mechanics lose in court
- Thread starter AAviator
- Start date
----------------
On 7/9/2003 4:48:08 PM twuer wrote:
To "Bob" and RV4. . .I'm afraid (for your sakes) that "Jake" was correct, though long winded! I have seen all the evidence to verify it. I'm new to the boards, could you fill me in on your positions. Are you paying TWU dues?
I will answer for myself only.
Yes
Elected officials, what?
Yes
Treasurer Local 562
By reading the past posts it appears to me that you two guys are a bit disgruntled with the whole TWU thing. Am I correct in assuming this?
Am I unhappy with the performance of the TWU ATD? Yes.
And forgive me for saying this, but you seem a bit pissed off that you lost the law suit.
Of course we are. The TWU violated its own Constitution and imposed a massivly concessionary contract on us for five years when historically the industry has made the turnaround from record losses to record profits in two years.
I am pondering both AMFA and TWU at this point but have seen NO evidence to sway me toward the AMFA side. You (being AMFA)talk about the job you guys are doing at NW, well, didn't they out-source their labor overseas recently? Or is this something I just "heard"?
Well I dont know exactly what you heard. My ultimate goal is for democratic accountability, and a more consolidated structure for aircraft mechanics and hopefully, other airline workers. I see no reason (or is it noreason) why airline workers that do the same job should be split up between several different unions where none of them are primarily focused on the airline industry. Can you?
And what about the new contract (pre 9-11)that TWU got for you (us). Many people worked long and hard to ensure that the members would get what was coming to them. I myself appreciated the pay raise. Noone, let me repeat, NOONE could have predicted 9-11. The reason for the big downturn in the whole airline industry. It seemed to snowball from there.
Enough about 9-11. The airlines were compensated for that already. The fact is that all four aircraft used in the attacks were running at about a 25% load that day. The airlines were already losing money big time on Sept 10,2001. Management had failed to react to the economic downturn.
The raise we got was way overdue(by around 20 years) and it merely restored our earnings. It did nothing to recapture the lost earnings of the prior 20 years of concessionary contract bargaining that took place without any resistance on the part of the leadership of our union.
Being a due-paying member of the TWU, I have faith in those I have elected to run this union. So far they haven't let me down.
Its good to have faith in your elected officials, its the unelected ones who have the real power that I have the problem with. For many years I've heard members complain about the lack of democratic accountability, the Internationals answer was that they never imposed anything without it going to a vote before the Presidents council, so "dont blame the International, blame the Presidents council". However the votes were not made public, only whether or not it passed and it's still a violation of the Constitution. Where does the Constitution transfer our right to vote to a "Presidents Council"? The Presidents council, an assembly that is controlled and chaired by the International, is a lot easier to manipulate than an entire membership where unrestrained debate can take place.
Can you honestly say the same about the AMFA leaders?
I cant say, but I can say that we have no way of removing the "appointed" -not elected, heads of the ATD and they have the power to impose a five year contract on the members without a vote. From what I've read members would have the power to remove any official with AMFA, our right to remove officials was removed from our Constitution at the 1997 Convention after a motion to broaden the members rights was defeated. Now the TWU even won the right to violate its own Constitution and impose agreements as it chooses. Without an election there is no reason for the TWU to deviate from this course of removing our rights to self determination, a course that has lead to decreased lifetime earnings for all of us while their pay and benifits, provided by our dues, continues to go up. Their increases, despite our losses are made possible by increasing the number of dues payers. The quality of union jobs is traded off against the quantity of dues payers.
Such actions are what can be expected from officials that feel they are not accountable to their members, the beautiful thing about Democracy is that it brings accountability. That is why I favor an election. Since our top officials are appointed by people who never face a membership vote the best means to bring forth accountability is for the entire organization to be put to the electoral test just as local officers face every three years. If there is an election, regardless of the outcome of the election, power, real power, not just rhetorical power, will be in the hands of the members. If there is an election all the parties seeking our vote will have to tell us why we should vote for them, they will be seeking to serve us, not the other way around. Whats wrong with that?
As in most elections the incumbant has the advantage, they also have more resources. Why does the International fear facing the same process that all the Local officials face? Every three years I face an anonymous vote from my coworkers and fellow members. I face their real feelings. Thats the way it should be. Every man who casts his own vote is entitled to that. However if you vote in behalf of others you are not. People have the right to know how votes cast in their behalf are made. International officers never face an anonymous vote, yet the members have no means of determining how the vote was cast in their behalf at Conventions. The only way for things like this to be changed is if those at the top decide thats its better to relinquish some power back to the members than lose them completely. An election is the means by which this pressure for change can come.
And do you honestly think that Bankruptcy would have been the better solution? Let's put even more people out of a job!!
The question is would the results have been worse in BK? Probably not. Or could we have gotten a better deal if we held out? Probably. The Vermont plan was not much worse than what we got and since we already provided AA with the best language in the industry (prior to the new concessions) from a unionized workforce (Part time, cross utilization, employee paid medical, employee funded retirement medical, transfer of work from Title I to ther lower paid workers, OSMs ect) we already had good cause to reject the companys proposals because they were onerous. The companys demands were far in excess of what its competitors got, even after they went through BK.
And any union that will send work over seas is not portraying the true meaning of "union" to me.
Well I've never heard of any Union sending work overseas. Companies do that. If you are talking about the lack of protective language and contracting out then you should look a little closer at our own deal. We have had foreign repair for years. JFK used to do "interior checks", that work was sent to England where (according to the instructors who were sent over to provide them the 40 hour class) unliscenced people with no aircraft maintenance backround whatsoever were doing the checks. These jobs were removed from JFK and sent overseas. We also have A-cks, SIC and other maintenance being performed in South America and other non-US, non-Union places. This work does not even count as outsourced if these workers, who are not US Citizens, are not union members and do not work under our agreement are AA employees.
I would like to hear your comments. . .even from you "Jake" and any other TWU supporter. Do you have anything else to add on the TWU behalf???
in union solidarity. . .
TWUer
----------------
On 7/9/2003 4:48:08 PM twuer wrote:
To "Bob" and RV4. . .I'm afraid (for your sakes) that "Jake" was correct, though long winded! I have seen all the evidence to verify it. I'm new to the boards, could you fill me in on your positions. Are you paying TWU dues?
I will answer for myself only.
Yes
Elected officials, what?
Yes
Treasurer Local 562
By reading the past posts it appears to me that you two guys are a bit disgruntled with the whole TWU thing. Am I correct in assuming this?
Am I unhappy with the performance of the TWU ATD? Yes.
And forgive me for saying this, but you seem a bit pissed off that you lost the law suit.
Of course we are. The TWU violated its own Constitution and imposed a massivly concessionary contract on us for five years when historically the industry has made the turnaround from record losses to record profits in two years.
I am pondering both AMFA and TWU at this point but have seen NO evidence to sway me toward the AMFA side. You (being AMFA)talk about the job you guys are doing at NW, well, didn't they out-source their labor overseas recently? Or is this something I just "heard"?
Well I dont know exactly what you heard. My ultimate goal is for democratic accountability, and a more consolidated structure for aircraft mechanics and hopefully, other airline workers. I see no reason (or is it noreason) why airline workers that do the same job should be split up between several different unions where none of them are primarily focused on the airline industry. Can you?
And what about the new contract (pre 9-11)that TWU got for you (us). Many people worked long and hard to ensure that the members would get what was coming to them. I myself appreciated the pay raise. Noone, let me repeat, NOONE could have predicted 9-11. The reason for the big downturn in the whole airline industry. It seemed to snowball from there.
Enough about 9-11. The airlines were compensated for that already. The fact is that all four aircraft used in the attacks were running at about a 25% load that day. The airlines were already losing money big time on Sept 10,2001. Management had failed to react to the economic downturn.
The raise we got was way overdue(by around 20 years) and it merely restored our earnings. It did nothing to recapture the lost earnings of the prior 20 years of concessionary contract bargaining that took place without any resistance on the part of the leadership of our union.
Being a due-paying member of the TWU, I have faith in those I have elected to run this union. So far they haven't let me down.
Its good to have faith in your elected officials, its the unelected ones who have the real power that I have the problem with. For many years I've heard members complain about the lack of democratic accountability, the Internationals answer was that they never imposed anything without it going to a vote before the Presidents council, so "dont blame the International, blame the Presidents council". However the votes were not made public, only whether or not it passed and it's still a violation of the Constitution. Where does the Constitution transfer our right to vote to a "Presidents Council"? The Presidents council, an assembly that is controlled and chaired by the International, is a lot easier to manipulate than an entire membership where unrestrained debate can take place.
Can you honestly say the same about the AMFA leaders?
I cant say, but I can say that we have no way of removing the "appointed" -not elected, heads of the ATD and they have the power to impose a five year contract on the members without a vote. From what I've read members would have the power to remove any official with AMFA, our right to remove officials was removed from our Constitution at the 1997 Convention after a motion to broaden the members rights was defeated. Now the TWU even won the right to violate its own Constitution and impose agreements as it chooses. Without an election there is no reason for the TWU to deviate from this course of removing our rights to self determination, a course that has lead to decreased lifetime earnings for all of us while their pay and benifits, provided by our dues, continues to go up. Their increases, despite our losses are made possible by increasing the number of dues payers. The quality of union jobs is traded off against the quantity of dues payers.
Such actions are what can be expected from officials that feel they are not accountable to their members, the beautiful thing about Democracy is that it brings accountability. That is why I favor an election. Since our top officials are appointed by people who never face a membership vote the best means to bring forth accountability is for the entire organization to be put to the electoral test just as local officers face every three years. If there is an election, regardless of the outcome of the election, power, real power, not just rhetorical power, will be in the hands of the members. If there is an election all the parties seeking our vote will have to tell us why we should vote for them, they will be seeking to serve us, not the other way around. Whats wrong with that?
As in most elections the incumbant has the advantage, they also have more resources. Why does the International fear facing the same process that all the Local officials face? Every three years I face an anonymous vote from my coworkers and fellow members. I face their real feelings. Thats the way it should be. Every man who casts his own vote is entitled to that. However if you vote in behalf of others you are not. People have the right to know how votes cast in their behalf are made. International officers never face an anonymous vote, yet the members have no means of determining how the vote was cast in their behalf at Conventions. The only way for things like this to be changed is if those at the top decide thats its better to relinquish some power back to the members than lose them completely. An election is the means by which this pressure for change can come.
And do you honestly think that Bankruptcy would have been the better solution? Let's put even more people out of a job!!
The question is would the results have been worse in BK? Probably not. Or could we have gotten a better deal if we held out? Probably. The Vermont plan was not much worse than what we got and since we already provided AA with the best language in the industry (prior to the new concessions) from a unionized workforce (Part time, cross utilization, employee paid medical, employee funded retirement medical, transfer of work from Title I to ther lower paid workers, OSMs ect) we already had good cause to reject the companys proposals because they were onerous. The companys demands were far in excess of what its competitors got, even after they went through BK.
And any union that will send work over seas is not portraying the true meaning of "union" to me.
Well I've never heard of any Union sending work overseas. Companies do that. If you are talking about the lack of protective language and contracting out then you should look a little closer at our own deal. We have had foreign repair for years. JFK used to do "interior checks", that work was sent to England where (according to the instructors who were sent over to provide them the 40 hour class) unliscenced people with no aircraft maintenance backround whatsoever were doing the checks. These jobs were removed from JFK and sent overseas. We also have A-cks, SIC and other maintenance being performed in South America and other non-US, non-Union places. This work does not even count as outsourced if these workers, who are not US Citizens, are not union members and do not work under our agreement are AA employees.
I would like to hear your comments. . .even from you "Jake" and any other TWU supporter. Do you have anything else to add on the TWU behalf???
in union solidarity. . .
TWUer
----------------
----------------
On 7/8/2003 1
41 PM jake wrote:
The intent of the preliminary injunction that was filed by your AMFA supporting pukes was to argue that the TWU International did not have the authority to sign the agreement and that it had to be re-voted. There were several arguments but there were three main ones. First, that a significant number of people did not receive PINs and therefore did not have an opportunity to vote. Secondly, that the TWU didn’t follow the Presidents Council by-laws by not providing a tentative agreement to the membership for review, thirty days prior to ratification. Thirdly that the TWU made significant changes to the agreement after ratification therefore making the vote invalid.
You left out the fact that the Constitution says "Any proposed agreement shall be subject to ratification by the members covered by such proposed agreement". Aryicle XXIV Sect 2
Let’s take these one at a time shall we? First, you have helped spread the false rumor that 3400 people did not receive a PIN thereby affecting the outcome of the vote. Let’s look at the truth. The TWU submitted uncontested evidence showing that only 699 people in both ratifications (joint and mechanic) complained about not receiving pin numbers and most of those were taken care of.
So only those that the International recieved complaints from were counted? So if someone did not complain then you "assume" they got a ballott? Didnt the TWU admitt that the Crew Chiefs were omitted from the list by "mistake"?
Secondly, the Presidents council voted unanimously (including the president of 562) to change the by- laws with regard to the 30 day requirement and to authorize the use of an automated counting system in order to accomplish the vote by the April 15 deadline given to each of the Unions by Mr. Carty.
I believe that you are combining two issues here. I'll have to check but I believe that the CCC system, that was superior to the deeply flawed AAA process (and did not have the former head od AA legal on the boartd) was presented and approved by the council, eliminating the 30 day requirement was not discussed. I believe that the CCC system offered complete accountabilty (where the votes were phoned in from were recorded), random pin numbers and no changing of cast ballotts.
No one even attempted to refute this in court. Third, The TWU made significant improvements in the agreement due to the dishonesty of Mr. Carty.
The TWU made the improvements? So they thought up profit sharing that only kicks in after $500 million in profits? Did anyone who works under the agreemnent have any say as to whether or not these "improvements" were sufficient? Who should make such a determination over what is better and what is not, Jim Little who gets his $141,000 plus other perks or the guys who are losing $25000 perc year after finding out that the executives were not "sharing the pain"? Neither is Little.
Local 562 claimed that each time one of our contracts is modified in any way the entire contract must be re-voted. The TWU made clear that, while most modifications must be ratified, modifications that were clearly improvements – such as early openers or extra profit sharing – did not have to be ratified, particularly when to do so would lead to a bankruptcy.
Like the 95 Me Too clause? How "Ironclad" are the reopeners? What compells the company to open the contract early or is it as enforcable as the "Me Too" clause? So now all the company has to do is threaten BK and we will never vote on another contract because Jim Little knows whats best for us, not whats best for him at $141,000 per year and climbing but for us who will lose over $100,000 working more hours than ever by the time this contract becomes amendable.
The judge found the TWU’s position was more reasonable and, like the judge in the flight attendant case, she also ruled that everyone – TWU members, members of other unions, as well as the public – would have fared much worse in a bankruptcy. This judge is from the same district where AA would have filed for bankruptcy, and may have reviewed any decision made by a Bankruptcy Judge. So, contrary to everything you and your cronies have told the membership, two federal courts have now directly stated that we would not have been better off in bankruptcy but instead, as the flight attendant judge stated, that a bankruptcy filing “would have dramatically adverse consequences for AA’s employees.â€
The judges did not state that we are better off for settling for what we did either. They merely stressed thatBK was not a desirable outcome. Whether or not that outcome was for certain was not explored for the purposes of the injunction, those details would have to wait for a trial.
As far as making fools of people, you and the leadership of 562 are guilty! You are guilty of not providing responsible and honest leadership to the unfortunate people who believe your lies. These people work hard every day and expect not to be lied to.
What lies? Tell us where we lied to the members?
The TWU informed all of the presidents and members alike why they did what they did. You and your band of arm- chair lawyers can’t get it through you thick head that you are not experts. You choose to spin the truth in an attempt to destroy a Union in which you could not get elected.
Experts? Since when do unionists rely on "experts" to course the direction of labor?Are these the same experts who insist that American workers should produce more and work for less to be "competative" with third world child and slave labor?
By the way, I was elected, twice by a wide margin. Are you elected?
Also, even though it wasn’t a part of the injunction hearing, the Judge decided to help you out with another piece of information. The language actually mirrored the ruling that the flight attendants received in their suit. She chose to say that we would be “worse off†had we gone to bankruptcy. Does that language ring a bell? It should, the TWU has been saying that all along. Are you guys idiots or what? You and your AMFA supporting pukes made fools of yourselves in front of the entire country by filing a law suit that you simply had no chance to win. The TWU told you exactly what was going to happen and it did and you and your boys chose to ignore it, is that responsible? Now, you explain that to your people!
So now Judges rulings are infallable? Like when they support RTW legislation? Like when they support placing Bush in the White House? Judges are just as corrupt as most politicians. Favorable rulings can pay off in later years through "consulting" jobs etc. It will be interesting to see on whose payrolls these Judges are on 5 or 10 years from now.
The fact is that "experts" have been telling working people sophisticated lies for years. Experts told us of all the benifits of deregulation, most of us suspected otherwise. Experts tell of how eliminating Capital gains and lowering taxes on the rich will "trickle down" to the rest of us, most of us were skeptical. Experts tell us we would be better off without Social Security, most are doubtful. Generally unionists dispute the claims of "experts" who claim that we need to work more for less. The fact that you, and people like you have apparently refuted this long standing position on Experts is troubling. "Experts" are hired to find a way to say what you want them to say. Was the TWU simply looking for "experts" to help sell a contract that would put AA in a tremendously advantageous position over its competitors or ones that would help preserve our living standards? Would the TWU benifit from placing AA in such a position? Past Industry Leading Concessionary contracts provided by the TWU helped to triple the number of dues paying members. Since Sonny Hall and Jim Little are not elected, lower wages and benifits do not threaten their hold on power but increased members means more dues for increased salaries, cars etc.
Better to have fought and lost than to surrender without a fight. A loser deserves more respect than a coward.
----------------
On 7/8/2003 1
41 PM jake wrote:The intent of the preliminary injunction that was filed by your AMFA supporting pukes was to argue that the TWU International did not have the authority to sign the agreement and that it had to be re-voted. There were several arguments but there were three main ones. First, that a significant number of people did not receive PINs and therefore did not have an opportunity to vote. Secondly, that the TWU didn’t follow the Presidents Council by-laws by not providing a tentative agreement to the membership for review, thirty days prior to ratification. Thirdly that the TWU made significant changes to the agreement after ratification therefore making the vote invalid.
You left out the fact that the Constitution says "Any proposed agreement shall be subject to ratification by the members covered by such proposed agreement". Aryicle XXIV Sect 2
Let’s take these one at a time shall we? First, you have helped spread the false rumor that 3400 people did not receive a PIN thereby affecting the outcome of the vote. Let’s look at the truth. The TWU submitted uncontested evidence showing that only 699 people in both ratifications (joint and mechanic) complained about not receiving pin numbers and most of those were taken care of.
So only those that the International recieved complaints from were counted? So if someone did not complain then you "assume" they got a ballott? Didnt the TWU admitt that the Crew Chiefs were omitted from the list by "mistake"?
Secondly, the Presidents council voted unanimously (including the president of 562) to change the by- laws with regard to the 30 day requirement and to authorize the use of an automated counting system in order to accomplish the vote by the April 15 deadline given to each of the Unions by Mr. Carty.
I believe that you are combining two issues here. I'll have to check but I believe that the CCC system, that was superior to the deeply flawed AAA process (and did not have the former head od AA legal on the boartd) was presented and approved by the council, eliminating the 30 day requirement was not discussed. I believe that the CCC system offered complete accountabilty (where the votes were phoned in from were recorded), random pin numbers and no changing of cast ballotts.
No one even attempted to refute this in court. Third, The TWU made significant improvements in the agreement due to the dishonesty of Mr. Carty.
The TWU made the improvements? So they thought up profit sharing that only kicks in after $500 million in profits? Did anyone who works under the agreemnent have any say as to whether or not these "improvements" were sufficient? Who should make such a determination over what is better and what is not, Jim Little who gets his $141,000 plus other perks or the guys who are losing $25000 perc year after finding out that the executives were not "sharing the pain"? Neither is Little.
Local 562 claimed that each time one of our contracts is modified in any way the entire contract must be re-voted. The TWU made clear that, while most modifications must be ratified, modifications that were clearly improvements – such as early openers or extra profit sharing – did not have to be ratified, particularly when to do so would lead to a bankruptcy.
Like the 95 Me Too clause? How "Ironclad" are the reopeners? What compells the company to open the contract early or is it as enforcable as the "Me Too" clause? So now all the company has to do is threaten BK and we will never vote on another contract because Jim Little knows whats best for us, not whats best for him at $141,000 per year and climbing but for us who will lose over $100,000 working more hours than ever by the time this contract becomes amendable.
The judge found the TWU’s position was more reasonable and, like the judge in the flight attendant case, she also ruled that everyone – TWU members, members of other unions, as well as the public – would have fared much worse in a bankruptcy. This judge is from the same district where AA would have filed for bankruptcy, and may have reviewed any decision made by a Bankruptcy Judge. So, contrary to everything you and your cronies have told the membership, two federal courts have now directly stated that we would not have been better off in bankruptcy but instead, as the flight attendant judge stated, that a bankruptcy filing “would have dramatically adverse consequences for AA’s employees.â€
The judges did not state that we are better off for settling for what we did either. They merely stressed thatBK was not a desirable outcome. Whether or not that outcome was for certain was not explored for the purposes of the injunction, those details would have to wait for a trial.
As far as making fools of people, you and the leadership of 562 are guilty! You are guilty of not providing responsible and honest leadership to the unfortunate people who believe your lies. These people work hard every day and expect not to be lied to.
What lies? Tell us where we lied to the members?
The TWU informed all of the presidents and members alike why they did what they did. You and your band of arm- chair lawyers can’t get it through you thick head that you are not experts. You choose to spin the truth in an attempt to destroy a Union in which you could not get elected.
Experts? Since when do unionists rely on "experts" to course the direction of labor?Are these the same experts who insist that American workers should produce more and work for less to be "competative" with third world child and slave labor?
By the way, I was elected, twice by a wide margin. Are you elected?
Also, even though it wasn’t a part of the injunction hearing, the Judge decided to help you out with another piece of information. The language actually mirrored the ruling that the flight attendants received in their suit. She chose to say that we would be “worse off†had we gone to bankruptcy. Does that language ring a bell? It should, the TWU has been saying that all along. Are you guys idiots or what? You and your AMFA supporting pukes made fools of yourselves in front of the entire country by filing a law suit that you simply had no chance to win. The TWU told you exactly what was going to happen and it did and you and your boys chose to ignore it, is that responsible? Now, you explain that to your people!
So now Judges rulings are infallable? Like when they support RTW legislation? Like when they support placing Bush in the White House? Judges are just as corrupt as most politicians. Favorable rulings can pay off in later years through "consulting" jobs etc. It will be interesting to see on whose payrolls these Judges are on 5 or 10 years from now.
The fact is that "experts" have been telling working people sophisticated lies for years. Experts told us of all the benifits of deregulation, most of us suspected otherwise. Experts tell of how eliminating Capital gains and lowering taxes on the rich will "trickle down" to the rest of us, most of us were skeptical. Experts tell us we would be better off without Social Security, most are doubtful. Generally unionists dispute the claims of "experts" who claim that we need to work more for less. The fact that you, and people like you have apparently refuted this long standing position on Experts is troubling. "Experts" are hired to find a way to say what you want them to say. Was the TWU simply looking for "experts" to help sell a contract that would put AA in a tremendously advantageous position over its competitors or ones that would help preserve our living standards? Would the TWU benifit from placing AA in such a position? Past Industry Leading Concessionary contracts provided by the TWU helped to triple the number of dues paying members. Since Sonny Hall and Jim Little are not elected, lower wages and benifits do not threaten their hold on power but increased members means more dues for increased salaries, cars etc.
Better to have fought and lost than to surrender without a fight. A loser deserves more respect than a coward.
----------------
----------------
On 7/10/2003 5
35 AM RV4 wrote:
Jake,
Why rush to delete the e-mail if your explaination is correct?
----------------
Dave,On 7/10/2003 5
35 AM RV4 wrote: Jake,
Why rush to delete the e-mail if your explaination is correct?
----------------
Everything I said is true and was documented in Court or by the AAA. If it wasn’t true, why did your lawyer admit that he wasn’t sure why AAA was even in the case? And why did he not accuse them of any misconduct? And how could 3400 mechanics have been deprived of PIN numbers if less than 2500 didn’t vote?
The question should be, why, if you are so honest, are you posting password protected material? As far as its removal, I know the website was down for a few hours, but I had no problem pulling it up. Of course, I am a paid up member. I am sure there was some concern as to how someone like you, who is in arrears and should have no access to the “members†area of our site accessed the document, and that it is against the law to post things on public access areas that are password protected. Of course, that particular e-mail had nothing to do at all with the issue regarding the unanimous Presidents Council resolution, which specifically authorized a process on a one time basis allowing for a ratified agreement by April 15.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 7,319
- Reaction score
- 1,555
----------------
On 7/10/2003 11:37:31 AM jake wrote:
Everything I said is true and was documented in Court or by the AAA. If it wasn’t true, why did your lawyer admit that he wasn’t sure why AAA was even in the case? And why did he not accuse them of any misconduct? And how could 3400 mechanics have been deprived of PIN numbers if less than 2500 didn’t vote?
The question should be, why, if you are so honest, are you posting password protected material? As far as its removal, I know the website was down for a few hours, but I had no problem pulling it up. Of course, I am a paid up member. I am sure there was some concern as to how someone like you, who is in arrears and should have no access to the “members†area of our site accessed the document, and that it is against the law to post things on public access areas that are password protected. Of course, that particular e-mail had nothing to do at all with the issue regarding the unanimous Presidents Council resolution, which specifically authorized a process on a one time basis allowing for a ratified agreement by April 15.
----------------
I am in arrears and it is not I that has access to the Local 514 web site, but members that are not in arrears that provide me with so called secret material. The secrecy of Local 514 and the TWU from it''s own members is one of the main reasons why the membership of the the TWU as a whole is looking for a new representitive.On 7/10/2003 11:37:31 AM jake wrote:
----------------
On 7/10/2003 535 AM RV4 wrote:
Jake,
Why rush to delete the e-mail if your explaination is correct?
----------------
Dave,On 7/10/2003 5
35 AM RV4 wrote: Jake,
Why rush to delete the e-mail if your explaination is correct?
----------------
Everything I said is true and was documented in Court or by the AAA. If it wasn’t true, why did your lawyer admit that he wasn’t sure why AAA was even in the case? And why did he not accuse them of any misconduct? And how could 3400 mechanics have been deprived of PIN numbers if less than 2500 didn’t vote?
The question should be, why, if you are so honest, are you posting password protected material? As far as its removal, I know the website was down for a few hours, but I had no problem pulling it up. Of course, I am a paid up member. I am sure there was some concern as to how someone like you, who is in arrears and should have no access to the “members†area of our site accessed the document, and that it is against the law to post things on public access areas that are password protected. Of course, that particular e-mail had nothing to do at all with the issue regarding the unanimous Presidents Council resolution, which specifically authorized a process on a one time basis allowing for a ratified agreement by April 15.
----------------
----------------
On 7/10/2003 11:37:31 AM jake wrote:
The question should be, why, if you are so honest, are you posting password protected material? As far as its removal, I know the website was down for a few hours, but I had no problem pulling it up. Of course, I am a paid up member. I am sure there was some concern as to how someone like you, who is in arrears and should have no access to the “members†area of our site accessed the document, and that it is against the law to post things on public access areas that are password protected.
----------------
Go on with your secret beliefs Jake.On 7/10/2003 11:37:31 AM jake wrote:
The question should be, why, if you are so honest, are you posting password protected material? As far as its removal, I know the website was down for a few hours, but I had no problem pulling it up. Of course, I am a paid up member. I am sure there was some concern as to how someone like you, who is in arrears and should have no access to the “members†area of our site accessed the document, and that it is against the law to post things on public access areas that are password protected.
----------------
When your union has Local Officers, Shop Stewards, and Members that have signed cards and support change, getting so-called secret information is not as difficult as you might think.
Against the law?
So get a lawyer and do something about it!
It is actually pretty funny watching your asses squirm and run around like ants around a kicked over ant hill because your "secret", and slanted communication system which you use to propagate lies to the membership has been breached.
Want to play more? Go tell your webmaster Alan Ball, that I am currently looking at your server directory named catch/me/if/you/can and that I can also access more than your secret communications. Then come and tell everyone how against the law that is too! ROFLMAO
Checking it Out
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2003
- Messages
- 1,702
- Reaction score
- 0
TWU is affiliated with the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) and the worldwide International Transport Workers Federation (ITF). We are a trade union representing workers in Mass Transportation, Airline, Railroad, Utility, University, Municipalities, Service and allied industries.
Our union operates on three levels -- the International Union, Industrial Divisions and Local affiliates. All TWU members belong to Locals formed on the basis of interest and geographic location. The members elect their own Local officers who handle most of their problems. The International Union coordinates the activities of the Divisions and the Locals and assists in negotiations, organizing drives and legislative campaigns. It provides professional legal, education, research and public relations services to the Locals and Divisions.
The supreme policy-making body of the union is the International Convention which is held every four years. International officers are elected at the Convention. The International Constitution, which governs all union activities, is reviewed and amended at that time as well.
Between Conventions, the policy-making bodies of the union are the International Executive Council and International Executive Board. Division Councils meet at regular intervals to discuss and formulate policies affecting their own particular memberships.
- International headquarters address:
1700 Broadway
New York, N.Y. 10019
Phone: 212-259-4900
Fax: 212-265-4537
You Be the Judge! Learn the Facts
Educate yourself about the true workings of Real Unions!
----------------
On 7/10/2003 7:15:39 PM Checking it Out wrote:
You Be the Judge! Learn the Facts
Educate yourself about the true workings of Real Unions!
----------------
We just got educated, learned the facts, now we can Judge and 3500 Members Lost Their Job Security and are NOW on the Street!On 7/10/2003 7:15:39 PM Checking it Out wrote:
You Be the Judge! Learn the Facts
Educate yourself about the true workings of Real Unions!
----------------
AIRLINE MECHANICS REPRESENTED BY AMFA
ALASKA
AMERICAN TRANS AIR
ATLANTIC COAST AIRLINES
HORIZON AIRLINES (defeated the TWU)
MESABA AIRLINES
NORTHWEST AIRLINES
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES
AND YOU CAN ADD UNITED AIRLINES EFFECTIVE MONDAY JULY 14th, 2003
Checking it Out
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2003
- Messages
- 1,702
- Reaction score
- 0
AMFA HISTORY
What is AMFA?
The Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association (AMFA) is an independent labor union representing aircraft technicians and, in their words, airline support personnel. AMFA is not affiliated with the AFL-CIO or any other labor organization. It is based in Laconia, New Hampshire.
Background
AMFA was founded by O.V. Delle-Femine, who is the only President/National Director AMFA has ever had. (40 years) Delle-Femine was born and raised in East Providence, Rhode Island. He obtained technical training as a mechanic while working in the Air Force. He became actively involved in union affairs after he left the Air Force and began working for American Airlines. Delle-Femine is well read and reportedly immersed himself in books on the history of the American labor movement. He eventually became disillusioned with the state of the mechanics'' union at American and committed himself to creating a "better" labor union focusing on the "craft" aspect of the mechanics work group. Delle-Femine and a few of his friends formed AMFA in 1962 supposedly as an alternative to the traditional industrial unions that had dominated union organizing among the mechanics'' craft or class up until that time. It formally became a union in 1963.
Delle-Femine and AMFA have been repeatedly frustrated over the years by the National Mediation Board''s (NMB) craft or class unit determinations that consistently group so-called "unskilled" workers such as cleaners and fuelers with so-called "skilled" workers such as aircraft technicians. AMFA has consistently made clear that it strongly favors rules that would enable it to represent only these "skilled" workers. For the most part, AMFA''s efforts have been unsuccessful. In fact, AMFA had very little success organizing any employees prior to 1994. The few companies where it had any success in organizing new employees (Ozark Airlines, Hughes Airwest, Southern Airways, Braniff, Trump Shuttle, Pacific Airlines, and Airlift International) are no longer in business (either through mergers or going out of business). However, the contracts AMFA negotiated during this period were always viewed as mid-scale. For the most part, AMFA was not a significant player in the airline labor movement through the mid 90-s. Its membership had dropped to only 439 employees by the end of 1996. Its only active members worked at Atlantic Coast Airlines, a relatively small regional airline based in Washington, D.C. With membership levels at an all time low, AMFA''s finances were in shambles.
Delle-Femine recently has changed the by-laws to Gurrantee his retirement and is believed to be grooming Kevin McCormick a sub-contractor to take his place. Their Attorneys are known for testifing against Labor and works with Management. AMFA is also famous for walking away from their membership during Bankruptcy proceedings.
AMFA''S Famous qoute: "Full Pay to the Last Day!"
Ask the 4500 plus Mechanics on Layoff at NW
over 50% MECHANICS AND 60% OTHERS
Compliments of www.the-mechanic.net
You be the Judge! Learn the Facts, Get Educated and you will understand the Best Choice!
What is AMFA?
The Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association (AMFA) is an independent labor union representing aircraft technicians and, in their words, airline support personnel. AMFA is not affiliated with the AFL-CIO or any other labor organization. It is based in Laconia, New Hampshire.
Background
AMFA was founded by O.V. Delle-Femine, who is the only President/National Director AMFA has ever had. (40 years) Delle-Femine was born and raised in East Providence, Rhode Island. He obtained technical training as a mechanic while working in the Air Force. He became actively involved in union affairs after he left the Air Force and began working for American Airlines. Delle-Femine is well read and reportedly immersed himself in books on the history of the American labor movement. He eventually became disillusioned with the state of the mechanics'' union at American and committed himself to creating a "better" labor union focusing on the "craft" aspect of the mechanics work group. Delle-Femine and a few of his friends formed AMFA in 1962 supposedly as an alternative to the traditional industrial unions that had dominated union organizing among the mechanics'' craft or class up until that time. It formally became a union in 1963.
Delle-Femine and AMFA have been repeatedly frustrated over the years by the National Mediation Board''s (NMB) craft or class unit determinations that consistently group so-called "unskilled" workers such as cleaners and fuelers with so-called "skilled" workers such as aircraft technicians. AMFA has consistently made clear that it strongly favors rules that would enable it to represent only these "skilled" workers. For the most part, AMFA''s efforts have been unsuccessful. In fact, AMFA had very little success organizing any employees prior to 1994. The few companies where it had any success in organizing new employees (Ozark Airlines, Hughes Airwest, Southern Airways, Braniff, Trump Shuttle, Pacific Airlines, and Airlift International) are no longer in business (either through mergers or going out of business). However, the contracts AMFA negotiated during this period were always viewed as mid-scale. For the most part, AMFA was not a significant player in the airline labor movement through the mid 90-s. Its membership had dropped to only 439 employees by the end of 1996. Its only active members worked at Atlantic Coast Airlines, a relatively small regional airline based in Washington, D.C. With membership levels at an all time low, AMFA''s finances were in shambles.
Delle-Femine recently has changed the by-laws to Gurrantee his retirement and is believed to be grooming Kevin McCormick a sub-contractor to take his place. Their Attorneys are known for testifing against Labor and works with Management. AMFA is also famous for walking away from their membership during Bankruptcy proceedings.
AMFA''S Famous qoute: "Full Pay to the Last Day!"
Ask the 4500 plus Mechanics on Layoff at NW
over 50% MECHANICS AND 60% OTHERS
Compliments of www.the-mechanic.net
You be the Judge! Learn the Facts, Get Educated and you will understand the Best Choice!
oza/twa/aa
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2003
- Messages
- 4
- Reaction score
- 0
----------------
On 7/9/2003 4:48:08 PM twuer wrote:
To "Bob" and RV4. . .I''m afraid (for your sakes) that "Jake" was correct, though long winded! I have seen all the evidence to verify it. I''m new to the boards, could you fill me in on your positions. Are you paying TWU dues? Elected officials, what? By reading the past posts it appears to me that you two guys are a bit disgruntled with the whole TWU thing. Am I correct in assuming this? And forgive me for saying this, but you seem a bit pissed off that you lost the law suit. I am pondering both AMFA and TWU at this point but have seen NO evidence to sway me toward the AMFA side. You (being AMFA)talk about the job you guys are doing at NW, well, didn''t they out-source their labor overseas recently? Or is this something I just "heard"? And what about the new contract (pre 9-11)that TWU got for you (us). Many people worked long and hard to ensure that the members would get what was coming to them. I myself appreciated the pay raise. Noone, let me repeat, NOONE could have predicted 9-11. The reason for the big downturn in the whole airline industry. It seemed to snowball from there. Being a due-paying member of the TWU, I have faith in those I have elected to run this union. So far they haven''t let me down. Can you honestly say the same about the AMFA leaders? And do you honestly think that Bankruptcy would have been the better solution? Let''s put even more people out of a job!! And any union that will send work over seas is not portraying the true meaning of "union" to me. I would like to hear your comments. . .even from you "Jake" and any other TWU supporter. Do you have anything else to add on the TWU behalf???
in union solidarity. . .
TWUer
When will you guys and gals ever learn the the TWU
is a company union I don''t get it.
Whatever AA says they do.
I have seen the Bull---- that they put out and you people
believe every word...
Just like the Jews going into get gased.
It''s time for a change.
----------------
On 7/9/2003 4:48:08 PM twuer wrote:
To "Bob" and RV4. . .I''m afraid (for your sakes) that "Jake" was correct, though long winded! I have seen all the evidence to verify it. I''m new to the boards, could you fill me in on your positions. Are you paying TWU dues? Elected officials, what? By reading the past posts it appears to me that you two guys are a bit disgruntled with the whole TWU thing. Am I correct in assuming this? And forgive me for saying this, but you seem a bit pissed off that you lost the law suit. I am pondering both AMFA and TWU at this point but have seen NO evidence to sway me toward the AMFA side. You (being AMFA)talk about the job you guys are doing at NW, well, didn''t they out-source their labor overseas recently? Or is this something I just "heard"? And what about the new contract (pre 9-11)that TWU got for you (us). Many people worked long and hard to ensure that the members would get what was coming to them. I myself appreciated the pay raise. Noone, let me repeat, NOONE could have predicted 9-11. The reason for the big downturn in the whole airline industry. It seemed to snowball from there. Being a due-paying member of the TWU, I have faith in those I have elected to run this union. So far they haven''t let me down. Can you honestly say the same about the AMFA leaders? And do you honestly think that Bankruptcy would have been the better solution? Let''s put even more people out of a job!! And any union that will send work over seas is not portraying the true meaning of "union" to me. I would like to hear your comments. . .even from you "Jake" and any other TWU supporter. Do you have anything else to add on the TWU behalf???
in union solidarity. . .
TWUer
When will you guys and gals ever learn the the TWU
is a company union I don''t get it.
Whatever AA says they do.
I have seen the Bull---- that they put out and you people
believe every word...
Just like the Jews going into get gased.
It''s time for a change.
----------------
Bob, Dave and Buck, (the three stooges),
I am going to respond to your latest posting on the assumption that facts and logic mean something to you, even though I have no reason to believe it is true. You are bitter that the TWU entered into a five year agreement which deprived us of the chance to take advantage of the huge upturn in airline profits you say is just two years away. (I guess you believe in that great Bush economic plan.) But, the contract that we now have gives us the unilateral right to a full reopener after three years. You keep on saying that we would be better off in bankruptcy, but all the airline contracts reached in bankruptcy have six year durations.
You can try to spin it away all you want, but two federal courts in New York have now told everyone that we would have been worse off in bankruptcy. One of them said this about bankruptcy:
Such an event would have dramatically adverse consequences for AA’s employees. In its Section 1113 proposal prepared for the Bankruptcy Court, AA estimated that declaring bankruptcy would force it to undertake an estimated $470 million in cutbacks for the flight attendants alone (as opposed to the $340 million in concessions to avoid bankruptcy). Further, AA would be forced to ground approximately 85 to 90 aircraft, including the entire fleet of 34 wide body A-300 Airbus aircraft, and to furlough approximately 2,500 flight attendants over and above the number that would be furloughed under the Restructuring Agreement. Grounding the fleet would also result in the need to furlough greater numbers of pilots, mechanics, and crews. Thus, if bankruptcy ensues, many more employees face furlough or termination, and plaintiffs will be in no appreciably better situation than they are in now. Accordingly, the Court concludes that the balance of hardships does not weigh in plaintiffs’ favor.
I know the opinions of judges don’t matter to you and that I should stake my family’s future on your expert legal advice. But, do you have an opinion from an actual judge that says anything different from that New York judge?
You keep saying the Vermont Plan was better than what we ended up with. I don’t know what plan you are reading, but the Vermont Plan I read calls for $70 million a year more in concessions from the mechanics, including outsourcing Title II, IV, all the overhaul work outside the main buildings in Tulsa, and line maintenance at the downline stations. That’s more than 10,000 jobs. It also increases the cost of medical and retiree medical by four times, and hits us with a cash balance pension plan. Maybe you would be better off if you’re a line mechanic working in a hub who is nowhere near retirement and who doesn’t need the Company’s health coverage. But, I don’t know anyone else who would benefit, and most of us would lose our jobs.
Oh, I know you believe it’s all a bluff and the Company would never really do all that. Except I noticed one thing. At United and USAir, the Company got the exact dollar value of concessions it demanded from each work group in bankruptcy. The furniture may have been moved around, but the bottom line is, the Companies not only got more from their workers in bankruptcy, they got the exact amount they asked for.
Your “better off in bankruptcy†slogan rings very hollow to me. I have an uncle in Ohio who worked most of his life in a steel plant that went bankrupt just before he retired. He’s had the pleasure of watching as his medical and then a big part of his retirement pay was taken away piece by piece by the Judge. I know he’s only an industrial worker, but the bankruptcy laws are the same for steelworkers and aircraft mechanics. Talk to him sometime about how well bankruptcy judges protect working people. You might learn something. But, I’m sure you wouldn’t be interested, because you already know it all.
As for all the other nonsense about how the voting process was handled, let’s go through the facts. After the Presidents unanimously adopted a procedure which allowed for a ratification by April 15, Jim Little was given the job of choosing an outside ballot agency. He chose the same agency chosen by the two other unions and, so far as I know, no one suggested he do anything else. There were a total of 699 complaints about not receiving PINs or non-working PINs from both ratifications and any complaint received by the TWU was referred to AAA. The only mistake made in the process was leaving Crew Chiefs off the original mailing list, something which the Court called a clerical error. The Court found that the Union did what it could to take care of the problem and that a large number of Crew Chiefs did vote. You had the chance to present and give evidence on all your conspiracy theories to the Court and they were all rejected.
Do I believe judges are infallible? Of course not. Most are appointed by Republicans and share that philosophy. But, are Bankruptcy judges any better? They are probably worse, and they are probably worse, and they are reviewed by the same judges you complain about. And if all those judges are as anti-worker and corrupt as you say, why am I a coward because I don’t want to go on the fool’s errand of taking my chances in bankruptcy?
I am going to respond to your latest posting on the assumption that facts and logic mean something to you, even though I have no reason to believe it is true. You are bitter that the TWU entered into a five year agreement which deprived us of the chance to take advantage of the huge upturn in airline profits you say is just two years away. (I guess you believe in that great Bush economic plan.) But, the contract that we now have gives us the unilateral right to a full reopener after three years. You keep on saying that we would be better off in bankruptcy, but all the airline contracts reached in bankruptcy have six year durations.
You can try to spin it away all you want, but two federal courts in New York have now told everyone that we would have been worse off in bankruptcy. One of them said this about bankruptcy:
Such an event would have dramatically adverse consequences for AA’s employees. In its Section 1113 proposal prepared for the Bankruptcy Court, AA estimated that declaring bankruptcy would force it to undertake an estimated $470 million in cutbacks for the flight attendants alone (as opposed to the $340 million in concessions to avoid bankruptcy). Further, AA would be forced to ground approximately 85 to 90 aircraft, including the entire fleet of 34 wide body A-300 Airbus aircraft, and to furlough approximately 2,500 flight attendants over and above the number that would be furloughed under the Restructuring Agreement. Grounding the fleet would also result in the need to furlough greater numbers of pilots, mechanics, and crews. Thus, if bankruptcy ensues, many more employees face furlough or termination, and plaintiffs will be in no appreciably better situation than they are in now. Accordingly, the Court concludes that the balance of hardships does not weigh in plaintiffs’ favor.
I know the opinions of judges don’t matter to you and that I should stake my family’s future on your expert legal advice. But, do you have an opinion from an actual judge that says anything different from that New York judge?
You keep saying the Vermont Plan was better than what we ended up with. I don’t know what plan you are reading, but the Vermont Plan I read calls for $70 million a year more in concessions from the mechanics, including outsourcing Title II, IV, all the overhaul work outside the main buildings in Tulsa, and line maintenance at the downline stations. That’s more than 10,000 jobs. It also increases the cost of medical and retiree medical by four times, and hits us with a cash balance pension plan. Maybe you would be better off if you’re a line mechanic working in a hub who is nowhere near retirement and who doesn’t need the Company’s health coverage. But, I don’t know anyone else who would benefit, and most of us would lose our jobs.
Oh, I know you believe it’s all a bluff and the Company would never really do all that. Except I noticed one thing. At United and USAir, the Company got the exact dollar value of concessions it demanded from each work group in bankruptcy. The furniture may have been moved around, but the bottom line is, the Companies not only got more from their workers in bankruptcy, they got the exact amount they asked for.
Your “better off in bankruptcy†slogan rings very hollow to me. I have an uncle in Ohio who worked most of his life in a steel plant that went bankrupt just before he retired. He’s had the pleasure of watching as his medical and then a big part of his retirement pay was taken away piece by piece by the Judge. I know he’s only an industrial worker, but the bankruptcy laws are the same for steelworkers and aircraft mechanics. Talk to him sometime about how well bankruptcy judges protect working people. You might learn something. But, I’m sure you wouldn’t be interested, because you already know it all.
As for all the other nonsense about how the voting process was handled, let’s go through the facts. After the Presidents unanimously adopted a procedure which allowed for a ratification by April 15, Jim Little was given the job of choosing an outside ballot agency. He chose the same agency chosen by the two other unions and, so far as I know, no one suggested he do anything else. There were a total of 699 complaints about not receiving PINs or non-working PINs from both ratifications and any complaint received by the TWU was referred to AAA. The only mistake made in the process was leaving Crew Chiefs off the original mailing list, something which the Court called a clerical error. The Court found that the Union did what it could to take care of the problem and that a large number of Crew Chiefs did vote. You had the chance to present and give evidence on all your conspiracy theories to the Court and they were all rejected.
Do I believe judges are infallible? Of course not. Most are appointed by Republicans and share that philosophy. But, are Bankruptcy judges any better? They are probably worse, and they are probably worse, and they are reviewed by the same judges you complain about. And if all those judges are as anti-worker and corrupt as you say, why am I a coward because I don’t want to go on the fool’s errand of taking my chances in bankruptcy?
Hopeful
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2002
- Messages
- 5,998
- Reaction score
- 347
Jake:
You may see things differently when AA announces its next "Major" restructuring phase. Elimination of more flights and jobs along with grounding of more aircraft might top the "alternative" to bankruptcy.
Face facts, American broke the unions once and for all. Now that they have their 5 year deal, you will see more and more outsourcing and reduction in size. American said they needed the concessions to avoid bankruptcy or else more desperate measures will be taken. Well guess what? They threatened workers with that alternative and like suckers we bought into it however narrow the votes were. Now they will proceed with those very measures they said they needed to avooid CH 11.
You may see things differently when AA announces its next "Major" restructuring phase. Elimination of more flights and jobs along with grounding of more aircraft might top the "alternative" to bankruptcy.
Face facts, American broke the unions once and for all. Now that they have their 5 year deal, you will see more and more outsourcing and reduction in size. American said they needed the concessions to avoid bankruptcy or else more desperate measures will be taken. Well guess what? They threatened workers with that alternative and like suckers we bought into it however narrow the votes were. Now they will proceed with those very measures they said they needed to avooid CH 11.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 7,319
- Reaction score
- 1,555
----------------
On 7/11/2003 1:13:45 PM j7915 wrote:
A better question is why are so many "proud upstanding union" folks voting Republican?
----------------
Maybe something is wrong with the education wing of the TWU?On 7/11/2003 1:13:45 PM j7915 wrote:
----------------
On 7/11/2003 10:15:52 AM Buck wrote:
Where is the almighty AFL-CIO?
----------------
On 7/11/2003 10:15:52 AM Buck wrote:
Where is the almighty AFL-CIO?
----------------
A better question is why are so many "proud upstanding union" folks voting Republican?
----------------
Why can you not just answer the question. You proudly defend the AFL-CIO, yet when members of affiliated unions are in trouble all the ATD does is fold.
