Seham Trying To Earn His Keep

[j7915]

BEWARE! of any documents that come from the AFL-CIO,TWU,IAM,or IBT. These organizations have been proven to produce fake and/or altered documents! During the AMFA election at BRANIFF/DALFORT, the IBT put out all sorts of fake,false documents to discredit AMFA. I have no doubts about the EVIL TWU doing the same thing, considering they are the most dishonorable of the AFL-CIO unions.

Stop spreading BS. If you have proof go to the courts. If you have suspicions go to the Dept. of Labor.

If you don't want that call the RTW Organization or the National Chamber of commerce or the GOP, they'll help you. They are just panting to get a handle on the labor movement.

 

[Bob Owens]

Stop spreading BS. If you have proof go to the courts. If you have suspicions go to the Dept. of Labor.

If you don't want that call the RTW Organization or the National Chamber of commerce or the GOP, they'll help you. They are just panting to get a handle on the labor movement.

Well we already saw Littles mailout where he blamed AMFA for UALs bankruptcy, despite the fact that everyone knows that UAL went bankrupt because they were denied a bailout. The decision to deny the bailout was made with the assumption that the mechanics granted concessions. In other words it didnt matter.

Little also left out how USAIR got concessions a few months earlier and went bankrupt anyway. USAIR promised not to come back for more but they did, now they are going for a third round of concessions.

Despite all that those workers make more than us, still get holiday pay, vacation, sick time, uniforms cleaned, shift differential etc.



Why call the RTW? Or the GOP? We here the same things from the TWU, the TWU the union that fights for the "right to work for less". " (Almost) Full employment through low wages and no benifits". "High wages are bad for you, be thankful you have a job". "We have to compete, so you must work for less". Its indistinguishable whether this would come from the GOP, RTW or the TWU.

Wasnt it you who praised the fact that our union is structured like a corporation?

The only thing better than no union for a company is a sweatheart union like the TWU.

Got some time? Read below;

One of Us -- Originally published at http://www.ufcw.net

April 1985:I am in a suite at a posh hotel with Doug Dority. At
that time Dority is the second in command at the United Food and
Commercial Workers International Union. On this day in April, he is
meeting with the Vice President of Labor Relations of a large service
industry corporation. I am the Vice President's assistant and protégé.
He takes me to his secret meetings so that I can witness the events,
record them and learn dimensions of labor relations that are not taught
in educational institutions.
The Corporate Vice President has come to Washington to persuade the
UFCW
to agree to a concessionary contract in negotiations that were to begin
in a
few weeks time. For a number of years the company had paid a large
group of
workers higher wages than were standard in its industry in an effort to
keep
unions out. But earlier that year, the company did a voluntary
recognition
deal with the UFCW and no longer needed to worry about being unionized.
This
being the case, the higher-than-market-pay-rates no longer made any
business
sense.
That was the logic behind the demand for concessions that the Corporate
Veep
was about to make.
The discussion between them was brief. The company needed a break,
the Corporate Vice President stated. Increased competition from
non-union operators was decreasing its market share. The high wages it
had been paying were a luxury that it could no longer afford. A wage
rollback - a big one - was needed or the future looked bleak. How big?
Twenty per cent, the Corporate Vice President said, cooly lying.
The union could not agree to a rollback of that magnitude Dority
replied.
His union had acquired these members in a voluntary rec exchange and was
about to negotiate its first contract for them. Concessions would be a
hard
sell for a first contract. On top of that it would be politically
awkward. It
wouldn't sit well with other locals whose leaders might find themselves
squeezed for similar concessions. But... Dority stated, without missing
a beat or drawing another breath, how about a two-tier contract where
new hires would be paid
according to a lower wage scale? His union had done these kinds of
deals with
employers who needed a break, he said, and they seemed to work well.
Within a matter of a few minutes the deal was done. In the
forthcoming negotiations, the company would grant existing workers a
modest increase. A lower wage scale would be bargained for new hires.
The UFCW negotiators would be brought into the loop in advance of
bargaining and would ensure that they ended up at this point.
The Corporate Vice President could hardly believe his good fortune.
He thought that it might be possible, but he was not expecting it to be
that easy. He asked for 20% hoping that he might come away with 10% -
if he was lucky. With the two tier set-up, he could drop rates down to
minimum wage levels and, with the rate of staff turnover in the
company's operations, it would be a matter of time before the vast
majority of workers were paid from the new lower scale.
I sat there quietly taking it all in. I had to remember as much as
I could of the exchange so that I could make notes of it later
(note-taking at secret high level meetings tended to inhibit the
discussions). Over a couple of years of following the Veep around, I'd
heard a lot of strange ####. This #### blew me away however. It
wouldn't be hard to remember. I was incredulous. Here was a Vice
President of this enormous international union getting tapped for a
major giveaway and he just rolled right over. He didn't even ask any
questions. He just swallowed the company guy's lies and burped up a
pile of concessions as if it was the most natural thing in the world
for him to do.
If he had bothered to inquire, he would have found that the company
seeking the concessions was hugely profitable. A well-established
leader in its segment of its market, it had a reputation for making big
bucks even in tough economic times. It had sailed through the recent
economic recession and was delivering double-digit returns on equity.
Every single one of its operating divisions was profitable, sales were
through the roof and a major expansion was underway. Its unionized
operations had managed to hold their own against non-union competitors
for years. Its phenomenal success was frequently discussed in the
national business media.
None of this mattered to Doug Dority it seemed. If he knew, he
didn't care. If he didn't know, he didn't care enough to find out.
Sleazy sonofabitch, I thought. He doesn't give a #### about those
people. Not even on a superficial level. They're just things to him.
Looking at this insipid man, I could not help but think how much he was
like the managers back at the corporate office. The deference he showed
to our Vice
President and the lengths to which he went to build rapport with him.
The earnestness in his voice as he told the Veep of his union's desire
for good relations and its respect for the company's right to make
money, the speed with which he rolled over.
"He's a good guy," the Veep said as we departed the meeting for a
celebratory brunch. "He's one of us!"
Within a few weeks of our meeting, negotiations began. The UFCW
business
agents who led the union's bargaining committee did an admirable job at
the
bargaining table. They put forward a respectable package of demands and
made
compelling - sometimes even impassioned - arguments in favor of their
proposals.
As the bargaining dance continued, they gradually conceded most of
their
demands or agreed to watered down, largely meaningless, versions -
digging
in their heals here and there on issues that they told us in advance
would be
particularly important. In secret discussions with us, they would ensure
that we knew they were only playing their parts and clarifying for us
what exactly they
would need to pacify the more stubborn elements on their committee.
Within a few weeks, the deal that had already been done, was done
again-this time for the benefit of the members. It was hailed as a good
deal. One that set a solid foundation for the future. Yes, the union
had to give a little but that was just one of those realities - one of
those things. It's a tough industry and with so many non-union
competitors, we don't want to put the company out of business, the
members were told. They ratified the deal. What else could they do?
Their negotiators had done all they could or so they said. The company
just wouldn't give them any more. They didn't want to bankrupt the
company, did they? Of course, the member didn't know that the company
was in no danger of going under, or that all that the concessions were
going to do was to make the company and its shareholders more wealthy.
And they didn't know that the most significant aspects of the deal had
been hammered out long before
in a posh hotel, in a far off city, in secret, without any discussion
of their interests. But that was OK because they didn't really matter.
They weren't "one of us".
In the couple of years that I spent in the corporate labor
relations department of this successful service industry business, I
learned a lot about the sleazy subterranean world of labor relations
and did not have many illusions about the magnanimity of employers or
the good intentions of union leaders. I'd never had any faith in the
high-mindedness of the corporation captains. Dority succeeded in
peeling away what little faith I had in their mainstream labor
counterparts.
If the back room deal that I'd witnessed on that day in 1985 was an
anomaly, it could perhaps be excused or even forgiven. But it was not a
"one
of". Similar deals would be done over and over again in the years that
followed -
with this company and with many others, on both sides of the border.
Within a decade Dority would take over the Presidency of the UFCW.
His performance in that role would exceed even my expectations. For the
next ten years he would preside over a union that squandered the power
and resources of its members and missed one opportunity after another
to improve their
working lives. All the while its leaders hung out in hotel suites,
enriching
themselves and selling out the members.
The members themselves became nothing more than a commodity.
Officially
they were the union but in reality they were things - revenue producing
units - that could be bought or traded and that needed to be managed so
that they
didn't get out of line and start messing up the leaders' self-serving
plans. While the members were asked to swallow one concessionary deal
after another, the leaders partied hearty on their dime and crapped
litigation on those who didn't like it - also on their dime.
Legions of aspiring "one's of us" - opportunists who saw a cushy
gig in the union-repping trade - were drawn to positions of power in
the locals and the international where they were rewarded for their
loyalty to Doug and his crew and groomed to follow them to the bigger
trough when the time came.
November 1999: I am in yet another hotel meeting with a prominent
UFCW
Local President - one of the up and comers who came up the ladder on
Dority's
watch. I have long since left the sleazy subterranean world of labor
relations.
He's up to his ass in it. I'm writing about union democracy. He's
puzzled by that but dismissive of it the glib way of people who don't
think they have much
to worry about. I ask him about union democracy in the UFCW. He offers
up a
defense of union autocracy.
The UFCW is a corrupt union, yes that's true he tells me
matter-of-factly. There's corruption - and lots of it - on both sides
of the border and up and down the chains of command, corruption as bad
as HERE used to have. That's just the way it is when you're big. What
can you do? There is no democracy. There can't be. The union is too big
for that. The union can't be trusted to the members. There's no point
in having democracy in the union. The union has to get along with the
employers rather than fight the employers. The days when fighting was
worthwhile are long gone. The union can't take the employers on any
more - it's too reliant on them for voluntary recognition agreements
and pension and other contributions. Besides, the management guys are
nice guys. We have a lot in common.
I leave the meeting with that same incredulous feeling that I had
years in earlier in Washington, only now it's mixed with a profound
sense of loathing. The backroom bastards are ruling the earth now. F**k
them.
October 2003: The biggest strike in contemporary labor history
begins in Southern California. Seventy thousand working people walk off
the job at three large food retailers. The key issues: Demands for
concessions on wages and health and welfare benefit payments. The
magnitude of the strike, the resolve of the workers, the solidarity
shown by members of their communities and of other unions stood to make
this one of those the big consciousness-shifting,
existing-order-shaking events. One of those happenings that changes the
way we think about ourselves and our relationships with others,
including our institutions.
Throughout the strike the resolve of the workers seems unshakeable.
Their leaders bob and weave, sending out mixed signals and making
strategic blunder after strategic blunder. The world is watching. Media
coverage is constant. The workers are speaking and being heard. They're
not quitting even though what their union's intentions are not as
clear. Opportunities to expand the strike to a nationwide scale are
rejected. Pickets are removed from strategic locations in efforts to
elicit similar "good faith" from the employers. Proposals giving ground
on key issues are made to get the employers back to the table. Dority
hangs out with celebrities and takes advantage of photo ops but is
conspicuous by his absence on the picket lines. One of the most
disturbing moments comes when workers, determined to continue picketing
a distribution center, chase away union officials who wanted them to
disband.
Five months later it's all over. Sixteen days of secret
negotiations culminate in a settlement - a concessionary deal that
follows the long established pattern of two-tier wage schemes and
compromises on key issues - in this case, health care funding. While
the ink is still drying, Doug Dority buggers off, retiring from his
ten-year stint as the head of North America's largest service industry
union.
With an annual salary in excess of $300,000, he represented (at
least in theory) some of North America's lowest paid workers. With his
crowing achievement (the "most successful strike in history" he called
it - yes, in all of history!) behind him, he hit the road packing a
hefty pension plus, if the word on the street is correct, a substantial
bonus. In his wake, he leaves an organization led by men (and they're
mostly men) who think and act like corporate managers and a successor
who was appointed by a group of 40 or so executive board members on
behalf of 1.4 million members.
Since the greatest deal in history became public knowledge,
criticism of
Dority and his crew has been relentless. It's hard to find a commentary
about the outcome of the spectacular show of workers' power in the
alternative or
mainstream media that does not contain the words "sell out",
"surrender", "betrayal" or "defeat" or that does not slam the UFCW's
leaders for their abject failure to lead.
Michael Hiltzik of the LA Times likens the UFCW's sorry performance
to watching a decrepit building implode:
UFCW Sacrifices Workers While Declaring Victory:
Just as those videos of old hotels and tenements imploding never
fail to
enthrall when they appear on the evening news, the spectacle of a great
institution crumbling away exercises a ghastly fascination: One moment
an
edifice stands solid and proud; a few seconds pass, and nothing remains
but a cloud of dust.
But there's a difference between the controlled demolition of a
decrepit
housing project and the collapse of, say, the United Food and Commercial
Workers, which resolved its long-running battle with three Southern
California grocery companies last week. In the former case, the
authorities take pains
to keep innocent bystanders safely out of danger. In the latter, the
livelihoods of
thousands of people could wind up buried in the wreckage.
Union officials are insisting that the contract ratified last
weekend
represents a great victory. UFCW International President Douglas
Dority, who
hustled himself into retirement Tuesday, issued a statement over the
weekend
calling the Southern California job action "one of the most successful
strikes in
history."
Stirring words indeed. But as an accurate description of events,
they
rank right up there with "Dewey Defeats Truman."
The overriding concern of the UFCW throughout the contract
dispute has been
to restructure its relationship with the owners-under the new market
conditions created by the growing presence of non-union, low-wage
competitors such as Wal-Mart-at the expense of the union rank-and-file.
- Union surrenders
benefits, wages in sellout of California grocery strike
A report from the LA Times offered a discomforting insight into
How the supermarket strike was settled: Moments before they shook hands
on a
deal, Stemerman had noticed that two of the supermarket reps were
sitting on
the bed, and he couldn't resist joking about "the union getting into
bed with
the employers."
Many of the tens of thousands of grocery store workers returning to
their
jobs would probably see more than a grain of truth in that teasing
remark.
A UCLA professor offered up the good along with the bad in an LA
Weekly
report titled "Surrender at the supermarket:"I don't think it can be
read
any other way than a defeat for the union," said labor expert Sanford
Jacoby, a professor at UCLA's Anderson School of Management. "I suppose
it could have been worse. The stores are still unionized."
I'm not sure that it can be any worse. Having the
union-that-wouldn't
isn't necessarily better than having no union at all. At least with no
union, the workers would be free to organize themselves or choose a
different union. As dues paying units of the UFCW they would have to
organize a massive
decertification effort just to get to that point. Is the UFCW "better
than
having no union" or a rag in drain? Depends on how much you know about
what goes on in the back room.
Secret discussions with corporate officials are often painted as
necessary or even beneficial for the members by the union leaders who
engage
in them.
In my years of hanging out in the labor relations back rooms, I never
saw
anything that was beneficial to the members. Most of what I saw
resembled
the
exchange I described earlier in this piece. The length of the
discussions
and the
variety of posturing that took place were the only major differences.
From his predecessor Bill Wynn, Doug Dority inherited an already
corrupt
business union bloated with disempowered members and self-serving pork
choppers. As the years passed, more disempowered members would be added
to
the ranks,
many of those through disempowering voluntary recognition deals. Under
Dority's watch, the UFCW would morph from a business union into a
business
partner.
Whether he saw it that way or not doesn't really matter. That's what
happened. Over the years, the UFCW would - despite its considerable
bargaining
power - roll over for the corporate gentlemen, again and again, in ways
that
would make our 1985 encounter seem tame by comparison. Two tier wages
deals,
buy-outs for long service higher paid workers, greater flexibility for
management,
became common outcomes of UFCW bargaining in the service industry. The
bosses
had Doug's number (and in Canada, Cliff's number). They knew his
weakness
which, ironically, was the values they shared in common, and they did
predictable
things. His ridiculous strategies played into their hands because they
were
business strategies.
The backroom meeting that I attended in April 1985 resulted in a
colossal
missed opportunity to for the UFCW organization to make inroads into a
corner
of the service industry where workers were desperate for good
representation.
Dority blew it. The SoCal strike was an opportunity for a bigger,
better-resourced, more seasoned UFCW organization (one that has all the
advantages that
"big unionism" is supposed to bring) to turn back the corporate assault
on
North American workers. Again, Doug blew it. Whether the SoCal debacle
was
choreographed from the outset or whether it just happened, doesn't
matter.
It's the
end result that counts. The end result is pitiful. Its ramifications are
ominous.
What does it - this latest, greatest
sellout/surrender/defeat/betrayal -
tell us? What does it tell us about the long-touted advantages of big
unionism? What does it tell us about the value of the labor federations
and
the
well-heeled leaders? What does it tell us about the value of autocratic
unionism?
The only bright light that I can see is what it teaches us about the
power
of
the people.
The 70,000 dedicated workplace activists who hit the street in
October
2003 had the power to win this strike. They could have won. They should
have
won. Their leaders, however, didn't have a clue. My guess is that they
were
afraid of the workers' power and as interested in keeping their awesome
might under
wraps as the employers.
The outcome of the SoCal strike was as predictable as it is
disappointing. It's time the leaders of the mainstream labor movement
acknowledge that sad
reality. The sellout began long ago and continued through two decades
during
which the leaders sat on their hands and pretended it wasn't happening.
Even
now, a lot of high falutin' heads are in the sand, hoping the whole
unpleasant
thing blows over and that Doug's disappearing act will somehow cure the
working
public of any residual nausea about it. It's not going to. The strike
was
too
big, the sellout to stark. People have become more knowledgable about
"labor
relations" and knowledge is power. Maybe it's time the heads stepped
down
off
their clouds and handed the labor movement back to the people who have
worker's interests uppermost in their minds and their hearts: The
community
of
workers.
"Change or get out of the way." That's something Doug Dority said
at the
UFCW International convention in 2001. Although I was never quite sure
exactly
what kind of change he was advocating, it seemed that he was
acknowledging a
disconnect between his union and its members. Why he said he when and
where
he
did has always fascinated me. It seems as though Doug had a sense that
the
end of an era might well be upon him and that change was needed. That's
a
plausible theory, I think. Even the most disconnected of despots have
been
known to
get that niggling feeling that the end is near. It was a good piece of
advice
which, unfortunately, neither Dority nor his audience ever took much to
heart.
That's not a surprise. The scale of change that would be needed to
connect
the UFCW's leaders to its members would mean that a lot of the leaders
would
need to get out of the way.
In the wake of SoCal the leaders of the mainstream labor movement
may
want to take Dority's prescient advice themselves. For a long time now,
these
disconnected leaders have tried their damnedest to get the workers to
change
- to
cajole them into joining their unions, and persuading their friends and
family members to join their unions and cheering for the leaders when
the
leaders
need to be cheered. It's not working. It's time for the leaders to
change -
or
get out of the way.
In over two decades of sellouts, few (if any) North American labor
leaders ever spoke out against the coziness that had developed between
the
UFCW and
its employer-partners. None publicly questioned the foolish theory that
the
union's leaders advanced in defence of their concessionary romps: That
concessions would help the unionized employers compete with non-union
competitors. Once
the unionized employers were competitive, they would share their wealth
with
the workers. (An even dumber variant of this theory went: The union
would
give
unionized employers concessions to help them be more competitive. The
union
would then organize all the workers at their non-union competitors. With
dominance across the entire industry, the union would be able to drive a
hard
bargain at negotiations and win back the ground it had conceded.)
Some even helped rationalize the labor-management bedmates' behavior:
The
UFCW's sad track record of backward bargaining wasn't the fault of its
leaders.
It was the employers, it was the government, it was the members
themselves
who
were responsible for the problems in the industry.
All along, the corporate veep's had their bedmates' number and
pressed
their buttons whenever the urge hit them. In the labor movement, union
leaders
shook their heads, held their noses and looked the other way - just like
they're supposed to under the Code of Union Officialdom: "... the
chiseled-in-stone
commandments that govern relations among union officials, (are) a code
seldom
broken that mandates loyalty, mutual support, and a live-and-let-live
attitude. In a smooth transition, the old head of the pack retires or
steps
down
gracefully, is always replaced in a celebratory spirit of amiable
consensus,
is
honored by accolades for past services to humanity, and is rewarded
with a
golden
parachute. In its most extreme and debased form, the code prescribes
that
you
may run your union as you see fit, even honestly, as long as I am
permitted
to run mine as I see fit, without public criticism." (The Rising Tide of
Union
Democracy, Herman Benson, 1995)
Fortunately, it's not all over for working people. Apart from the
stinging criticism of Dority and his crew, there is another thread -
not so
apparent
but perceptible nevertheless - in the public reaction to the end of the
SoCal
strike: The workers were heroic. They were not perceived as greedy or
unreasonable but rather as resolute, unified, selfless people. Members
of
communities
taking a courageous and necessary stand against insatiable greed of
entities
that need serious behavior modification. This perception of working
people
is,
in my view, a significant departure from what has been the norm over the
past
several decades. It's a very good sign - one of those glimmers that
suggests
a
shift in how we perceive things - a shift in our consciousness.
The SoCal workers' efforts have the potential to be the
consciousness
shifting event of our working lives - the direction of the shift - for
better or
worse - depends on what those workers and all of the rest of us, do from
here
on. A new movement can happen. It's happening already. Focusing our
energy
in
the direction of our collective goals can give it momentum. Cleaning
out the
back rooms and getting rid of the rags in the drain would be a good
start.

Remote Viewer is a regular contributor at Members for Democracy who
has
worked extensively in the field of labor relations. Over the years she
has
worked as a representative of labor, management and government.
© Members for Democracy

 

[James T. Kirk]

Stop spreading BS. If you have proof go to the courts. If you have suspicions go to the Dept. of Labor.

If you don't want that call the RTW Organization or the National Chamber of commerce or the GOP, they'll help you. They are just panting to get a handle on the labor movement.

Well we already saw Littles mailout where he blamed AMFA for UALs bankruptcy, despite the fact that everyone knows that UAL went bankrupt because they were denied a bailout. The decision to deny the bailout was made with the assumption that the mechanics granted concessions. In other words it didnt matter.

Little also left out how USAIR got concessions a few months earlier and went bankrupt anyway. USAIR promised not to come back for more but they did, now they are going for a third round of concessions.

Despite all that those workers make more than us, still get holiday pay, vacation, sick time, uniforms cleaned, shift differential etc.



Why call the RTW? Or the GOP? We here the same things from the TWU, the TWU the union that fights for the "right to work for less". " (Almost) Full employment through low wages and no benifits". "High wages are bad for you, be thankful you have a job". "We have to compete, so you must work for less". Its indistinguishable whether this would come from the GOP, RTW or the TWU.

Wasnt it you who praised the fact that our union is structured like a corporation?

The only thing better than no union for a company is a sweatheart union like the TWU.

Got some time? Read below;

One of Us -- Originally published at http://www.ufcw.net

April 1985:I am in a suite at a posh hotel with Doug Dority. At
that time Dority is the second in command at the United Food and
Commercial Workers International Union. On this day in April, he is
meeting with the Vice President of Labor Relations of a large service
industry corporation. I am the Vice President's assistant and protégé.
He takes me to his secret meetings so that I can witness the events,
record them and learn dimensions of labor relations that are not taught
in educational institutions.
The Corporate Vice President has come to Washington to persuade the
UFCW
to agree to a concessionary contract in negotiations that were to begin
in a
few weeks time. For a number of years the company had paid a large
group of
workers higher wages than were standard in its industry in an effort to
keep
unions out. But earlier that year, the company did a voluntary
recognition
deal with the UFCW and no longer needed to worry about being unionized.
This
being the case, the higher-than-market-pay-rates no longer made any
business
sense.
That was the logic behind the demand for concessions that the Corporate
Veep
was about to make.
The discussion between them was brief. The company needed a break,
the Corporate Vice President stated. Increased competition from
non-union operators was decreasing its market share. The high wages it
had been paying were a luxury that it could no longer afford. A wage
rollback - a big one - was needed or the future looked bleak. How big?
Twenty per cent, the Corporate Vice President said, cooly lying.
The union could not agree to a rollback of that magnitude Dority
replied.
His union had acquired these members in a voluntary rec exchange and was
about to negotiate its first contract for them. Concessions would be a
hard
sell for a first contract. On top of that it would be politically
awkward. It
wouldn't sit well with other locals whose leaders might find themselves
squeezed for similar concessions. But... Dority stated, without missing
a beat or drawing another breath, how about a two-tier contract where
new hires would be paid
according to a lower wage scale? His union had done these kinds of
deals with
employers who needed a break, he said, and they seemed to work well.
Within a matter of a few minutes the deal was done. In the
forthcoming negotiations, the company would grant existing workers a
modest increase. A lower wage scale would be bargained for new hires.
The UFCW negotiators would be brought into the loop in advance of
bargaining and would ensure that they ended up at this point.
The Corporate Vice President could hardly believe his good fortune.
He thought that it might be possible, but he was not expecting it to be
that easy. He asked for 20% hoping that he might come away with 10% -
if he was lucky. With the two tier set-up, he could drop rates down to
minimum wage levels and, with the rate of staff turnover in the
company's operations, it would be a matter of time before the vast
majority of workers were paid from the new lower scale.
I sat there quietly taking it all in. I had to remember as much as
I could of the exchange so that I could make notes of it later
(note-taking at secret high level meetings tended to inhibit the
discussions). Over a couple of years of following the Veep around, I'd
heard a lot of strange ####. This #### blew me away however. It
wouldn't be hard to remember. I was incredulous. Here was a Vice
President of this enormous international union getting tapped for a
major giveaway and he just rolled right over. He didn't even ask any
questions. He just swallowed the company guy's lies and burped up a
pile of concessions as if it was the most natural thing in the world
for him to do.
If he had bothered to inquire, he would have found that the company
seeking the concessions was hugely profitable. A well-established
leader in its segment of its market, it had a reputation for making big
bucks even in tough economic times. It had sailed through the recent
economic recession and was delivering double-digit returns on equity.
Every single one of its operating divisions was profitable, sales were
through the roof and a major expansion was underway. Its unionized
operations had managed to hold their own against non-union competitors
for years. Its phenomenal success was frequently discussed in the
national business media.
None of this mattered to Doug Dority it seemed. If he knew, he
didn't care. If he didn't know, he didn't care enough to find out.
Sleazy sonofabitch, I thought. He doesn't give a #### about those
people. Not even on a superficial level. They're just things to him.
Looking at this insipid man, I could not help but think how much he was
like the managers back at the corporate office. The deference he showed
to our Vice
President and the lengths to which he went to build rapport with him.
The earnestness in his voice as he told the Veep of his union's desire
for good relations and its respect for the company's right to make
money, the speed with which he rolled over.
"He's a good guy," the Veep said as we departed the meeting for a
celebratory brunch. "He's one of us!"
Within a few weeks of our meeting, negotiations began. The UFCW
business
agents who led the union's bargaining committee did an admirable job at
the
bargaining table. They put forward a respectable package of demands and
made
compelling - sometimes even impassioned - arguments in favor of their
proposals.
As the bargaining dance continued, they gradually conceded most of
their
demands or agreed to watered down, largely meaningless, versions -
digging
in their heals here and there on issues that they told us in advance
would be
particularly important. In secret discussions with us, they would ensure
that we knew they were only playing their parts and clarifying for us
what exactly they
would need to pacify the more stubborn elements on their committee.
Within a few weeks, the deal that had already been done, was done
again-this time for the benefit of the members. It was hailed as a good
deal. One that set a solid foundation for the future. Yes, the union
had to give a little but that was just one of those realities - one of
those things. It's a tough industry and with so many non-union
competitors, we don't want to put the company out of business, the
members were told. They ratified the deal. What else could they do?
Their negotiators had done all they could or so they said. The company
just wouldn't give them any more. They didn't want to bankrupt the
company, did they? Of course, the member didn't know that the company
was in no danger of going under, or that all that the concessions were
going to do was to make the company and its shareholders more wealthy.
And they didn't know that the most significant aspects of the deal had
been hammered out long before
in a posh hotel, in a far off city, in secret, without any discussion
of their interests. But that was OK because they didn't really matter.
They weren't "one of us".
In the couple of years that I spent in the corporate labor
relations department of this successful service industry business, I
learned a lot about the sleazy subterranean world of labor relations
and did not have many illusions about the magnanimity of employers or
the good intentions of union leaders. I'd never had any faith in the
high-mindedness of the corporation captains. Dority succeeded in
peeling away what little faith I had in their mainstream labor
counterparts.
If the back room deal that I'd witnessed on that day in 1985 was an
anomaly, it could perhaps be excused or even forgiven. But it was not a
"one
of". Similar deals would be done over and over again in the years that
followed -
with this company and with many others, on both sides of the border.
Within a decade Dority would take over the Presidency of the UFCW.
His performance in that role would exceed even my expectations. For the
next ten years he would preside over a union that squandered the power
and resources of its members and missed one opportunity after another
to improve their
working lives. All the while its leaders hung out in hotel suites,
enriching
themselves and selling out the members.
The members themselves became nothing more than a commodity.
Officially
they were the union but in reality they were things - revenue producing
units - that could be bought or traded and that needed to be managed so
that they
didn't get out of line and start messing up the leaders' self-serving
plans. While the members were asked to swallow one concessionary deal
after another, the leaders partied hearty on their dime and crapped
litigation on those who didn't like it - also on their dime.
Legions of aspiring "one's of us" - opportunists who saw a cushy
gig in the union-repping trade - were drawn to positions of power in
the locals and the international where they were rewarded for their
loyalty to Doug and his crew and groomed to follow them to the bigger
trough when the time came.
November 1999: I am in yet another hotel meeting with a prominent
UFCW
Local President - one of the up and comers who came up the ladder on
Dority's
watch. I have long since left the sleazy subterranean world of labor
relations.
He's up to his ass in it. I'm writing about union democracy. He's
puzzled by that but dismissive of it the glib way of people who don't
think they have much
to worry about. I ask him about union democracy in the UFCW. He offers
up a
defense of union autocracy.
The UFCW is a corrupt union, yes that's true he tells me
matter-of-factly. There's corruption - and lots of it - on both sides
of the border and up and down the chains of command, corruption as bad
as HERE used to have. That's just the way it is when you're big. What
can you do? There is no democracy. There can't be. The union is too big
for that. The union can't be trusted to the members. There's no point
in having democracy in the union. The union has to get along with the
employers rather than fight the employers. The days when fighting was
worthwhile are long gone. The union can't take the employers on any
more - it's too reliant on them for voluntary recognition agreements
and pension and other contributions. Besides, the management guys are
nice guys. We have a lot in common.
I leave the meeting with that same incredulous feeling that I had
years in earlier in Washington, only now it's mixed with a profound
sense of loathing. The backroom bastards are ruling the earth now. F**k
them.
October 2003: The biggest strike in contemporary labor history
begins in Southern California. Seventy thousand working people walk off
the job at three large food retailers. The key issues: Demands for
concessions on wages and health and welfare benefit payments. The
magnitude of the strike, the resolve of the workers, the solidarity
shown by members of their communities and of other unions stood to make
this one of those the big consciousness-shifting,
existing-order-shaking events. One of those happenings that changes the
way we think about ourselves and our relationships with others,
including our institutions.
Throughout the strike the resolve of the workers seems unshakeable.
Their leaders bob and weave, sending out mixed signals and making
strategic blunder after strategic blunder. The world is watching. Media
coverage is constant. The workers are speaking and being heard. They're
not quitting even though what their union's intentions are not as
clear. Opportunities to expand the strike to a nationwide scale are
rejected. Pickets are removed from strategic locations in efforts to
elicit similar "good faith" from the employers. Proposals giving ground
on key issues are made to get the employers back to the table. Dority
hangs out with celebrities and takes advantage of photo ops but is
conspicuous by his absence on the picket lines. One of the most
disturbing moments comes when workers, determined to continue picketing
a distribution center, chase away union officials who wanted them to
disband.
Five months later it's all over. Sixteen days of secret
negotiations culminate in a settlement - a concessionary deal that
follows the long established pattern of two-tier wage schemes and
compromises on key issues - in this case, health care funding. While
the ink is still drying, Doug Dority buggers off, retiring from his
ten-year stint as the head of North America's largest service industry
union.
With an annual salary in excess of $300,000, he represented (at
least in theory) some of North America's lowest paid workers. With his
crowing achievement (the "most successful strike in history" he called
it - yes, in all of history!) behind him, he hit the road packing a
hefty pension plus, if the word on the street is correct, a substantial
bonus. In his wake, he leaves an organization led by men (and they're
mostly men) who think and act like corporate managers and a successor
who was appointed by a group of 40 or so executive board members on
behalf of 1.4 million members.
Since the greatest deal in history became public knowledge,
criticism of
Dority and his crew has been relentless. It's hard to find a commentary
about the outcome of the spectacular show of workers' power in the
alternative or
mainstream media that does not contain the words "sell out",
"surrender", "betrayal" or "defeat" or that does not slam the UFCW's
leaders for their abject failure to lead.
Michael Hiltzik of the LA Times likens the UFCW's sorry performance
to watching a decrepit building implode:
UFCW Sacrifices Workers While Declaring Victory:
Just as those videos of old hotels and tenements imploding never
fail to
enthrall when they appear on the evening news, the spectacle of a great
institution crumbling away exercises a ghastly fascination: One moment
an
edifice stands solid and proud; a few seconds pass, and nothing remains
but a cloud of dust.
But there's a difference between the controlled demolition of a
decrepit
housing project and the collapse of, say, the United Food and Commercial
Workers, which resolved its long-running battle with three Southern
California grocery companies last week. In the former case, the
authorities take pains
to keep innocent bystanders safely out of danger. In the latter, the
livelihoods of
thousands of people could wind up buried in the wreckage.
Union officials are insisting that the contract ratified last
weekend
represents a great victory. UFCW International President Douglas
Dority, who
hustled himself into retirement Tuesday, issued a statement over the
weekend
calling the Southern California job action "one of the most successful
strikes in
history."
Stirring words indeed. But as an accurate description of events,
they
rank right up there with "Dewey Defeats Truman."
The overriding concern of the UFCW throughout the contract
dispute has been
to restructure its relationship with the owners-under the new market
conditions created by the growing presence of non-union, low-wage
competitors such as Wal-Mart-at the expense of the union rank-and-file.
- Union surrenders
benefits, wages in sellout of California grocery strike
A report from the LA Times offered a discomforting insight into
How the supermarket strike was settled: Moments before they shook hands
on a
deal, Stemerman had noticed that two of the supermarket reps were
sitting on
the bed, and he couldn't resist joking about "the union getting into
bed with
the employers."
Many of the tens of thousands of grocery store workers returning to
their
jobs would probably see more than a grain of truth in that teasing
remark.
A UCLA professor offered up the good along with the bad in an LA
Weekly
report titled "Surrender at the supermarket:"I don't think it can be
read
any other way than a defeat for the union," said labor expert Sanford
Jacoby, a professor at UCLA's Anderson School of Management. "I suppose
it could have been worse. The stores are still unionized."
I'm not sure that it can be any worse. Having the
union-that-wouldn't
isn't necessarily better than having no union at all. At least with no
union, the workers would be free to organize themselves or choose a
different union. As dues paying units of the UFCW they would have to
organize a massive
decertification effort just to get to that point. Is the UFCW "better
than
having no union" or a rag in drain? Depends on how much you know about
what goes on in the back room.
Secret discussions with corporate officials are often painted as
necessary or even beneficial for the members by the union leaders who
engage
in them.
In my years of hanging out in the labor relations back rooms, I never
saw
anything that was beneficial to the members. Most of what I saw
resembled
the
exchange I described earlier in this piece. The length of the
discussions
and the
variety of posturing that took place were the only major differences.
From his predecessor Bill Wynn, Doug Dority inherited an already
corrupt
business union bloated with disempowered members and self-serving pork
choppers. As the years passed, more disempowered members would be added
to
the ranks,
many of those through disempowering voluntary recognition deals. Under
Dority's watch, the UFCW would morph from a business union into a
business
partner.
Whether he saw it that way or not doesn't really matter. That's what
happened. Over the years, the UFCW would - despite its considerable
bargaining
power - roll over for the corporate gentlemen, again and again, in ways
that
would make our 1985 encounter seem tame by comparison. Two tier wages
deals,
buy-outs for long service higher paid workers, greater flexibility for
management,
became common outcomes of UFCW bargaining in the service industry. The
bosses
had Doug's number (and in Canada, Cliff's number). They knew his
weakness
which, ironically, was the values they shared in common, and they did
predictable
things. His ridiculous strategies played into their hands because they
were
business strategies.
The backroom meeting that I attended in April 1985 resulted in a
colossal
missed opportunity to for the UFCW organization to make inroads into a
corner
of the service industry where workers were desperate for good
representation.
Dority blew it. The SoCal strike was an opportunity for a bigger,
better-resourced, more seasoned UFCW organization (one that has all the
advantages that
"big unionism" is supposed to bring) to turn back the corporate assault
on
North American workers. Again, Doug blew it. Whether the SoCal debacle
was
choreographed from the outset or whether it just happened, doesn't
matter.
It's the
end result that counts. The end result is pitiful. Its ramifications are
ominous.
What does it - this latest, greatest
sellout/surrender/defeat/betrayal -
tell us? What does it tell us about the long-touted advantages of big
unionism? What does it tell us about the value of the labor federations
and
the
well-heeled leaders? What does it tell us about the value of autocratic
unionism?
The only bright light that I can see is what it teaches us about the
power
of
the people.
The 70,000 dedicated workplace activists who hit the street in
October
2003 had the power to win this strike. They could have won. They should
have
won. Their leaders, however, didn't have a clue. My guess is that they
were
afraid of the workers' power and as interested in keeping their awesome
might under
wraps as the employers.
The outcome of the SoCal strike was as predictable as it is
disappointing. It's time the leaders of the mainstream labor movement
acknowledge that sad
reality. The sellout began long ago and continued through two decades
during
which the leaders sat on their hands and pretended it wasn't happening.
Even
now, a lot of high falutin' heads are in the sand, hoping the whole
unpleasant
thing blows over and that Doug's disappearing act will somehow cure the
working
public of any residual nausea about it. It's not going to. The strike
was
too
big, the sellout to stark. People have become more knowledgable about
"labor
relations" and knowledge is power. Maybe it's time the heads stepped
down
off
their clouds and handed the labor movement back to the people who have
worker's interests uppermost in their minds and their hearts: The
community
of
workers.
"Change or get out of the way." That's something Doug Dority said
at the
UFCW International convention in 2001. Although I was never quite sure
exactly
what kind of change he was advocating, it seemed that he was
acknowledging a
disconnect between his union and its members. Why he said he when and
where
he
did has always fascinated me. It seems as though Doug had a sense that
the
end of an era might well be upon him and that change was needed. That's
a
plausible theory, I think. Even the most disconnected of despots have
been
known to
get that niggling feeling that the end is near. It was a good piece of
advice
which, unfortunately, neither Dority nor his audience ever took much to
heart.
That's not a surprise. The scale of change that would be needed to
connect
the UFCW's leaders to its members would mean that a lot of the leaders
would
need to get out of the way.
In the wake of SoCal the leaders of the mainstream labor movement
may
want to take Dority's prescient advice themselves. For a long time now,
these
disconnected leaders have tried their damnedest to get the workers to
change
- to
cajole them into joining their unions, and persuading their friends and
family members to join their unions and cheering for the leaders when
the
leaders
need to be cheered. It's not working. It's time for the leaders to
change -
or
get out of the way.
In over two decades of sellouts, few (if any) North American labor
leaders ever spoke out against the coziness that had developed between
the
UFCW and
its employer-partners. None publicly questioned the foolish theory that
the
union's leaders advanced in defence of their concessionary romps: That
concessions would help the unionized employers compete with non-union
competitors. Once
the unionized employers were competitive, they would share their wealth
with
the workers. (An even dumber variant of this theory went: The union
would
give
unionized employers concessions to help them be more competitive. The
union
would then organize all the workers at their non-union competitors. With
dominance across the entire industry, the union would be able to drive a
hard
bargain at negotiations and win back the ground it had conceded.)
Some even helped rationalize the labor-management bedmates' behavior:
The
UFCW's sad track record of backward bargaining wasn't the fault of its
leaders.
It was the employers, it was the government, it was the members
themselves
who
were responsible for the problems in the industry.
All along, the corporate veep's had their bedmates' number and
pressed
their buttons whenever the urge hit them. In the labor movement, union
leaders
shook their heads, held their noses and looked the other way - just like
they're supposed to under the Code of Union Officialdom: "... the
chiseled-in-stone
commandments that govern relations among union officials, (are) a code
seldom
broken that mandates loyalty, mutual support, and a live-and-let-live
attitude. In a smooth transition, the old head of the pack retires or
steps
down
gracefully, is always replaced in a celebratory spirit of amiable
consensus,
is
honored by accolades for past services to humanity, and is rewarded
with a
golden
parachute. In its most extreme and debased form, the code prescribes
that
you
may run your union as you see fit, even honestly, as long as I am
permitted
to run mine as I see fit, without public criticism." (The Rising Tide of
Union
Democracy, Herman Benson, 1995)
Fortunately, it's not all over for working people. Apart from the
stinging criticism of Dority and his crew, there is another thread -
not so
apparent
but perceptible nevertheless - in the public reaction to the end of the
SoCal
strike: The workers were heroic. They were not perceived as greedy or
unreasonable but rather as resolute, unified, selfless people. Members
of
communities
taking a courageous and necessary stand against insatiable greed of
entities
that need serious behavior modification. This perception of working
people
is,
in my view, a significant departure from what has been the norm over the
past
several decades. It's a very good sign - one of those glimmers that
suggests
a
shift in how we perceive things - a shift in our consciousness.
The SoCal workers' efforts have the potential to be the
consciousness
shifting event of our working lives - the direction of the shift - for
better or
worse - depends on what those workers and all of the rest of us, do from
here
on. A new movement can happen. It's happening already. Focusing our
energy
in
the direction of our collective goals can give it momentum. Cleaning
out the
back rooms and getting rid of the rags in the drain would be a good
start.

Remote Viewer is a regular contributor at Members for Democracy who
has
worked extensively in the field of labor relations. Over the years she
has
worked as a representative of labor, management and government.
© Members for Democracy

Well Bobby I have found one thing that you postings are good for, when can't go to sleep I'll start reading them and BOOM lights out in 2 MIN.

 

[Bob Owens]

Well Bobby I have found one thing that you postings are good for, when can't go to sleep I'll start reading them and BOOM lights out in 2 MIN.

You type in your sleep?

 

[twuer]

The twu people on this board have not changed a bit. They still think if they say it often enough that it will happen . It is just like your propaganda on base. On a Friday I was given an informer that stated NW had 60%, on Saturday I received the twu rag that said 50%, then on Monday I get another informer that says NW has 43%. Now if that is true, then that is a darn powerful union that can get 17% of its people back over a weekend, or it is more twu LIES :angry: . So which is it cio or twuer!

Another typical, hypocritical statement from an amfa wannabe. Always pointing fingers but refusing to look elsewhere.

How's this. . .

Amfa. . ."we have enough cards". . ."we don't have enough cards, we need a lot more if we want to reach 60%". . ."we have enough cards and are filing for an election". . ."we are filing an appeal to the NMB for more time to get more cards". . ."we have more than enough cards even if they don't remove anyone from the list to get an election".

HOLY COW!!!!! How's that for mis-information!!!!!

 

[A'strike]

Another typical, hypocritical statement from an amfa wannabe. Always pointing fingers but refusing to look elsewhere.

How's this. . .

Amfa. . ."we have enough cards". . ."we don't have enough cards, we need a lot more if we want to reach 60%". . ."we have enough cards and are filing for an election". . ."we are filing an appeal to the NMB for more time to get more cards". . ."we have more than enough cards even if they don't remove anyone from the list to get an election".

HOLY COW!!!!! How's that for mis-information!!!!!

Here are the numbers you clown,the facts don't lie. You are are dancing and celebrating about how the company has raised the numbers in the craft and Class of mechanics and related and you should be a shamed that the company wants to keep you. That should tell everyone, TWU supporter or not that The company should not be so supportive of any Union.!

Again you try to deceive the facts!!!!!



http://www.nmb.gov/representation/deter200...002/29n043.html

In the Matter of the
Application of the



TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA



alleging a representation dispute pursuant to Section 2, Ninth,
of the Railway Labor Act as amended



involving employees of



AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.
TWA AIRLINES, LLC.
29 NMB No. 43



CASE NOS. R-6872,
R-6873, R-6874,
R-6875, R-6876,
and R-6877

FILE NOS. CR-6751
and CR-6752
(File No. CR-6743)



FINDINGS UPON
INVESTIGATION



March 27, 2002


This determination addresses an application filed by the Transport Workers Union of America (TWU or Organization). TWU requests the National Mediation Board (Board) investigate whether American Airlines, Inc. (American), and TWA Airlines, LLC. (TWA-LLC),(1) operate as a single transportation system.



The weight of the evidence establishes that American and TWA-LLC operate as a single transportation system.



PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND



On December 13, 2001, TWU filed an application alleging a representation dispute involving the following: Mechanics and Related Employees; Fleet Service Employees; Stock Clerks; Dispatchers; Simulator Technicians; Instructors; Technical Specialists; and Meteorologists of American. TWU asserted that American and TWA-LLC constitute a single transportation system. The application was assigned NMB File No. CR-6743.



The Board assigned Eileen Hennessey to investigate.

The same investigator that is doing the mechanics and related determined the Numbers at American Airlines inn the present Investigation between TWU & AMFA, you would think she knows the numbers already! She ruled a decision in this case.


On December 19, 2001, the Board requested that American and TWA-LLC provide information. American and TWA-LLC jointly responded on January 3, 2002. TWU filed a response on February 1, 2002. The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO (IAM) filed a response on February 1, 2002.

CONTENTIONS



TWU



TWU contends as follows:



American and TWA-LLC are a single carrier and the TWU's application should be granted. The factual record was, for the most part, correctly stated in the Carriers' submission in this case as well as the Allied Pilots Association's submission in CR-6736. All critical management functions at TWA-LLC, including labor relations, are completely controlled by American. In addition, American now specifically represents to the public that "TWA is now American Airlines" and routes and schedules are combined. These are the core factors in a single carrier system pursuant to Board precedent. Trans World Airlines/Ozark Airlines, 14 NMB 218 (1987); Flagship Airlines, et al., 22 NMB 331 (1995).

STATEMENT OF FACT

Corporate Transactions



On April 9, 2001, American acquired certain assets of TWA, Inc. Simultaneously, American transferred the assets to a newly created subsidiary known as TWA-LLC. TWA-LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of American Airlines and is certified by the FAA and Department of Transportation (DOT) as a Part 121 direct air carrier pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 119.



Representation


TWU is the certified collective bargaining representative for the following crafts or classes at American: Airline Mechanics, Ground Service, Plant Maintenance and Fleet Service Personnel R-1640 (1946); Stock and Stores employees R-1447 (1945); and Meteorologists R-4191 (1970).



TWU was certified as the representative of the Dispatchers at American in R-4265 (1972) and as the representative of the Dispatchers at TWA, Inc., in R-3653 (1964).



TWU is the voluntarily recognized representative of the following American employees: Flight Simulator Technicians; Instructors; and Technical Specialists.



The IAM is the certified collective bargaining representative of the following crafts or classes at TWA, Inc.: Mechanics and Related (including Fleet Service) R-1471 (1945); and Stock Clerks R-1606 (1946). Effective January 8, 1957, TWA, Inc., recognized the IAM as the representative of its Flight Simulator Technicians and incorporated that position into the TWA, Inc./IAM collective bargaining agreement.(2)



The employees covered by this application are:

American TWA-LLC

Mechanics and Related 13,229 3,272

Fleet Service 13,206 3,082
Stock Clerks 1,382 316
Dispatchers 163 51
Simulator Technicians 108 20
Instructors 273 10
Technical Specialists 79 0
Meteorologists 17 0

I WILL LET YOU DO THE MATH WISE GUY!

NOT 18,000+ like American Airlines is try to protest



Operations


American and TWA-LLC operate under separate FAA Air Carrier Certificates. TWA-LLC's Flight Dispatch, Flight Safety, and Maintenance & Engineering's Quality Assurance and Quality Surveillance functions are controlled by TWA-LLC.



The FAA requires that aircraft registered to a certificate holder be operated in accordance with the certificate holder's specific procedures. 14 C.F.R. §121.133; 14 C.F.R. §121.400. TWA-LLC and American have separate operating certificates. Therefore, mechanics at TWA-LLC do not work on American aircraft and American's mechanics do not work on TWA-LLC aircraft.



According to the TWA-LLC/IAM agreements, TWA-LLC employees receive pay and benefits equivalent to American pay rates and benefits, effective January 1, 2002. As of January 1, 2002, work rules equivalent to American work rules became applicable for TWA-LLC Mechanics and Related Employees, Fleet Service Employees, Stock Clerks, Dispatchers, Simulator Technicians and Instructors. TWA-LLC employees will be covered by American/TWU collective bargaining agreements when an integration agreement among the TWU and the Carriers becomes effective or when the Board determines that a single transportation system exists and resolves any representation issues.

How can you act in such away, When you should be ashamed that a Company wants and supports a Sell Out Union?

 

[A'strike]

Another typical, hypocritical statement from an amfa wannabe. Always pointing fingers but refusing to look elsewhere.

How's this. . .

Amfa. . ."we have enough cards". . ."we don't have enough cards, we need a lot more if we want to reach 60%". . ."we have enough cards and are filing for an election". . ."we are filing an appeal to the NMB for more time to get more cards". . ."we have more than enough cards even if they don't remove anyone from the list to get an election".

HOLY COW!!!!! How's that for mis-information!!!!!

Here is that number again in federal documents!! THE NMB


http://www.nmb.gov/representation/deter200...002/29n051.html

In the Matter of the
Application of the



TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA



alleging a representation dispute pursuant to Section 2, Ninth,
of the Railway Labor Act as amended



involving employees of



AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.
TWA AIRLINES, LLC.
29 NMB No. 51



CASE NOS. R-6872,
R-6873, and R-6874



FINDINGS UPON
INVESTIGATION-
DETERMINATION OF
CERTIFICATIONS



April 29, 2002


This determination addresses the representation consequences of the application filed by the Transport Workers Union of America (TWU or Organization) for the following crafts or classes: Mechanics and Related Employees; Fleet Service Employees; and Stock Clerks, employees of American Airlines, Inc. (American), and TWA Airlines, LLC. (TWA-LLC).(1)



The Board finds that TWU is the certified representative of Mechanics and Related Employees in the single transportation system (R-6872). The Board finds that TWU is the certified representative of Fleet Service Employees in the single transportation system (R-6873). The Board extends TWU's certification in NMB Case No. R-1447 to include Stock and Stores Employees in the single transportation system.

On March 27, 2002, the Board determined that American and TWA-LLC operate as a single transportation system for representation of the following crafts or classes: Mechanics and Related Employees; Fleet Service Employees; Stock and Stores Employees; Dispatchers; and Meteorologists. The Board determined that American and TWA-LLC operate as a single transportation system for representation of Dispatchers and extended TWU's certification in NMB Case No. R-4265 to include Dispatchers in the single transportation system. The Board determined that American and TWA-LLC operate as a single transportation system for representation of Meteorologists and extended TWU's certification in NMB Case No. R-4191 to include Meteorologists in the single transportation system. The Board determined that the position of Flight Simulator Technician is properly included in the Mechanics and Related Employees craft or class. American Airlines, Inc./TWA Airlines, LLC., 29 NMB 240 (2002).



Pursuant to the Board's Representation Manual (Manual) Section 19.6, this investigation addresses the representation of the following crafts or classes at American: Mechanics and Related Employees; Fleet Service Employees; and Stock and Stores Employees.



The Board's March 17, 2002, determination stated that the IAM "has 30 days from the date of this determination to file an application for each of these crafts or classes, supported by a showing of interest of at least 35 percent of the single transportation system or to supplement the showing of interest in accordance with Manual Section 19.601."



STATEMENTS OF FACT


TWU is the certified collective bargaining representative for the following crafts or classes at American: Airline Mechanics, Ground Service, Plant Maintenance and Fleet Service Personnel, NMB Case No. R-1640 (1946); and Stock and Stores Employees, NMB Case No. R-1447 (1945).



The IAM is the certified collective bargaining representative of the following crafts or classes at TWA, Inc.: Mechanics and Related (including Fleet Service Employees), NMB Case No. R-1471 (1945); and Stock Clerks, NMB Case No. R-1606 (1946).



The employees covered by this application are:

American TWA-LLC

Mechanics and Related(2) 13,337 3,292


Fleet Service 13,206 3,082
Stock Clerks 1,382 316



Here are the numbers one more time for craft and class mechanics and related not 18,000+ like the company says!


CONCLUSION



The Board finds that TWU is the certified representative of the entire craft or class of Mechanics and Related Employees in the single transportation system (R-6872). The Board extinguishes the IAM's certification issued in R-1471. Accordingly, Case No. R-6872 is closed.



The Board finds that TWU is the certified representative of the entire craft or class of Fleet Service Employees in the single transportation system (R-6873). The Board extinguishes the IAM's certification issued in R-1471. Accordingly, Case No. R-6873 is closed.



The Board extends TWU's certification in NMB Case No. R-1447 to include Stock and Stores Employees in the single transportation system.The Board extinguishes the IAM's certification issued in NMB Case No. R-1606. Accordingly, NMB Case No. R-6874 is closed.



By direction of the NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD.





Benetta M. Mansfield
Chief of Staff

 

[Checking it Out]

Different time, place and circumstances! Amfa is attempting to distort the issue at hand and is only giving half-truths! Keep it up, its fun to watch!

 

[1AA]

Different time, place and circumstances! Amfa is attempting to distort the issue at hand and is only giving half-truths! Keep it up, its fun to watch!

I smell panic and fear from you CIO. Don't worry your agony will soon be over and you will be put to rest. Hang in there for a little while longer it's almost over.

 

[Johnny Lunchbox]

You AMFA boys that keep smelling things need to lower the arms a bit. AMFA crying unsuccessfully right now, the drive is crumbling, thank you TWU for your efforts!

Have a great TWU day!

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

I smell panic and fear from you CIO. Don't worry your agony will soon be over and you will be put to rest. Hang in there for a little while longer it's almost over.

cio,

Different circumstances? OK, the circumstances were that AA just picked up TWA and claimed there were just over 16,000 craft and class. Then there were lay offs, firings, deaths, resignations. Now the circumstances are that AA has over 19,000 craft and class.

The twu smells fear... and it is spreading!

Let's see. AA knows exactly how much money they need in concessions to the last penny but yet they do not know who is in our craft and class? Are we saving even more money with the extra concessions from these extra names? Or was that already calculated?

cio's agony will not be over after AMFA defeats the twu. It will only begin since he will not be getting his union pay and will have to live under the concessions he so willingly accepts.

GO AMFA!

 

[twuer]

Hey CHUCKIE, this picture shows what AMFA boys think of the TWU!

Nice Judy. . .you're a real lady huh????

That is pretty offensive regardless of to whom it is aimed, even for you.

Freedom of speech I guess. . .

:down:

 

[Checking it Out]

cio,

Different circumstances? OK, the circumstances were that AA just picked up TWA and claimed there were just over 16,000 craft and class. Then there were lay offs, firings, deaths, resignations. Now the circumstances are that AA has over 19,000 craft and class.

The twu smells fear... and it is spreading!

Let's see. AA knows exactly how much money they need in concessions to the last penny but yet they do not know who is in our craft and class? Are we saving even more money with the extra concessions from these extra names? Or was that already calculated?

cio's agony will not be over after AMFA defeats the twu. It will only begin since he will not be getting his union pay and will have to live under the concessions he so willingly accepts.

GO AMFA!

Ken, I have no fear! The truth will prevail! You know I don't understand why you amfa wannabes all want to eliminate recall rights to the Mechanic's Class and Craft!


You really have me wonder? Come to think about it! I don't! With over 35% of amfa without work, it's obvious!

What a record to be proud of! OUTsource express!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Raptor]

Ken, I have no fear! The truth will prevail! You know I don't understand why you amfa wannabes all want to eliminate recall rights to the Mechanic's Class and Craft!

CIO you do a good job of acting stupid but I don't think you are that stupid, eliminate the recall right of the Mechanic class, I can't believe anyone actually voted for you with the completly idiotic comments you post, Even if AMFA does not win I am betting you will not be re-elected what a joke.

Rick back to the box for you dude.
I sure hope you don't end of working anywhere around me

 

[Rusty]

You know I don't understand why you amfa wannabes all want to eliminate recall rights to the Mechanic's Class and Craft!


You really have you wonder? Come to think about it! I don't! With over 35% of amfa without work it's obvious!

cio, your so full of crap, just one question. How do you even come up with this far fetched BS? Your mind must just be a clustered up entanglement of rhetoric maybe from sitting in the companies lap to long.