DL Terminates Labor Activist Kip Hedges

[robbedagain]

ur right E  

 

[WorldTraveler]

thank you for taking the liberty to frame my opinions.... it is nice to know you handle them as inaccurately as you do things that are factually based such as subjects involving revenue.

I support the right of private individuals and companies to act in their own best interests.

there is no right for an employee to do what they want.

I do not know all of the facts to know whether DL acted appropriately in this situation or not.

 

[700UW]

I would guess he is in contact with the IAM and the NMB to file charges against DL, it is illegal for DL to retaliate against him for being pro-union.

 

[WorldTraveler]

and it hasn't dawned on you that DL doesn't realize that and made sure that whatever reason DL had was beyond that.

BTW, there are a number of pro-union DL employees and their jobs do not appear to be at risk, nor should they be.

 

[700UW]

Oh that's right in your mind DL can do no wrong.

And DL has been targeting the vocal pro-union employees.

And many companies think they did what was legal and been found, told and been held liable for being wrong.

 

[eolesen]

Based on his own statements, it's pretty obvious that if WT were still employed by DL, he probably wouldn't hesitate to to rat out another employee for making disparaging comments here about DL.

Good goes round, guys. If stuff like this doesn't help generate union cards, I don't know what can.

 

[WorldTraveler]

appears to me that you don't have your hands full enough dealing with AA's own labor mess and want to look for a diversion from the pay raise, profit sharing, and incentive pay that AA mgmt. gets but the "little people" that influence the outcome of the company aren't worth participating in - because they don't matter.

Good does go around.

which is why it has passed you by.

 

[Kev3188]

robbed,
there is no freedom of speech clause in the workplace. FWAAA has written about it before.
Companies of all types have the right to dictate the terms of conduct of their employees and monitor their performance and activities.

...Except that this wasn't in the workplace, nor was he on the clock or in uniform. You have a unique advantage over E & others in that you can access DL's social media policy in full.

So again; after reviewing that, and the video in question, tell us what you feel might have been violated here.

Sidebar: Not trying to pile on, but I gotta tell ya; the idea that you're okay with a company monitoring an employee's performance & activities is not a little terrifying.

It also runs counter to what you've said about protecting one's privacy...
 
 

with employee-related disciplinary issues, it is very rare that the case is as clear to the public as it would be if the case went to court.

Just as an exercise, let's assume this one is as clear as it appears on the surface. With that context as a backdrop, what would your opinion be?
 
 
 

BTW, there are a number of pro-union DL employees and their jobs do not appear to be at risk, nor should they be.

You don't actually believe that, do you?

I can only wish you were right...
 
 

 
 

Based on his own statements, it's pretty obvious that if WT were still employed by DL, he probably wouldn't hesitate to to rat out another employee for making disparaging comments here about DL.

Good goes round, guys. If stuff like this doesn't help generate union cards, I don't know what can.

That's exactly what's happening right now...

 

[Kev3188]

If the guy was disparaging DL, he had to be spreading false/untrue information.

If indeed there are a good number of people earning less than $15, all he did was quantify a fact.

When you compare this to the F bomb laden video from the fired AA mechanic last year, the interview Kip gave on a video blog is pretty benign.

DL overreached here. They took out a union organizer, and that should be the claim, not freedom of speech (which as already noted doesn't protect anyone in an employer/employee relationship).

^Nailed it^

I would further say that IMO his statements were pretty reasonable conclusions to come to. How/why the company found them "disparaging" is the question.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Kev,
regardless of whether he was in uniform or not, he was a DL employee.

Let me know where you believe the social media policy allows DL employees to speak to the media about DL issues - and this absolutely involved DL policies - even after hours or out of uniform.

to answer your question, hypothetically, if the video was the sum total of all that ever occurred between Mr. Hedges and DL, I would agree with you that DL's actions seem excessive.

but this isn't a hypothetical case. It is a real case with more information beyond what is in the video. You know it and I know it.

and, yes, I absolutely believe that DL employees who abide by DL's policies and are only engaged in union organizing activities should not worry.

If they had something to worry about, then you might suggest that 700 quit posting pictures of every union social event that includes DL employees. I happen to believe there is no reason for those employees to fear and that posting their pictures is a non-issue.

 

[Kev3188]

to answer your question, hypothetically, if the video was the sum total of all that ever occurred between Mr. Hedges and DL, I would agree with you that DL's actions seem excessive.

but this isn't a hypothetical case. It is a real case with more information beyond what is in the video. You know it and I know it.

No, I don't know that.

OTOTH, I do know the person in question.

The truth is, this is it. There is no "more to the story," or anything else outside of what E's noted.

 

[Kev3188]

and, yes, I absolutely believe that DL employees who abide by DL's policies and are only engaged in union organizing activities should not worry.

Me too. Shame that doesn't reflect reality...

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

^Nailed it^I would further say that IMO his statements were pretty reasonable conclusions to come to. How/why the company found them "disparaging" is the question.

I have seen people terminated by corporations knowing full well that they were wrongfully terminating said employee. They make a calculated desicison and are willing to pay the price to make their "statement". Sometimes managers decide that it is better to have the employee on the other side of the fence looking in, than on the inside getting ahead. It is a sad fact, but happens in the real world of non-union work forces.

It would seem that Delta has made that decision here.

That will be my only comment on this thread. I think Mr. Hedges will be better off with less said on this forum given the tendencies of a couple who frequent here.

 

[Kev3188]

I think you're probably right- and I think I'll join you out of respect for him...

 

[jcw]

It's great to be non union as they csnfire you at will - I bet that employee is glad they got profit sharing