NMB Accused Of Helping Delta

[LukeAisleWalker]

This is an interesting article, however, I'm not sure what's different here. In other words, authorization cards were never intended to be a means of certifying an election in and of themselves. They were always to "supplement the showing of interest necessary to trigger an election."
If anyone reads this any different, please comment. Thanks.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/sto...ws/NMB08018.xml

 

[BABABOOY]

From what I understand, as it stands today, there will be an election for AFA because they (NW)
represent 30-35% of the combined workforce? What they are changing is that there will be
NO AUTOMATIC election? There has to be an Majority "interest" (50%+1) by means of signed cards of the combined workforce for a vote. Is that what this article is stating?

 

[Jackrla]

My view:
The article seems to quote the proposed action accurately.
The direct link to proposed revision is at http://www.nmb.gov/representation/olanotice_rep-man.pdf
When they speak of extending the certification, it seems they are looking at doing it without an election but by a substantial showing of more than a majority. At least that is how I read it.
They do not seem to be addressing what happens if there is less than a substantial majority. They are not changing their rules for an election.
Question: What if a union represents less than a majority on the combined carrier or close to it, and the Carrier refuses to negotiate with it because the union is not the representative of the entire craft?
It seems there may be some old court cases that say the "duty to bargain" accrues to the representative of the enitre craft.

 

[North by Northwest]

NMB Proposes Rule Change
to Destroy Northwest Unions

In an openly anti-union gesture, on July 15, 2008 the National Mediation Board (NMB), the government agency that holds representation elections and certifies unions in the airline and railroad industries, announced its intent to change its rules and procedures in carrier mergers.

The proposed change says that when “there is a certified representative on one of the affected carrier(s) but no certified representative on the other, the Board will exercise its discretion and extend the certification only where there is more than a substantial majority, as determined by the Board. Authorization cards may only be used to supplement the showing of interest necessary to trigger an election; they may not be used towards getting a certification extended.â€￾

The IAM has been at the forefront of the fight opposing this change. While our formal comments are not due until September 3, 2008, we wanted to share some of our concerns about this proposal. Of particular note is the fact that this proposed change only applies when a carrier whose employees are unrepresented merges with a carrier whose employees are represented. This reflects the precise scenario involved in the intended Delta-Northwest merger. It appears the Board is attempting to change its merger procedures after the announced Delta-Northwest merger in an effort to undermine union representation.

Under the current procedures, whenever there has been a merger between an unrepresented and a represented group and the represented group has a majority, the NMB has extended the certification of the representative. For the NMB to adopt a rule now that only when one carrier is represented and the other is not, the represented group must be “more than a substantial majority as determined by the Boardâ€￾ signals a deviation from its decades-long precedent without any demonstrated need or justification for such a change. The only effect of such a change is to make it significantly more difficult for employees to maintain their representation after a merger and help keep Delta Air Lines largely non-union.

Prior to these proposed changes, the NMB would have permitted the IAM to demonstrate its majority status on the merged carrier by relying on its certification on Northwest and obtaining authorization cards from employees on Delta to meet the majority requirement. In other words, if we represented 40% of all of the employees in the newly merged craft or class, we could get cards from another 10% plus 1 and if the new carrier agreed in writing, the IAM could be certified. It appears that the Board is now looking to argue that its change prohibits such a certification since cards cannot be used to extend certification. The Board would still allow a labor representative that is totally new to a carrier to obtain certification by a check of authorization cards, but, it appears that employees who have been represented by a labor representative for decades cannot maintain that representation by a check of authorization cards.

We will update you once our comments are filed and let you know if the NMB agrees to our request for a public hearing on this very important matter


--------------------
You can't get anymore blatantly ANTI-UNION than this group of swine. (from a supposedly independent gov. agency. Any doubts know about where this filthy, crooked Administration stands against American workers)

 

[BABABOOY]

I believe the following is more outrageous:

http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/employ...CFRuuQAodERYQfw



By GLENN SPENCER - U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE | 7/21/08 6:10 AM EST
"The act would effectively strip workers of the protection of secret ballots in union certification elections. Replacing the privacy of the voting booth, workers would be asked to publicly sign cards indicating support for a union, exposing them to harassment and intimidation. Unions could badger workers repeatedly, at work and at home, to sign a card acquiescing to representation and, in most cases, employers would have limited ability to give workers their side of the story."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11840.html

 

[Ralph]

Because the merger between DL and NW is not yet complete and because we do not need two separate threads on the same topic, I am moving this discussion to the Aviation News forum. It's actually more specific to all dealings with the NMB than it is to either airline.

 

[1Conehead]

I believe the following is more outrageous:

http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/employ...CFRuuQAodERYQfw



By GLENN SPENCER - U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE | 7/21/08 6:10 AM EST
"The act would effectively strip workers of the protection of secret ballots in union certification elections. Replacing the privacy of the voting booth, workers would be asked to publicly sign cards indicating support for a union, exposing them to harassment and intimidation. Unions could badger workers repeatedly, at work and at home, to sign a card acquiescing to representation and, in most cases, employers would have limited ability to give workers their side of the story."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11840.html

Why are you afraid of a vote?
Shouldn't we all have a say?

 

[lineguy43]

NMB Proposes Rule Change
to Destroy Northwest Unions

In an openly anti-union gesture, on July 15, 2008 the National Mediation Board (NMB), the government agency that holds representation elections and certifies unions in the airline and railroad industries, announced its intent to change its rules and procedures in carrier mergers.

The proposed change says that when “there is a certified representative on one of the affected carrier(s) but no certified representative on the other, the Board will exercise its discretion and extend the certification only where there is more than a substantial majority, as determined by the Board. Authorization cards may only be used to supplement the showing of interest necessary to trigger an election; they may not be used towards getting a certification extended.â€￾

The IAM has been at the forefront of the fight opposing this change. While our formal comments are not due until September 3, 2008, we wanted to share some of our concerns about this proposal. Of particular note is the fact that this proposed change only applies when a carrier whose employees are unrepresented merges with a carrier whose employees are represented. This reflects the precise scenario involved in the intended Delta-Northwest merger. It appears the Board is attempting to change its merger procedures after the announced Delta-Northwest merger in an effort to undermine union representation.

Under the current procedures, whenever there has been a merger between an unrepresented and a represented group and the represented group has a majority, the NMB has extended the certification of the representative. For the NMB to adopt a rule now that only when one carrier is represented and the other is not, the represented group must be “more than a substantial majority as determined by the Boardâ€￾ signals a deviation from its decades-long precedent without any demonstrated need or justification for such a change. The only effect of such a change is to make it significantly more difficult for employees to maintain their representation after a merger and help keep Delta Air Lines largely non-union.

Prior to these proposed changes, the NMB would have permitted the IAM to demonstrate its majority status on the merged carrier by relying on its certification on Northwest and obtaining authorization cards from employees on Delta to meet the majority requirement. In other words, if we represented 40% of all of the employees in the newly merged craft or class, we could get cards from another 10% plus 1 and if the new carrier agreed in writing, the IAM could be certified. It appears that the Board is now looking to argue that its change prohibits such a certification since cards cannot be used to extend certification. The Board would still allow a labor representative that is totally new to a carrier to obtain certification by a check of authorization cards, but, it appears that employees who have been represented by a labor representative for decades cannot maintain that representation by a check of authorization cards.

We will update you once our comments are filed and let you know if the NMB agrees to our request for a public hearing on this very important matter


--------------------
You can't get anymore blatantly ANTI-UNION than this group of swine. (from a supposedly independent gov. agency. Any doubts know about where this filthy, crooked Administration stands against American workers)

Yeah I saw how the NMB operates when we voted the iam out.. Funny that the iam is so mad considering that a number of NMB members have former connections to the iam....Personally, I hope the iam gets their ass handed to them. It would be poetic justice after how they helped the company to bust the mechanics strike.

 

[tech2101]

Yeah I saw how the NMB operates when we voted the iam out.. Funny that the iam is so mad considering that a number of NMB members have former connections to the iam....Personally, I hope the iam gets their ass handed to them. It would be poetic justice after how they helped the company to bust the mechanics strike.

NMB member Biography:

Read Van de Water, current Chairman of the National Mediation Board effective July 1, 2008, has served as a Member of the Board since 2003, and previously as Chairman from July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2006. Ms. Van de Water was sworn in as a Board Member on December 11, 2003, after being nominated by President George W. Bush in September, and unanimously confirmed by the United States Senate on December 9, 2003.

Ms. Van de Water served from 2001-2003 as the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs at the U.S. Department of Transportation. Previously she served as the legislative counsel for international trade and investment with The Business Roundtable and as legislative counsel and director of government affairs for Northwest Airlines. She also was employed on Capitol Hill as an appropriations associate and legislative assistant.

A native of Charlotte, North Carolina, Ms. Van de Water graduated from the University of the South (Sewanee) in 1986. She received a master's degree from The George Washington University and her J.D. from The Georgetown University Law Center.

Ms. Van de Water is married to Mark Van de Water and they have three children. They reside in Warrenton, Virginia.

 

[cooper43]

If we can just hold on until we get a Dem in the white house then the anti union actions will stop (I hope)

 

[BABABOOY]

Why are you afraid of a vote?
Shouldn't we all have a say?

Not afraid of a vote. but why throw out the secret ballot?
Its no ones business if/how I vote. Should we change the
election laws in all 50 states plus federal?

 

[1Conehead]

Not afraid of a vote. but why throw out the secret ballot?
Its no ones business if/how I vote. Should we change the
election laws in all 50 states plus federal?

My point exactly, signing a card should not constitute a vote.