Labor Unions

[Kev3188]

That's a spurious accusation at best. Calling something out for what it is =/= lack of tolerance or advocation of 1st amendment suppression.

Maybe you should explain how/why you've come to that conclusion.

 

[limit]

I find it very interesting, union officials are all about tolerance, free speech and acceptance except when an individual or organization contradicts their viewpoints or agenda.

Josh

What is interesting is your attempt to accuse people of not been tolerate,
when they are just rejecting or accepting another point of view ,one the do not agree with.
Where exactly did you read on this thread ,that the author - Sowell - does not have the right to publish his opinion?
According to what you just wrote ,unless one accept opinions contradictory to his beliefs he is not tolerate. ???

 

[737823]

That's a spurious accusation at best. Calling something out for what it is =/= lack of tolerance or advocation of 1st amendment suppression.

Maybe you should explain how/why you've come to that conclusion.

Sure, my experience with family business that was subject to unionization. Several of the DL agents I've talked to mentioned that the IAM was harassing them throughout the election period while on duty, during lunch breaks and even at their homes. Again, very interesting that the IAM and AFA were quick to accuse Delta of interference (only after the end result wasn't in their favor) only to later have the NMB, controlled by former union officials uphold the election results.

Josh

 

[700UW]

And DL made phone calls, mailed numerous flyers to their houses and held "captive" audience meetings.

 

[eolesen]

And DL made phone calls, mailed numerous flyers to their houses and held "captive" audience meetings.

Alleged, yet never proven to the investigators' satisfaction or level of credibility.

 

[700UW]

Read the paperwork submitted.

Findings

 

[737823]

And DL made phone calls, mailed numerous flyers to their houses and held "captive" audience meetings.

DL educated the employees about unionization and nothing more. So it's apparently okay for the IAM and other unions to canvass workers, visit their homes unannounced, follow them to their cars in the parking lot but not for DL? Sorry it didn't work out for you guys but you got to control the timetable of the election, gain union officials who arguably had a conflict of interest on the NMB, lobby to have the rules changed and then have a hissy fit when things don't work out your way? If I were a DL employee voting in the elections, I'd find it compelling that the AFA and IAM had tried the elections so many times when the workers clearly weren't interested in representation. AFA and IAM wanted the dues stream and nothing more. All the people I talk to at DL are very happy and enjoy their jobs. Besides wasn't today the day the PM-NW and PM-DL sides integrate now that the union and political non-sense is behind everyone? It really shows how irresponsible the IAM is to use members money to fight interference charges (unsuccessfully) when 70% of the workers voted you down. Don't let the facts get in the way!

Josh

 

[Kev3188]

Josh--

You're definitely taking this thread in many different directions! Let's try to unpack each piece...

First, the Sowell article:

Let's try something. Humor me.

Random author: "Citibank invented the CDO, and by doing so single-handedly caused the recent financial meltdown. Everyone knows bankers make child pornographers look like Ghandi, and the fact that every last one isn't rotting in a prison cell, just proves how in bed with them the Obama administration truly is."

Josh: That's not true, and here's why (etc.).

Kevin: I find it interesting that financial employees are usually open minded, except when the light is being shown on them. I wonder why their against democracy, free speech, apple pie, puppies, and baseball?

Josh: How does my objection to what was written equate to being anti free speech?

Kevin: I know bankers. My parents had a mortgage when I was growing up. I also talk to the tellers when I go to the credit union. They fill me in on what the sector leaders are up to. They're all the same. BTW, did you know that JP Morgan was harassing war widows into signing over their Social Security payments?

See what I did there? Obviously hyperbolic, but it should get the point across. The hypothetical article, has one glaring error (which if it doesn't jump off the page, means you're lying about what you do for a living), a fistful of rhetoric, and some stale memes mixed in for good measure. Your protest wouldn't mean you're against free speech, any more than anyone of this thread is. It'd mean you're against inaccurate information and/or opinion masquerading as fact.



Onto the representation elections at DL:

1. People that are ardently opposed to representation will of course feel "harassed," just as pro labor people felt "harassed" by the onslaught of messaging we received from the company. Wether that meets a legal threshold is a different issue altogether. FWIW, the IAM publicly-and repeatedly- offered to cooperate with both DL and any employee that felt "harassed" seek justice. Neither the company, nor anyone else took them up on it.

2. Make no mistake. There was no "educating" anyone. DL had a clear cut mission to not have representation, and they did whatever it took to achieve that aim. This gauzy idea that it was just "educating people" to make sure they got the facts is disingenuous at best.

3. We've been integrated for awhile now. Today is the day F/A's can fly together, and the day all workgroups' benefits/payroll systems/and so on are one. Not for nothing, but my entire station sort of vanished off the map when they tried to assimilate us into the PMDL payroll system (MPS). Our location defaults to a different hub. Apparently, they're "working on a fix." They also misclassified all of us. Go figure...

4. It is not irresponsible for a labor organization to fight for it's members. Just packing it in would've have been much more so. The above wing election was close to the 70% you mentioned, but the fleet service and F/A elections were both extremely close. We can debate how it was handled, but simply walking away wasn't the right thing to do.

5. One last thought: The idea that labor activists aren't happy and somehow hate their jobs/company is another tired stereotype. I'm actually surprised you buy into it (though, maybe I shouldn't be?). I like my job, enjoy what I do, am good at it, etc. Doesn't mean I'm not going to try and make it better, though...

 

[WorldTraveler]

I'm not going to get in the middle of this discussion other than to note that Kev's post above is one of the wittiest I've seen on here for quite a while... and why you, Kev, need to make sure you keep a healthy presence here... seems your participation has decreased of late - but few if anyone matches the cleverness with which you write.
.
Your last point, Kev, is particularly noteworthy - and it is precisely because both DL and its employees - PMDL and PMNW - remained professional throughout the whole process that DL pulled off one of the smoothest mergers in the industry, esp. with respect to labor relations in an industry that is known for some of the worst labor relations in American business - and there were legions of people who expected no shortage of problems for DL w/ labor integration.
.
All,
There seems little point in continuing to debate about what happened w/ who did what during the representation process because it was followed to the satisfaction of the governmental authorities that were charged w/ monitoring the election. Short of pushing for a revision of the process, it was followed and it matters not who participated in it.
.
We can only hope - but likely doubt- that the other active mergers in the industry will be resolved as smoothly.

 

[737823]

Josh--

You're definitely taking this thread in many different directions! Let's try to unpack each piece...

First, the Sowell article:

Let's try something. Humor me.

Random author: "Citibank invented the CDO, and by doing so single-handedly caused the recent financial meltdown. Everyone knows bankers make child pornographers look like Ghandi, and the fact that every last one isn't rotting in a prison cell, just proves how in bed with them the Obama administration truly is."

Josh: That's not true, and here's why (etc.).

Kevin: I find it interesting that financial employees are usually open minded, except when the light is being shown on them. I wonder why their against democracy, free speech, apple pie, puppies, and baseball?

Josh: How does my objection to what was written equate to being anti free speech?

Kevin: I know bankers. My parents had a mortgage when I was growing up. I also talk to the tellers when I go to the credit union. They fill me in on what the sector leaders are up to. They're all the same. BTW, did you know that JP Morgan was harassing war widows into signing over their Social Security payments?

See what I did there? Obviously hyperbolic, but it should get the point across. The hypothetical article, has one glaring error (which if it doesn't jump off the page, means you're lying about what you do for a living), a fistful of rhetoric, and some stale memes mixed in for good measure. Your protest wouldn't mean you're against free speech, any more than anyone of this thread is. It'd mean you're against inaccurate information and/or opinion masquerading as fact.

Not sure what point you're trying to make (or if you have one) but I must say you did humor me .

Onto the representation elections at DL:

1. People that are ardently opposed to representation will of course feel "harassed," just as pro labor people felt "harassed" by the onslaught of messaging we received from the company. Wether that meets a legal threshold is a different issue altogether. FWIW, the IAM publicly-and repeatedly- offered to cooperate with both DL and any employee that felt "harassed" seek justice. Neither the company, nor anyone else took them up on it.

2. Make no mistake. There was no "educating" anyone. DL had a clear cut mission to not have representation, and they did whatever it took to achieve that aim. This gauzy idea that it was just "educating people" to make sure they got the facts is disingenuous at best.

3. We've been integrated for awhile now. Today is the day F/A's can fly together, and the day all workgroups' benefits/payroll systems/and so on are one. Not for nothing, but my entire station sort of vanished off the map when they tried to assimilate us into the PMDL payroll system (MPS). Our location defaults to a different hub. Apparently, they're "working on a fix." They also misclassified all of us. Go figure...

4. It is not irresponsible for a labor organization to fight for it's members. Just packing it in would've have been much more so. The above wing election was close to the 70% you mentioned, but the fleet service and F/A elections were both extremely close. We can debate how it was handled, but simply walking away wasn't the right thing to do.

5. One last thought: The idea that labor activists aren't happy and somehow hate their jobs/company is another tired stereotype. I'm actually surprised you buy into it (though, maybe I shouldn't be?). I like my job, enjoy what I do, am good at it, etc. Doesn't mean I'm not going to try and make it better, though...

First off I'm glad you enjoy your job. I do as well and its unfortunate when people don't given how much time we devote to our careers and spend away from family for work.

1) I doubt an employee would want to take burden and possible expense of pursuing legal action against the IAM related to harassment during the election. I've heard from several of the DL agents I know very well at BOS that they were harassed and intimidated by union officials.

2) Not sure, I wasn't there and didn't see the flyers DL sent people, videos, and other internal material.

3) Good for the FAs, this nearly 18 months too late due to the union crying and stonewalling tactics.

4) In my work I have to make difficult unemotional decisions. I can't understand how it was a good use of union resources to fight Delta when the union clearly lost and the courts determined DL did not interfere with the election.

5) If the unions are an agent to improve jobs why did the DL workers overwhelmingly vote the unions down (several times now)? What about the simulator technicians? Didn't the IAM receive even fewer votes the second time when they were able to get a revote?

Josh

 

[Kev3188]

Not sure what point you're trying to make (or if you have one) but I must say you did humor me .

Glad you got a laugh, disappointed you didn't grasp what I was showing you. Surely, I haven't overestimated your intellectual capacity?

First off I'm glad you enjoy your job. I do as well and its unfortunate when people don't given how much time we devote to our careers and spend away from family for work.

1) I doubt an employee would want to take burden and possible expense of pursuing legal action against the IAM related to harassment during the election. I've heard from several of the DL agents I know very well at BOS that they were harassed and intimidated by union officials.

No, this would've been offering assitance with any investigation should someone have pressed charges with their local law enforcement.

2) Not sure, I wasn't there and didn't see the flyers DL sent people, videos, and other internal material.

That's right; you weren't. But still you feel free to weigh in based on anecdotal exchanges with a few agents you chat with at the podium.

3) Good for the FAs, this nearly 18 months too late due to the union crying and stonewalling tactics.

5/1 was established by the company, not labor. Could've been done before that, if needed.

4) In my work I have to make difficult unemotional decisions. I can't understand how it was a good use of union resources to fight Delta when the union clearly lost and the courts determined DL did not interfere with the election.

For a guy who claims to make unemotional decisions, you sure use a lot of emotional terms (crying, etc.). How 'bout using that same pragmatism when discussing labor?

5) If the unions are an agent to improve jobs why did the DL workers overwhelmingly vote the unions down (several times now)? What about the simulator technicians? Didn't the IAM receive even fewer votes the second time when they were able to get a revote?

That's just it, Josh. One election was "overwhelming." The others, not so much. As for the Sim Techs, IIRC, that's correct. I suspect that many made the emotional decision of only looking at the payscale, w/o realizing the cost of giving up everything else that came with it. There were also reports that many were promised better shifts as part of a "no" vote, but I'm not sure how extensive that is/was.