Interesting Tidbit

[Your_Ex-Wife]

Name: ICEMAN
Employer: AA
Location: TUL
Date: Saturday, February 07, 2004
Time: 08:24 AM


Comments
I received a call today from one of the shop stewards. He had been approached by one of AMFA organizers demanding that shop steward sign a card. The AMFA organizer continued to tell the shop steward how AMFA national had given the organizers at Tulsa and AFW $150,000.00 Dollars for each place to open up offices. I was just curious did everyone vote to send your dues money to AA employees to the tune of $300,000.00 Dollars.

 

[Your_Ex-Wife]

Name:
Employer: NWA
Location: a must read
Date: Saturday, February 07, 2004
Time: 12:57 AM


Comments
Force Majeure 1 lost! How could that be? What argument was the grievance based on? I heard (speculation) that the argument made was that what happened on 9/11 didn't warrant layoffs. That is absurd!! The contract clearly states that what happened on 9/11 can lead to layoffs. (pg. 3.12/ 1a.(2)© and (g).) Also remember the statements on lines 17 and 18....the term "circumstance over which the Company does not have control" includes BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO:"........ NWA was clearly within their rights to layoff but the real argument is for how long? When will the circumstances for Force Majeure cease? This is what the grievance should focus on. AMFA national should be re-filing a grievance for F.M.1 with the argument that the effects of 9/11 are no longer valid reasons to keep people furloughed. NWA was losing money at first because people were afraid to fly and the load factors showed this. The same is true for the Iraq war. Today we have increased load factors but the number of flights were never brought back up due to a sluggish economy. (economic reasons are not considered "circumstances over which the company has no control" pg.3.13(3)© & (d)]. What needs to be looked at is the total number of passengers flying commercially before 9/11 and the total number flying today! I'm sure you would find a relatively equal number. You would then have to come to the conclusion that the effects of 9/11 or the Iraq war are no longer valid reasons for a Force Majeure. NWA's response would be "we have reduced flights and don't have as many passengers as before." But the passengers are out there flying on other airlines so the fault would be with NWA's business/marketing plan which is not a reason in which they could maintain a Force Majeure. NWA is losing money and that is simply the reason for continuing the Force Majeure. They can save a ton of money by outsourcing and reducing payroll. AMFA has to wake up and re-think their strategy. It should be very easy for their lawyers to prove these points to an arbitrator! The time for the Force majeure to expire is now. The time to stop the bravado of "NO CONCESSIONS FROM AMFA" is now. When things are good you must take but when they are bad you must give some to preserve and protect jobs!! I am not pro IAM or AMFA. I just want the best representation I can get from any union! There is a time to fight for what you believe in to the bitter end and there is a time to preserve people's jobs even if it goes against what you believe in. There is a chance of reinstating furloughed technicians at NWA only if AMFA is willing to give some back. I can guarantee you that it is better to have 6000 mechanics at $25/hr. than it is to have 3000 at $35/hr. All I ever hear at NWA is never again to concessions but that's pretty easy to say when you only took a pay cut in the 1990's instead of losing your job. It won't be long until June of 2006 is upon us and NWA has the right to layoff anyone. (it's in the contract pg. 3.12 lines 1-7.) When your job is hanging in the balance or when you have actually been laid off for awhile with little hopes of returning let's see how strongly you feel against some form of concession in exchange for your job.