Nightwatch,Aug 31 2004, 03:34 AM]
Ken, I do not agree with you on the fact of the IAM being a better union than the TWU. After being in the IAM for over 20 years, many of those years as a steward, I embraced the TWU and the autonomy that came with them.
The autonomy that you feel you have is an illusion. The fact is that the contract and control over lies with the International.
As far as which grievances are heard remember its the International that picks both the mediator and the TWU member of the panel. So instead of just rejecting the grievance outright they do it at arbitration where your grievance, paid for by your local, gets bartered off or rejected anyway.
Another disadvantage to the TWU structure is that since the Locals do the grievances some valid grievances go unheard. For instance one of the members of Local 562 was looking to go to Charlotte which according to our contract should have been staffed with TWU members. The member filed a grievance. But the grievance was dropped even though the International agreed that it was a "winner". The International did not follow it, Local 562 was not going to spend $5000 to $10000 to get Local 510 (which would represent Charlotte) more dues payers and I guess Local 510 was not about to spend that kind of money to get maybe a few hundred dollars a year in dues because it would probably cost them more to represent them than they would collect in dues.
With the IAM we had a District, which received a good part of our dues money. I think somewhere around 40% stayed locally and the rest was split between the International and the District. The district had approx. 6-8 members at an annual pay scale of approx. 80K.
Bobby Gless, President of the 1000 member Local 562 made $96K a year.
And Ken, I also doubt that the AFL-CIO would "ask" us to stand tall and send the companies a message ref. outsourcing. We have to do that ourselves. We have to organize and combine talents to see something of that magnitude occur, and I doubt you'd ever see that happen. You would not see the floor respond to an action, AMFA or the TWU leading it. Maybe now I'm the pessimistic one, but only a few are willing to place their 2 week payday at risk over a venture like that.
And another thing that occurred to me.
So in other words even though we have a union, and we both agree that we need to do something we are on our own? We would have to wildcat because the union, that takes our dues, is not willing to take any risks in order to protect us? So why are we paying a union that is unwilling to do anything risky for us? You cant blame the members for not being willing to take things into their own hands when they belong to a union that will not support them. The problem is the leadership of the union not the membership. You would probably be very suprised at what the members would do with a leader that they had confidence in, historically people with leadership qualities have little trouble getting people to do what is needed.
AMFA currently represents more AMT's than the TWU, true? Then why would you say the AFL-CIO should lead the way in message writing? If AMFA is so damn good for us, where's the "pudding"? From what I have seen from AMFA I am not impressed. My senses are not "dulled" as yours from the long history you have with the TWU.
Well actually AMFA has 18000 members while the TWU claims that we have 18600 in the class and craft that would go to AMFA. I'll agree that at this time AMFAs impact is limited because the profession is still split up all over the place. However once we get to AMFA it will double the size of the organization and AMFA will have considerably more resources.
As I've said many times before all you have to do is look at what the TWU has done over the last twenty years.
We do need to start sending a message to our government about the exploitation of our work to outside vendors, our jobs will not return if we allow them to go. How long is AA going to be able to stay competitive with the other airlines that are outsourcing? Is that why you desire AMFA here? So that our jobs leave as they have at NWA and UAL, thus making us competitive?
The fact is that for the last twenty years the TWU has given the company a cost advantage over other carriers. This in turn has pressured other carriers to seek concessions. The TWU has always led the way with concessions.The work stays with the TWU so long as the TWU can show the company thats its cheaper to do it in house. Thats begging, not fighting. However even though the work stays with the TWU it has not stayed with the A&P. As an A&P that is my primary concern, I do not wish to do the same work I do now someday as a Fleet Service worker at Fleet Service rates, I would rather go on strike and shut the company down, however such a scenario is OK with the TWU as long as they get more members. The TWUs interests are not the interests of the A&P mechanic.
Our struggle isn't which union is best, our struggle is to retain our livelihoods within the USA, and we need to get on the ball, we are all losing.
And your solution is to work for third world wages? Maybe that OK for someone in MCI, where costs are low and you can get by on such wages but what about those of us who provide the labor where the revenues that pay you are generated?
Ken, I do not agree with you on the fact of the IAM being a better union than the TWU. After being in the IAM for over 20 years, many of those years as a steward, I embraced the TWU and the autonomy that came with them.
The autonomy that you feel you have is an illusion. The fact is that the contract and control over lies with the International.
As far as which grievances are heard remember its the International that picks both the mediator and the TWU member of the panel. So instead of just rejecting the grievance outright they do it at arbitration where your grievance, paid for by your local, gets bartered off or rejected anyway.
Another disadvantage to the TWU structure is that since the Locals do the grievances some valid grievances go unheard. For instance one of the members of Local 562 was looking to go to Charlotte which according to our contract should have been staffed with TWU members. The member filed a grievance. But the grievance was dropped even though the International agreed that it was a "winner". The International did not follow it, Local 562 was not going to spend $5000 to $10000 to get Local 510 (which would represent Charlotte) more dues payers and I guess Local 510 was not about to spend that kind of money to get maybe a few hundred dollars a year in dues because it would probably cost them more to represent them than they would collect in dues.
With the IAM we had a District, which received a good part of our dues money. I think somewhere around 40% stayed locally and the rest was split between the International and the District. The district had approx. 6-8 members at an annual pay scale of approx. 80K.
Bobby Gless, President of the 1000 member Local 562 made $96K a year.
And Ken, I also doubt that the AFL-CIO would "ask" us to stand tall and send the companies a message ref. outsourcing. We have to do that ourselves. We have to organize and combine talents to see something of that magnitude occur, and I doubt you'd ever see that happen. You would not see the floor respond to an action, AMFA or the TWU leading it. Maybe now I'm the pessimistic one, but only a few are willing to place their 2 week payday at risk over a venture like that.
And another thing that occurred to me.
So in other words even though we have a union, and we both agree that we need to do something we are on our own? We would have to wildcat because the union, that takes our dues, is not willing to take any risks in order to protect us? So why are we paying a union that is unwilling to do anything risky for us? You cant blame the members for not being willing to take things into their own hands when they belong to a union that will not support them. The problem is the leadership of the union not the membership. You would probably be very suprised at what the members would do with a leader that they had confidence in, historically people with leadership qualities have little trouble getting people to do what is needed.
AMFA currently represents more AMT's than the TWU, true? Then why would you say the AFL-CIO should lead the way in message writing? If AMFA is so damn good for us, where's the "pudding"? From what I have seen from AMFA I am not impressed. My senses are not "dulled" as yours from the long history you have with the TWU.
Well actually AMFA has 18000 members while the TWU claims that we have 18600 in the class and craft that would go to AMFA. I'll agree that at this time AMFAs impact is limited because the profession is still split up all over the place. However once we get to AMFA it will double the size of the organization and AMFA will have considerably more resources.
As I've said many times before all you have to do is look at what the TWU has done over the last twenty years.
We do need to start sending a message to our government about the exploitation of our work to outside vendors, our jobs will not return if we allow them to go. How long is AA going to be able to stay competitive with the other airlines that are outsourcing? Is that why you desire AMFA here? So that our jobs leave as they have at NWA and UAL, thus making us competitive?
The fact is that for the last twenty years the TWU has given the company a cost advantage over other carriers. This in turn has pressured other carriers to seek concessions. The TWU has always led the way with concessions.The work stays with the TWU so long as the TWU can show the company thats its cheaper to do it in house. Thats begging, not fighting. However even though the work stays with the TWU it has not stayed with the A&P. As an A&P that is my primary concern, I do not wish to do the same work I do now someday as a Fleet Service worker at Fleet Service rates, I would rather go on strike and shut the company down, however such a scenario is OK with the TWU as long as they get more members. The TWUs interests are not the interests of the A&P mechanic.
Our struggle isn't which union is best, our struggle is to retain our livelihoods within the USA, and we need to get on the ball, we are all losing.
And your solution is to work for third world wages? Maybe that OK for someone in MCI, where costs are low and you can get by on such wages but what about those of us who provide the labor where the revenues that pay you are generated?
