IBEW Fleet Service Union Campaign Update

Status
Not open for further replies.
folks,

Make sure you know your sources and facts before you post something..

remember there are alot of IAM grievence committee and agcs out here that could be looking for work if things change

which would mean.. .oh GOD Forbid they have to return to the airport and be a baggage handler again and actually have to work

a little bit . I say IAM boys .. go to the store and buy your ben-gay and get your ramp candy cause a new day is coming and you

may be stuck offloading 12,000 from lax..
 
Well,
Bottom line...sign the cards..got it !!
I work in a hub and have been hesitant to act...
no more, I'm in......thanks., and thanks IBEW, we
didn't know we had a choice.

bob
 
Thanks Tim.
People at work were asking questions about the Q & A. I thought the best way to ask was on here. A lot of folks read this but do not post. The way I see it is the more information they can have the better informed they will be.
 
No more than one topic per week for each union.

We will merge this one with the newer IBEW thread.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #37
Thanks Tim.
People at work were asking questions about the Q & A. I thought the best way to ask was on here. A lot of folks read this but do not post. The way I see it is the more information they can have the better informed they will be.
No problem. I think there is going to be an IBEW meeting in CLT 'soon'. To be honest, CLT is the only hub that seems to be having some issues signing IBEW cards and I am a bit surprised by this. I'd sure hate for CLT to hold this thing back because CLT knows what it has to do. The IBEW has set a goal of how many cards it needs and although Hope777 is inaccurate, we can not assume the IBEW will stick around if it is having problems at the second biggest station.
One either supports the IAM by not signing an IBEW card, or one signs an IBEW card to get the IAM off the property. It's just that simple.

As aside, perseverance, I did not get the letter from Parker's boy yet but I bet he just spread fear and didn't mention anything he did over the last 13 years as a reason to keep the IAM.

regards,
 
Tim-
The IAM letter can seriously make you ill reading how they try to scare you into
not looking outside of them for representation. ''If another organization is able to
garnish enough support for an election, your very job is at risk.'' Last time I heard
a threat like that Bush had people buying plastic wrap and duct tape in case of chemical
attack. CLT if what Tim is saying is true can someone ,other that 700, come on hear and
explain whats' going on.
Tim, if you want me to fax you a copy send me your fax number.



Thanks
 
I can't really explain but I do think Tim is correct in saying that CLT is having some issues in getting the cards signed. This is my opinion only but I think the majority have no idea who the IBEW is.
 
I guess none of you voted for concessions twice in bankruptcy one and none of you voted for the final offer after the CBA was abrogated in bankruptcy II and the IAM just gave everything away.

Great to see none of you take personal responsiblity and none of you can actually understand what happened in bankruptcy.

And the IAM was the only union to give the company wanted they wanted, ALPA, AFA, CWA, TWU, APA, AFPA, IBT and AMFA did not give concessions at AA, NW, UA, CO, DL, HA, Aloha and every other airline that took concessions.

Now wake up to reality and look what happened to the industry after 9/11, fuel increases and all the chapter 11 filings.
 
And the IAM was the only union to give the company wanted they wanted, ALPA, AFA, CWA, TWU, APA, AFPA, IBT and AMFA did not give concessions at AA, NW, UA, CO, DL, HA, Aloha and every other airline that took concessions.

What ???...I remember the night of my first beer. I guess I sounded alitlle like you.
Go to sleep.


Thanks
 
Joe,
Happens alot. A union simply is not required to get 50%.
I think the USWA had like 23%, the IAM 22%, the IBT 19%. Overall, 50%+1 voted but a single union isn't required to get the full 50%+1, provided other votes are cast. The IAM ended up winning the runoff when the IBT told workers to screw the USWA.

For example, in raids there are two union choices. The IBEW may get 40% of the vote and the IAM may get 15% of the vote. The IBEW will win even if it obtained less than 50% of the vote.

The IBT vote was before the piedmont vote, and was a result of the PSA merger. The IBT had like 1800 votes, the IAM had like 16 votes, and some chick had a vote or two. Once the IBT won that vote it represented all the US AIRWAYS workers. But other than the 1800 [4 stations] they were still non-contract until a contract could be negotiated for them.

At any rate, Joe, if you need any other clarifications, email me at appearances1@aol.com

regards,



Tell him what happens when less than 50%+1 of the membership shows up for vote . :mf_boff:
 
I don't know about the other areas at work but it seems where I work there is not much activity. I don't exactly how many have signed.

Coach I think you are right. I will see if someone has a more solid idea of whats is happening and see if they will post tomorow.

Delldude....Yea already know what will happen......No union and no representation. We would be at Parker's mercy....... "Please Massa Parker ize du wutever ize hapto to keep mu job. I was just asking for some numbers. I was here through all that and could not remember the numbers. People read these post and I thought that would be the best way to get the info out.
 
delldude-
Why are you asking a question you know the answer to, just put it out
there. We all know that if 50% +1 do not vote for representation, we lose that
representation. What Tim is saying is if 23% of the workforce vote for IAM and
7% write in IBT and another 24% vote for IBEW, we remain represented. With the
IBEW winning the election with the 24% number (the highest). That would mean 54%
of the workforce voted to remain represented. Also this vote would incorporate a
phone and computer vote, allowing people to vote from home, work or vacation.
Which in my opinion would only increase the voting number. Tim has also pointed
out that only one time has a workforce not voted to remain represented (100 skycaps).
Now, what I came on here for. The IAM agreed to bring back to the workforce
a concessionary agreement. A concessionary agreement is giving anything back,
especially to a company that has shown and continues to show profits nearing the
$1,000,000,000 number. We should not be giving anything back. What we have was
negotiated on during bankruptcy. Do you mean to tell me it was such a good deal that
we should give the company more, seeing how thier not in bankruptcy and making
money. That makes no sense to me.
Spread the word...sign the cards.


bob
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #45
delldude-
Why are you asking a question you know the answer to, just put it out
there. We all know that if 50% +1 do not vote for representation, we lose that
representation. What Tim is saying is if 23% of the workforce vote for IAM and
7% write in IBT and another 24% vote for IBEW, we remain represented. With the
IBEW winning the election with the 24% number (the highest). That would mean 54%
of the workforce voted to remain represented. Also this vote would incorporate a
phone and computer vote, allowing people to vote from home, work or vacation.
Which in my opinion would only increase the voting number. Tim has also pointed
out that only one time has a workforce not voted to remain represented (100 skycaps).
Now, what I came on here for. The IAM agreed to bring back to the workforce
a concessionary agreement. A concessionary agreement is giving anything back,
especially to a company that has shown and continues to show profits nearing the
$1,000,000,000 number. We should not be giving anything back. What we have was
negotiated on during bankruptcy. Do you mean to tell me it was such a good deal that
we should give the company more, seeing how thier not in bankruptcy and making
money. That makes no sense to me.
Spread the word...sign the cards.
bob
The reason why I posted that info was because the PHX chair put out a letter that was scanned to me and it had 3 lies on it. Many were concerned because they figured the IAM will get about 10% of the vote and that meant those votes would count against the IBEW, which is a lie. Again, a union is not required to get 50%+1 of the vote. This has happened twice already with our very own group and I'm not sure why we have to keep discussing this. Let's get this thing done already.

This is common knowledge but the IAM is busy with the personal attacks, fear campaign, and lies. Even Boss Canale can't stand behind facts in his letter, nor can he tell you what he actually did for you in the last 13 years. All Boss Canale did in his letter was give you opinion that was NOT substantiated with research or facts. I kept my opinion out of it, and provided 100% fact with references included.
He told the PHL crowd, "It was a good contract."
Now let's see what CLT does because IMO, if CLT doesn't start signing the cards then this thing will shut down. It shouldn't matter if it were the whore union, cards should be getting signed down there. This is the best opportunity fleet service has had to get out of the shackles of Boss Canale.
regards,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top