Most people are oblivious about the politics that affect their own cities, states, this nation, the globe, and even the school districts where they send their kids to get educated. Why then should any of them be expected to take seriously and invest time in learning about a whole other realm of politics which, from the outside, looks just like a huge collection of hacks and amateurs blaming each other from what is, at root, a foundational and systemic inability of a labor organization to remain relevant?
Who benefits from an uninformed and apathetic membership? The company, certainly, but solidarity and awakening are a double-edged sword, and in rousing the membership - which the IAM claims to want to do - it runs the risk of itself becoming the victim of popular ire when its own inventory of shortcomings comes under scrutiny. It seems to me that there are those who have gained such comfort and security by virtue of their positions of "serving" the membership that they would rather not see this happen. I don't imagine it's lost on Delaney and his underlings that an awakened membership might stand up not only to the company but to his 'company' as well.
This is a recurrent problem in democratic politics: institutions chosen and mandated by a population to protect and serve its interests over time come to be as exploitative as the entities it was selected to protect that population against. This is precisely why Thomas Jefferson said, perhaps partially tongue-in-cheek, that God forbid we go 20 years without a revolution. We see this same dynamic writ large in our national democracy, in which mass disinterest has allowed the government to acquire powers and capabilities that have the potential of being used in very anti-democratic ways (and in fact regularly are).
As such it's pointless to finger any one person or committee and say they're corrupt or incompetent when the entire structure of representation is broken or corrupted. The IAM being its own self-interested entity will at the end of the day prioritize its own wants and needs over that of client memberships it has the legal duty to represent; a disempowered and disinterested membership makes it all the easier for it to do so. No union is immune from the temptations to fleece the flock it is supposed to protect. I see the T/A negotiated for UA fleet to be a case-in-point in this regard.
Since the IAM is essentially hired to work for the membership I believe it's prudent that questions of DFR be asked constantly, and I am suspicious of those who feel that the IAM is somehow above or beyond that kind of scrutiny.