainly wasn't 400+ times what their average worker earned. What has changed these days to justify such a drastic difference between executive pay and "peon" pay?

KCFLYER,
That's the issue here. OneFlyer and Former ModerAAtor are blaming the unions for what we make even now..You can't win with these pro company types!

 

[eolesen]

LikeI said, YOU DON'T GET YOUR HANDS DIRTY FOR A LIVING, SO YOU THINK YOU'RE BETTER THAN THE REST OF US!

No, but I also don't think I'm automatically worse, which you seem to believe without knowing a damn thing about me.

KCFLYER,
That's the issue here. OneFlyer and Former ModerAAtor are blaming the unions for what we make even now..You ca't win with these pro company types!

There's a difference between being pro-company and anti-union. Some people are both, but there are far more who aren't.

Yes, I blame some unions for sitting fat, dumb, and happy. Specifically, leaders like Dick Dubinsky (ALPA, UAL) who once said he was more interested in choking the golden goose until they got every last egg they could, rather than making sure the goose survived so it could keep laying the eggs.

At the same time, I have a lot of respect for how SWAPA, TWU and IBT have managed to get a decent wage while not raping Southwest in the process.

We all want more money than we now earn. That's just human nature.

And executive compensation in the US is out of control.

But don't use that as an excuse to ignore the fact that 80% of management employees at AMR are as underpaid as the front line workers are, if not moreso.

Keep beating me over the head because oneflyer made some stupid statements if you want to, but try taking off the hate-blinders for a moment, and you just might find we have a lot more in common than you give me credit for.

 

[Hopeful]

No, but I also don't think I'm automatically worse, which you seem to believe without knowing a damn thing about me.
There's a difference between being pro-company and anti-union. Some people are both, but there are far more who aren't.

Yes, I blame some unions for sitting fat, dumb, and happy. Specifically, leaders like Dick Dubinsky (ALPA, UAL) who once said he was more interested in choking the golden goose until they got every last egg they could, rather than making sure the goose survived so it could keep laying the eggs.

At the same time, I have a lot of respect for how SWAPA, TWU and IBT have managed to get a decent wage while not raping Southwest in the process.

We all want more money than we now earn. That's just human nature.

And executive compensation in the US is out of control.

But don't use that as an excuse to ignore the fact that 80% of management employees at AMR are as underpaid as the front line workers are, if not moreso.

Keep beating me over the head because oneflyer made some stupid statements if you want to, but try taking off the hate-blinders for a moment, and you just might find we have a lot more in common than you give me credit for.

!
That's what I've been talking about! EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION BEING OBSCENE IN THIS COUNTRY.
But do you realize SWA makes more than we do and they are heavily unionized?

Where did we ever "rape" AA? Are we not also entitled to a decent wage? The big difference between SWA and AA is not just size, but PENSIONS!

I have NEVER belittled any one for the paths they have chosen with respect to their careers. NEVER!

But when people like Oneflyer blame the woes on the economy on unions, he has to be answered. He never condemns the greedy Fat Cats at the top whose compensation is obsecene. You have a company like WalMart with record profits paying employees wages that qualify them for puble assistance. No one is saying that a Walmart cashier should make a six figure income, but living in the United States requires compensation that will enable them to survive.

People like Oneflyer applaud companies who outsorce to China and cost the US worker hundreds and hundreds of thousands of jobs because greedy corporate structure and philosophy place more value on the shareholder than the employee.

How the hell is this nation going to compete with China where the average wage is $.25 an hour? We all can't be MBA's, doctors and lawyers.

What do people like oneflyer expect our children and children's children to do for jobs?

He likes to blame unions but the only way for America to compete is to pay us an average $.25 an hour. So we'll pay union workers sub standard wages while Oneflyer earns the real money.

You don't see american corporations paying their executives China management wages, do you?

 

[AMFAMAN]

While were at it, here is an article that came out yesterday...

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P143257.asp?Printer

 

[KCFlyer]

While were at it, here is an article that came out yesterday...

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P143257.asp?Printer

Oddly enough, I don't have a real problem with this...because I noticed that in every case, the folks in question had "founder" on their resume. More power to them. The problem I have is with the guys who come in with a gazillion dollar "signing bonus"..."performance bonuses" that somehow manage to pay out mere millions for "poor performance", and who didn't have a hand in creating anything.

 

[Bob Owens]

Hopeful
!
That's what I've been talking about! EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION BEING OBSCENE IN THIS COUNTRY.
But do you realize SWA makes more than we do and they are heavily unionized?

SWA employees get paid more than AA employees too.

Where did we ever "rape" AA? Are we not also entitled to a decent wage? The big difference between SWA and AA is not just size, but PENSIONS!

The biggest difference is management.

People like Oneflyer applaud companies who outsorce to China and cost the US worker hundreds and hundreds of thousands of jobs because greedy corporate structure and philosophy place more value on the shareholder than the employee.

I really dont have a problem with corporations being greedy, after all thats what they are supposed to be. What I have a problem with is how corporations have expanded their rights and become superhumans. Their power has expanded to the point where they have become the dominant institutions in our society. These institutions were formed solely for the creation of wealth for its owners, nothing else. They have supplanted government, government which was created with the intent of being accountable to society as a whole.

Corporations are neccisary, but the rights of citizens must trump the rights of shareholders.

Lobbying and campaign financing are just as much a part of the political process as voting, perhaps even more so. If you cant vote you should be barred from taking part in the political process. Campaign financing should be limited to citizens.

How the hell is this nation going to compete with China where the average wage is $.25 an hour? We all can't be MBA's, doctors and lawyers.

We are not expected to compete with China, we are supposed to compete in a race to the bottom with each other.

What do people like oneflyer expect our children and children's children to do for jobs?

Beg.

You don't see american corporations paying their executives China management wages, do you?

One set of rules for them and one set for us.Some would say I'm trying to incite a class war but the class war has been going on for a long time. The losing side simply hasnt realized it yet and as long as the white guy in the trailer park believes he has more in common with the Rockefellers than the black guy in the trailer next door to him the other side will continue to win victory after victory.

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

Informer, your peers and those who came before you agreed to the concept of "without further ratification" -- that isn't something anyone outside your union hall forced on you. It's not something I'd take sitting down, but you can't blame management for that any more than you can hold management accountable for what the guys at Dalfart or Timco earn per hour for doing similar work.

Last time I checked being a twu member was a requirement for employment at AA.
So what do you call that

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

While were at it, here is an article that came out yesterday...

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P143257.asp?Printer

I suppose they bought all those shares of stock on thier salaries and then chose the dollar rule.

It is still a scam who grants them all that stock. I will work for a dollar also give me 1 million shares

 

[eolesen]

Last time I checked being a twu member was a requirement for employment at AA.
So what do you call that

Not really -- paying dues to the bargaining unit is a requirement in the contract, but you can resign your membership and still keep your job (I believe a few participants in this forum do that, no?). I won't pretend to know if the TWU is the one who requested that language, but if they were to ask for it to be removed, there's no reason I can think of why AA would want to keep that subsection in place.

It's pretty clear from past events that you do have the power to try and replace the bargaining unit. That's not something management can do for you, although I'm sure there are a few here who might dispute that...

 

[AMFAMAN]

Not really -- paying dues to the bargaining unit is a requirement in the contract, but you can resign your membership and still keep your job

Still have to pay dues either way.

 

[TWAnr]

Not really -- paying dues to the bargaining unit is a requirement in the contract, but you can resign your membership and still keep your job (I believe a few participants in this forum do that, no?). I won't pretend to know if the TWU is the one who requested that language, but if they were to ask for it to be removed, there's no reason I can think of why AA would want to keep that subsection in place.

The United States Supreme Court has held that formal union membership cannot legally be required regardless of the wording of the collective bargaining agreement. Non union members may still be required to pay agency fees to cover the cost of union services such as negotiating the CBA but they are not subject to internal union discipline.

 

[AMFAMAN]

The United States Supreme Court has held that formal union membership cannot legally be required regardless of the wording of the collective bargaining agreement. Non union members may still be required to pay agency fees to cover the cost of union services such as negotiating the CBA but they are not subject to internal union discipline.

Which makes the dues $51 a month instead of $53 a month.