More Airline Workers Want Out Of The Afl-cio

Decision 2004

Veteran
Mar 12, 2004
1,618
0
United workers seek new union
Group of attendants launches campaign for own labor agent

By David Kesmodel, Rocky Mountain News
April 7, 2004

Some United Airlines flight attendants have launched a campaign to unseat their union, the Association of Flight Attendants.

The workers hope to replace the AFA with a new union that would represent only United attendants and would not be affiliated with the AFL-CIO, an umbrella union organization.

The workers say they want a more democratic and responsive union and are upset with the AFA's recent merger with the Communications Workers of America. The CWA represents employees in such industries as telecommunications, higher education and newspaper publishing.

"We want a union focused on flight attendants' interests only," said Eric Julien, a spokesman for the group and an 18-year attendant at United, Denver's dominant carrier.

The workers, who wish to form the United Flight Attendant Union, or UFAU, face many hurdles. First, they must persuade a majority of United's roughly 20,000 active or furloughed attendants to sign authorization cards so they can hold an election at the carrier, which is in bankruptcy.

The National Mediation Board, which oversees labor relations in the airline industry, will determine whether the group has enough signatures. The effort to collect authorization cards got under way Monday.

A Laconia, N.H.-based firm, the McCormick Advisory Group, is advising the group. McCormick also works with the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association, the union that unseated the International Association of Machinists last year as the bargaining agent for United's mechanics.

AMFA, formed in the 1960s, has persuaded mechanics at several big airlines in recent years to be part of a union that focuses on a single profession and is not affiliated with the AFL-CIO.

Unlike AMFA, the UFAU would represent workers at only one company.

The startup group said it is angry in part because its current union, which represents more than 50,000 flight attendants at 26 carriers, has spent money on failed attempts to organize Delta Air Lines' attendants.

Greg Davidowitch, president of United's AFA branch, said the workers would serve themselves better if they became active in the AFA's management instead of trying to dump the union.

"It's really easy to stand on the outside and throw rocks," he said. "If these people were serious about making things better for United flight attendants, there's a forum for that. Half of our local councils around the world are up for re-election."

He said a previous campaign by the group to organize workers, in 2000 and 2001, fizzled because "they didn't have a lot of support."

Davidowitch said United attendants are dealing with a great deal of uncertainty because the Chicago- based carrier is fighting to emerge from bankruptcy and workers have faced wage and benefit cuts and furloughs. But to address the turmoil, the attendants "need to work together," he said.

The effort to unseat the AFA could have "a legitimate chance," said Gary Chaison, a professor of labor relations at Clark University in Worcester, Mass.

"There's so much anxiety in that industry among all the labor groups," he said. "Right now, it's just a search for solutions."

But he said he could see several factors working against the campaign.

"One might be that people just don't like change," he said. "I'm not sure whether the attendants are willing to take the risk (of joining a startup union). And I've always suspected that a lot of the support for a second union is really just voicing concern for their first union, rather than a real attempt to change."
 
And I've always suspected that a lot of the support for a second union is really just voicing concern for their first union, rather than a real attempt to change."


Imagine that!!!!
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #3
twuer said:
And I've always suspected that a lot of the support for a second union is really just voicing concern for their first union, rather than a real attempt to change."


Imagine that!!!!
You seem to "suspect" alot of things that are not true.

Time will tell, and indeed the members will have their say.

We are nothing more than two members with differing views. What will the majority of the 16,000 plus work group say when given a chance in the privacy of their own home?
 
Another group of misinformed people who do not realize that numbers are what counts and not singularity. Togther we win divided we all lose to bad that the United mechanics didn't realize that before voting for AMFA oh thats right 46% did not even vote. Jim
 
TWU Jim said:
Another group of misinformed people who do not realize that numbers are what counts and not singularity. Togther we win divided we all lose to bad that the United mechanics didn't realize that before voting for AMFA oh thats right 46% did not even vote. Jim
Well we have been "together" with the TWU and we are the lowest paid of all the major carriers, we have workers with as little as one weeks vacation, we work holidays for half pay, they only recognize 5 holidays, no double time, we have to clean our own uniforms, etc. Together with the TWU we lose.


As far as the 46% who did not vote at UAL it just goes to show what a lousy job the IAM was doing that that large of a percentage couldnt be bothered voting at all, or it could also be because of the fact that many were laid off and many were management.
 
I guess AMFA did not have any stake at all in the 46% at UAL who did not vote. Well thats OK we can blame it on the IAM, AMFA is good at blaming someone else for their shortcomings. Lets see 45% layoff at NWA and 2 maintenance bases shut down at UAL. I bet those brothers and sisters would rather pay to have their uniforms cleaned then to be without a job. No medical insurance, living on unemployment insurance, I bet life is great for these folks. AMFA does not believe in lobbing Congress or getting involved in politics. But politicians are trying to reduce unemployment benefits, do away with overtime, reduce pension allotments to retirees, I guess when a member of AMFA is laid off you just forget about them and leave them to the wolves. Jim
 
twu jim,

Lets see 45% layoff at NWA and 2 maintenance bases shut down at UAL.

You must be jim little. Because only a true twu believer/idiot would try and peddle such lies as the truth.

The twu smells fear... and it is their own!

Show the facts where the iam still represented AMTs at UAL when these bases were closed. You truly are afraid of the truth. So sad.
 
I guess AMFA did not have any stake at all in the 46% at UAL who did not vote. Well thats OK we can blame it on the IAM, AMFA is good at blaming someone else for their shortcomings.


Thats the one thing that the TWU is better than AMFA at -passing the buck. The Presidents blame the International, the International blames the Presidents, The members blame Little, Little blames Sonny, Sonny blames the members.

Lets see 45% layoff at NWA and 2 maintenance bases shut down at UAL. I bet those brothers and sisters would rather pay to have their uniforms cleaned then to be without a job. No medical insurance, living on unemployment insurance, I bet life is great for these folks.

Layoffs have always been this industrys response to downturns. People came back because the wages and benifits were preserved. Now when demand returns and if those workers return we will be stuck with these concessions. We all know how the airlines can delay contract talks until the next downturn, so we will never get back what we lost, especially with the TWU. The amount of money we lost with this concession over the life of this contract is the equivelent of working for free for two years. Thats even worse than being laid off for two years because when you are laid off you do not fall to zero because of the safety net of unemployment and other benifits, thats why union fought so hard for those programs, so the threat of a layoff could not be used to do what this union/company did to us.

AMFA does not believe in lobbing Congress or getting involved in politics.

Wrong, AMFA has already started getting more deeply involved, and after we go there they will have even more resources.

But politicians are trying to reduce unemployment benefits, do away with overtime, reduce pension allotments to retirees, I guess when a member of AMFA is laid off you just forget about them and leave them to the wolves. Jim

Well if we are willing to give everything away in order so that some of our members will not have to use those services then why fight to keep them? Didnt the TWU do away with benifits and pay, do away with OT for training after shift or for some of our members only pay OT after 40 hours are put in? Arent many of our senior employees being forced to retire early since if they stay longer their pension will be reduced? Didnt the TWU put in openers that are scheduled at the same time that the Pension deferral runs out?

If we are willing to give away everything that was gained over the last 50 years in order to prevent some, but not all, from going on unemployment , then why support a safety net that we have no intentions on ever putting to the test? If we are going to operate as if there was no net, then why have it?
 
Bob Owens said:
Well we have been "together" with the TWU and we are the lowest paid of all the major carriers, we have workers with as little as one weeks vacation, we work holidays for half pay, they only recognize 5 holidays, no double time, we have to clean our own uniforms, etc. Together with the TWU we lose.


As far as the 46% who did not vote at UAL it just goes to show what a lousy job the IAM was doing that that large of a percentage couldnt be bothered voting at all, or it could also be because of the fact that many were laid off and many were management.
Bob I thought you are an amt. Since when is AMFA concerned about what others are doing? According to AMFADave's signature line all AMFA concerns itself with is AMTs.

Of course if F/A and fleet service get more then all those coattail riders will get what higly skilled amts deserve. You are justifying the pilot's claim that they are the most important component of the system.
 
j7915 said:
Bob I thought you are an amt. Since when is AMFA concerned about what others are doing? According to AMFADave's signature line all AMFA concerns itself with is AMTs.

Of course if F/A and fleet service get more then all those coattail riders will get what higly skilled amts deserve. You are justifying the pilot's claim that they are the most important component of the system.
Obviously, unlike in the TWU there is room for diverse opinions in AMFA. We have common ground, such as promoting the profession, but we have diverse views on other issues, it does not mean that we can not work together where we have common ground. I realize that such a concept of true tolerance is foreign to you. You feel that you are the majority and all others should bow to and unquestionably support your position. Refusal to do so leads to you accusing others of being "anti-union". This is a false notion because the basis of unionism is to resist unilateralism and to encourage the formation of a multilateral workplace. Your position, reinforced by your statements, despite occasional denials, and those of all the leaders from Tulsa has been that since Overhaul is the majority, only their needs are of any importance.

I am deeply concerned about the fate of my fellow workers, thats one of the reasons why I support and promote their drive for the AGW.

I do not see where the Fleet Service or other TWU members have profited from their association with us. On this point many AMFA supporters dissagree with me. To me the TWU and the current structure of unionism in our industry has been harmful to all of us.

I see F/S jobs as the equivelent of Longshoremen, and Longshoremen make a lot more than either of us, but then again they have a different union structure.

As to the pilots, what do you expect their union to say? We are the same as a baggage handler or mechanic or flight attendant but you should pay us over $100,000 a year anyway? Their union is doing what they should be doing, promoting the pilots. Thats what we want, a union that will promote our profession, not one like the TWU that will say "I dont care who does the work, as long as they pay dues to ME".
 

Latest posts

Back
Top