700UW said:
If you think anyone believes that your made up union that you appointed yourself to the interim director position is going to spend money probably given to you from MAG in the form of a loan and then spend it to decertify the IAM and not get the membership for your own made up union, then you must think everyone is very nieve or very stupid.
What an oxymoron: US Airways and Profitiblity, it will be years before US makes a profit.
Try your snowjob on someone that will believe it.
[post="245266"][/post]
So what exactly are the members getting for their $500/year?
Even most non-union people in companies as large as USAIR get at least two weeks off plus around 10 holidays off. So that comes out to around 4 weeks off a year with two weeks spread out over the year. IAM represented USAIR worker will only get two weeks off for 18 years???
Why would workers at Walmart want to fork out hundreds of dollars a year when they see how utterly ineffective unions are?
700UW, I have no doubt that you probably believe that you are a true unionist but your loyalty to people who are not is more destructive to unionism than any union busting corporate or government policy.
Unions are killing unionism because many of them have become nothing but another business themselves. Usually headed by incompetant self interested leaders who have no vision. Their lack of vision is displayed in how they, the leaders, blame the members for not acting without leadership.
On the one hand you dutifully chant out the slogans but defend the inaction of union leaders who are not democratically accountable to the members who sit back and talk to their members about tough choices while they lose nothing.
The fact is your leaders let you down, and they really do not care. As you sit there taking the hits they are laughing all the way to the bank. You claim that you have no International aspirations. Well thats even better for them, you will do their dirty work, chant out the slogans, repeat and spread their propaganda, even defend their inaction by repeating their excuses-its the memberships fault- and you are not a threat.
Let me ask you something. Is USAIRs problems the fault of the workers or management?
I would hope you said management.
Even if many workers leave a lot to be desired their lack of production is still the fault of management.
Now the same hold true for the union. If the union is weak, its not the members fault, its the leaders fault. If the members chose their leaders then the members could be partially blamed for picking the wrong leaders, however even then, poor leadership is the cause.
One of the reasons why unions like the TWU and IAM took away the members rights to choose top leaders and continue to do so is because they claim that it becomes a popularity contest and the union does not neccissarily end up with the "most qualified" person for the job. They claim to be better positioned to make such determinations.
However if the union needs the support of the members the members have to have a bond with the leaders they are supposed to be supporting dont they? The fact is that the way unions like the IAM and TWU are set up the higher you go the more that bond is lacking. In the TWU the International often takes officers who have been willing to put aside the interests of their members in favor of the International and puts those people in positions above the members elected officers. So in other words they choose people that the memnbers rejected as leaders and make them the leader. How can anyone expect that to work?
If USAIR had cited to discontinue "Check-off" then you would have seen a much more militant response from these clowns.
If your leaders were facing a direct election from the members where they know that failing to lead would result in their removal from office then you would have seen a different response.
The threats used today are no different than the threats that companies always used against workers. The methods may have changed but the threat is the same. THe difference is not the members, its the leaders, of lack thereof.
