Teamster Representation Questions

[Anomaly]

swamt,



You are beyond exasperating.

 

[swamt]

swamt,



You are beyond exasperating.

Typical answer from you Anomaly when one, or both in this case, of the other industrial unions are proven liars and caught spreading complete false information. And while were at it here is yet another example (that you yourself has claimed way back in the beginning) that AMFA has no money. Article is taken from the AA-AMFA website:

The Teamster and TWU are always quick to say that AMFA has no money and we thought you should see a comparison of two large locals within each union to see if there is any merit to their claims. Below is a chart with the latest LM-2 reports from each local that can be found on the Department of Labor website.


As you can see, the IBT Local 769 was charted in 1966 and they have $1,471,497 dollars in assets and $700,000 in liabilities. The local has over 10,000 members and brings in roughly $5.5 million in dues a year, so after 46 years in business they have less than 2 months of dues in the bank excluding liabilities. Now compare that to AMFA Local 11 who was charted in 2003 and have $1,259,011 dollars in assets and $1,106 in liabilities. Local 11 has less than 900 members and brings in roughly $500,000 in dues a year, so after 10 years in business they have managed to put away more than 2 years worth of dues including liabilities. If you had a choice where to invest your dues money which Local would you choose?





Gentlemen, we have all seen what happens when you give your money to a bloated industrial union like the TWU. These self-important self-appointed leaders line their pockets with our dues, appoint their friends and family, and sell us out to the company at every turn. If you look at the Teamsters LM-2, you will find that the they have many times the self-appointed leaders compared to the Twu,. While it is true they bring in millions because of their size, almost all of it gets blown on overpaid yes men and election politics. Very little if any will be put away to support the members, but a select few will get rich. Under AMFA your money will be spent on you by the leaders you directly elect and can recall if you choose.



Pay lower dues and feel secure in knowing your dues will not be wasted on some fat cat. Make a Change that will Make a Difference for all of us.

If you were to break it down to how much dues money is spent per member it is overwhelming. Plus with all these comparisons the teamsters dues coming in are 2.5 times base plus premiums and shift diff. with AMFA it is 2.0 times base AND ONLY BASE.
Huge difference on how the monies are distributed out to all the officers and international union leaders. AMFA focusses their monies on the membership and related issues, NOT the over paid salaries of all the officers and above union officials. Just compare the $150,000.00 teamsters list of people being paid by your union dues, and the entire list of all AMFA union salaries. Roll your eyes all you want to Anomaly, the plain truth and proof speaks for itself.

 

[swamt]

Anomaly, we all know you want to "eat your young" in order to keep the teamsters at UAL and get the teamsters in at AA. The latter of the two will NOT happen. The UAL guys were duped into voting the teamsters in at UAL. The teamsters are pulling their same lies, mis-truths, promicing the world, and to add to all this forgery and fraud during the card drive. Pathetic when you have to lower yourself to forgery and fraud to get in at an airline. And let's not forget about the teamsters past illegal activities known thru-out the world. You may as well give it up about the teamsters getting in at AA. They have blown it themselves just like the TWU has. In May there will be an announcement that AMFA is filing for a representational election at AA. With the recent actions and illegal activity by the teamsters, and the recent threats from the TWU stating that the members will fore-go their 4.3% raise as well as, their portion of the 4.8% equity stake, those two unions are history at AA. Both groups were outstanding AMFA card drive supporters to say the least. I have added the letter from Mr. Seham concerning the NMB stance on the TWU threat, as well as promices the teamsters made to you UAL guys and now AA guys, happy reading:

March 25, 2013


Mr. Don Rodgers
AMFA-AA Organizing Committee



Re: Threats of Economic Retaliation



Dear Mr. Rodgers:


You have brought to our attention that the TWU has engaged in intimations of economic retaliation by American Airlines and/or the TWU in response to an effort by the Mechanics and Related Employees to change their representation. These threats reportedly related to both contractual wage increases and the distribution of the 4.8% equity stake.


We consider these threats to be unlawful and that, furthermore, any effort to fulfill such threats would subject American and/or the TWU to enormous potential liability.


Contractual Wage Increases

The Railway Labor Act prohibits any effort by a carrier to "influence or coerce employees in an effort to induce them to join or remain or not to join or remain members of any labor organization." 45 U.S.C. 152, Fourth. Significantly, the federal judiciary has held that a change in union representatives does not alter the employees' existing contractual rights.

Nevertheless, in a Q&A published March 14, 2013, the TWU shamelessly asserts that "the New American will have a strong argument" that negotiated wage increases would not be payable to those employees who decided to change unions.

We say "shamelessly," not just because the TWU is wrong, but because, when the IBT made an analogous argument - i.e., that the IBT would have the automatic right to reopen an existing TWU-negotiated CBA - the TWU effectively blasted the IBT propaganda as a lie. The TWU correctly informed its members that, under federal law, a successor union steps into the contractual shoes of its predecessor.

So who is lying now? Federal courts and the National Mediation Board provide the answer.

The federal courts have consistently held that a change in union representation does not change existing contractual right and obligations. See Association of Flight Attendants v. USAir, Inc., 807 F. Supp. 827 (D.D.C. 1992), aff'd, 146 L.R.R.M. 2534 (D.C. Cir. 1994); Air Transp. Employees v. Western Airlines, 105 L.R.R.M. 3004, 3008 (C.D. Cal 1980); International Ass'n of Machinists v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 843 F.2d 1119, 1123 n.5 (8th Cir. 1988), vacated as moot, 854 F.2d 1088 (8th Cir. 1988); Order of Ry. Conducts & Brakemen v. Switchmen's Union of North America, 269 F.2d 726, 730 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 899 (1959).

The National Mediation Board has also repeatedly recognized the principle of contractual continuity. In 1935, the Board wrote:


When there is an agreement in effect between a carrier and its employees signed by one set of representatives and employees choose new representatives who are certified by the Board, the Board has taken the position that a change in representation does not alter or cancel any existing agreement made in behalf of the employees by their previous representatives. The only effect of a certification by the Board is that the employees have chosen other agents to represent them in dealing with the management under the existing agreement.


First Annual Report of the National Mediation Board at 23-24 (1935) (emphasis supplied). In 1976, the Board further explained:



The purpose of such a policy is to emphasize a principle of the Railway Labor Act that
agreements are between the employees and the carrier....


Forty-Second Annual Report of the National Mediation Board at 39 (1976) (emphasis supplied).

The Board's position was reaffirmed on June 7, 1994 by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which cited the "well-established principle that a mere change of representatives does not alter otherwise applicable contractual agreements." Association of Flight Attendants, 24 F.3d at 1438.

Equity Stake

Interestingly enough, the TWU refrains from making a similar economic threat regarding the distribution of the 4.8% equity stake. With respect to these monies, the TWU's March 14 Q&A indicates that, even with a change of union representation: "Mechanics and Related, as a class or craft, will receive an appropriate share of this equity." Nevertheless, we understand that TWU representatives have been making oral threats that the TWU might withhold the Mechanics' share of equity stake in retaliation for their support of alternative union representation.

The TWU's written commitment to provide Mechanics and Related Employees an "appropriate share" of the equity undoubtedly reflects its awareness that the Railway Labor Act prohibits a labor union from stripping employees of contractual benefits based on their preference for alternative union representation. See, Ramey v. International Association of Machinists, 378 F.2d 269 (2nd Cir. 2004) (IAM liable for damages and attorneys fees where it seniority integration decisions regarding USAir Shuttle Mechanics were based on its animus toward these mechanics based on their advocacy for AMFA); Teamsters Local Union No. 42 v. NLRB, 825 F.2d 608, 612 (1st Cir. 1987) ("When a union attempts to prefer [on group of] workers based solely on [their loyalty to their guild]," it has breached its duty of fair representation).

We do not believe that the oral threats that have been made, in conflict with the TWU's written commitment, will be fulfilled. Moreover, we can assure you that any effort to cheat the AA Mechanics and Related Employees of their contractual rights will meet with an aggressive litigation response.

Sincerely,






Lee Seham

Only facts here

 

[Anomaly]

@swamt,

Who pays your union officers?

 

[swamt]

@swamt,

Who pays your union officers?

The same as all unions. Why do you ask?

 

[Anomaly]

That's not a real answer now is it. Let me try a different way. Your union may have one, maybe two, full time international officers who are paid by the members and not "pinched" by any represented corporation. Who pays your Local 11 officers? I ask because I heard they are paid by the company and as current and active employees would be subject to those company rules and policies. Is this correct? I am asking the question, not jumping to conclusions.

 

[Anomaly]

@ swamt,

Your posts and soap box is directed to the wrong page and group. Try a company with an active campaign. As I have pointed out to you many times before, other than a mention on your national page, there is no active campaign at UA. What you have are disgruntled former amfa leaders who were not accepted for jobs with the IBT.

Let me explain something to you as you DO NOT work for UAL. We left amfa because collectively we were not satisfied with the representation we were promised by the association. Plain and simple, it took only 5 years for us to realize the mistake we made. This includes many former leaders who are now in IBT positions. You may believe that SWA mechanics are the only wrench turners capable of intelligent thought, but like so many of your conclusions, this one too is poorly considered.

For a comparison of our two unions, why don't we take a look at real ongoing situations rather than political conjecture? How about the subject of negotiations?

According to the updates from both of our representatives, amfa at SWA has come to agreements in principal in only four articles (12, 26, 27, and 28). Meanwhile, the Teamsters have concluded discussions in 18 articles (2 thru 14, 17 thru 21). Despite being so far ahead of you, your talks started months before our group did, and amfa has many many fewer representatives on the negotiating team.

You might make the argument that we are in expedited negotiations at the request of UA due to the recent merger with Continental, but didn’t SWA merge with another airline also? It is in both our companies’ best interests to reach an amalgamated (combined) agreement with all the represented work groups as soon as possible. But why is your company dragging out the proceedings? Could it be your association has no real power or influence with either the company or the NMB?

The examples and realities of these negotiations are telling. Our IBT negotiators (rank and file are included by the way and not simply officers or area reps as with amfa) are in Chicago as I write this preparing WITH THE COMPANY for the next phase of our negotiations, economics. We have been averaging about three weeks of negotiattions a month vs your occasional 4 days a month. If all remains on track, and it looks like all is well so far, I expect our union will be on schedule with providing a TA for the rest of us to look at within a couple of months. You will be lucky to see economic discussions within a couple of years at the pace you are moving.

Get off your high horse with those BS promises and campaign rhetoric slogans and take a look at the world in real life. While you do this, please understand; the mechanics at UA are doing OK for the moment. There may be an occasion when we might contemplate changing unions for a third time, but that time certainly is not now. We are making gains and would like to continue doing so. We will, if you simply keep your association garbage within the two(2) airlines you represent.

 

[swamt]

@ swamt,

Your posts and soap box is directed to the wrong page and group. Try a company with an active campaign. As I have pointed out to you many times before, other than a mention on your national page, there is no active campaign at UA. What you have are disgruntled former amfa leaders who were not accepted for jobs with the IBT.

Let me explain something to you as you DO NOT work for UAL. We left amfa because collectively we were not satisfied with the representation we were promised by the association. Plain and simple, it took only 5 years for us to realize the mistake we made. This includes many former leaders who are now in IBT positions. You may believe that SWA mechanics are the only wrench turners capable of intelligent thought, but like so many of your conclusions, this one too is poorly considered.

For a comparison of our two unions, why don't we take a look at real ongoing situations rather than political conjecture? How about the subject of negotiations?

According to the updates from both of our representatives, amfa at SWA has come to agreements in principal in only four articles (12, 26, 27, and 28). Meanwhile, the Teamsters have concluded discussions in 18 articles (2 thru 14, 17 thru 21). Despite being so far ahead of you, your talks started months before our group did, and amfa has many many fewer representatives on the negotiating team.

You might make the argument that we are in expedited negotiations at the request of UA due to the recent merger with Continental, but didn’t SWA merge with another airline also? It is in both our companies’ best interests to reach an amalgamated (combined) agreement with all the represented work groups as soon as possible. But why is your company dragging out the proceedings? Could it be your association has no real power or influence with either the company or the NMB?

The examples and realities of these negotiations are telling. Our IBT negotiators (rank and file are included by the way and not simply officers or area reps as with amfa) are in Chicago as I write this preparing WITH THE COMPANY for the next phase of our negotiations, economics. We have been averaging about three weeks of negotiattions a month vs your occasional 4 days a month. If all remains on track, and it looks like all is well so far, I expect our union will be on schedule with providing a TA for the rest of us to look at within a couple of months. You will be lucky to see economic discussions within a couple of years at the pace you are moving.

Get off your high horse with those BS promises and campaign rhetoric slogans and take a look at the world in real life. While you do this, please understand; the mechanics at UA are doing OK for the moment. There may be an occasion when we might contemplate changing unions for a third time, but that time certainly is not now. We are making gains and would like to continue doing so. We will, if you simply keep your association garbage within the two(2) airlines you represent.

I don't care who is paying local officers or National officers. All of them receive a check from SWA every payday. However, the company and/or the union is reimbursed any monies legally due to them per Cat 1-5.
I have already addressed the difference in teamsters nego's tactics (as we have already experienced it ourselves first hand) and the way AMFA nego's. AMFA is still repairing the damages and grey areas the teamsters left behind, they are going article by article, line by line to make corrections and clarification. Once again SWA's integration with AT is completed. Is yours at UAL? AMFA is bringing in 4 new groups to the contract, their language is being drafted from the start. We (the membership) are in no hurry. They can take as long as they like, if need be.
Anomaly, you can stop trying to find some sort of flaw within AMFA. It is obvious you are stretching and searching hard for something. You have constantly been proven wrong thru-out these threads and forums. All the lies, mis-truths and complete fabrications you have posted has givin the forums posters "0" credibility with you and your postings. Good luck in the future with your teamster representation, your going to need it.

 

[WNMECH]

@ swamt,

Your posts and soap box is directed to the wrong page and group. Try a company with an active campaign. As I have pointed out to you many times before, other than a mention on your national page, there is no active campaign at UA. What you have are disgruntled former amfa leaders who were not accepted for jobs with the IBT.

Let me explain something to you as you DO NOT work for UAL. We left amfa because collectively we were not satisfied with the representation we were promised by the association. Plain and simple, it took only 5 years for us to realize the mistake we made. This includes many former leaders who are now in IBT positions. You may believe that SWA mechanics are the only wrench turners capable of intelligent thought, but like so many of your conclusions, this one too is poorly considered.

For a comparison of our two unions, why don't we take a look at real ongoing situations rather than political conjecture? How about the subject of negotiations?

According to the updates from both of our representatives, amfa at SWA has come to agreements in principal in only four articles (12, 26, 27, and 28). Meanwhile, the Teamsters have concluded discussions in 18 articles (2 thru 14, 17 thru 21). Despite being so far ahead of you, your talks started months before our group did, and amfa has many many fewer representatives on the negotiating team.

You might make the argument that we are in expedited negotiations at the request of UA due to the recent merger with Continental, but didn’t SWA merge with another airline also? It is in both our companies’ best interests to reach an amalgamated (combined) agreement with all the represented work groups as soon as possible. But why is your company dragging out the proceedings? Could it be your association has no real power or influence with either the company or the NMB?

The examples and realities of these negotiations are telling. Our IBT negotiators (rank and file are included by the way and not simply officers or area reps as with amfa) are in Chicago as I write this preparing WITH THE COMPANY for the next phase of our negotiations, economics. We have been averaging about three weeks of negotiattions a month vs your occasional 4 days a month. If all remains on track, and it looks like all is well so far, I expect our union will be on schedule with providing a TA for the rest of us to look at within a couple of months. You will be lucky to see economic discussions within a couple of years at the pace you are moving.

Get off your high horse with those BS promises and campaign rhetoric slogans and take a look at the world in real life. While you do this, please understand; the mechanics at UA are doing OK for the moment. There may be an occasion when we might contemplate changing unions for a third time, but that time certainly is not now. We are making gains and would like to continue doing so. We will, if you simply keep your association garbage within the two(2) airlines you represent.

Since you posted this same claim on another forum thread, I will post my same response.

You answered you own question.
The IBT and UAL agreeed to expedited negotiations at the company's request I do believe.

You assume too much in your attempt to talk down AMFA. If we wanted more days, or wanted expidited negotiations, then we would ask for them. We settled the most important items to the AirTran guys already with our SLI and transition agreements.
They are on our seniority list and making our industry leading wages wages now.
The only reason that was not settled sooner was because the IBT would not come to the table and didn't return phone calls for a year.

When does your combined seniority list start and when do the furloughed UAL get brought back?

It seems to me you should be in more of a rush to finish your SLI and protect your laid off guys than worrying about when SWA guys get their next raise. We just got one in August.


We know the IBT. The last contract before we voted them away took around 2 years to reach.
And at that time there was no merger or addition of new work categories to our contract.

 

[Anomaly]

@ WNMECH

Step kick turn, step kick turn.
Shuffle shuffle bow.

You are a great dancer, but keep up the two step shuffle with swamt and eventually one of you will step on the others toes.

 

[WNMECH]

@ WNMECH

Step kick turn, step kick turn.
Shuffle shuffle bow.

You are a great dancer, but keep up the two step shuffle with swamt and eventually one of you will step on the others toes.

Right.
While you are spinning like a ballerina.

Now how about you point out anything I just said as untrue.

Spin ballerina, spin.

 

[Anomaly]

The Teamster and TWU are always quick to say that AMFA has no money and we thought you should see a comparison of two large locals within each union to see if there is any merit to their claims. Below is a chart with the latest LM-2 reports from each local that can be found on the Department of Labor website.


As you can see, the IBT Local 769 was charted in 1966 and they have $1,471,497 dollars in assets and $700,000 in liabilities. The local has over 10,000 members and brings in roughly $5.5 million in dues a year, so after 46 years in business they have less than 2 months of dues in the bank excluding liabilities. Now compare that to AMFA Local 11 who was charted in 2003 and have $1,259,011 dollars in assets and $1,106 in liabilities. Local 11 has less than 900 members and brings in roughly $500,000 in dues a year, so after 10 years in business they have managed to put away more than 2 years worth of dues including liabilities. If you had a choice where to invest your dues money which Local would you choose?

I don't care who is paying local officers or National officers. All of them receive a check from SWA every payday. However, the company and/or the union is reimbursed any monies legally due to them per Cat 1-5.

You appear to have little understanding of assets and liabilities, but if you would have provided a link to your explained information perhaps some of us could have taken a look for ourselves and helped you out? According to your brief explanation, amfa spent only $1,100 and some change in service to the members for a whole year? This is another way to look at the report. This is terrible considering the salaries of all the representatives are paid for by SWA.

I for one still have a problem with having the leadership paid by the company they are charged to oversee. Kind of a conflict of interest if you ask me?? Besides that, all the money that is given to subsidize the salaries of union officials is taken away from the pool of money that would have gone to the members. You say that dues dollars in amfa are less, but when you consider the amount that goes towards the leadership instead of the members, the deficit narrows.

For the sake of argument, let’s say all of your theories are correct, and amfa has loads of income. Where then is your money spent?? Surely it is not in the future of amfa as you have no organizing department. Certainly it is not in the future of your members as you have NO STRIKE FUND. Is all your money then spent on the Sueham lawyers who have found their cash cow in your group? You do realize that they make a killing representing amfa? They certainly made out well with their part in the Northwest fiasco.

I have already addressed the difference in teamsters nego's tactics (as we have already experienced it ourselves first hand) and the way AMFA nego's. AMFA is still repairing the damages and grey areas the teamsters left behind, they are going article by article, line by line to make corrections and clarification. Once again SWA's integration with AT is completed. Is yours at UAL? AMFA is bringing in 4 new groups to the contract, their language is being drafted from the start. We (the membership) are in no hurry..
Anomaly, you can stop trying to find some sort of flaw within AMFA. It is obvious you are stretching and searching hard for something. You have constantly been proven wrong thru-out these threads and forums. All the lies, mis-truths and complete fabrications you have posted has givin the forums posters "0" credibility with you and your postings. Good luck in the future with your teamster representation, your going to need it.

You side stepped the differences in negotiations and refuse to recognize the progress of the IBT. Just as you refuse to recognize or admit it was the Teamsters who had given you your industry leading contract. SWA mechanics had enjoyed this top tier for many years under the Teamsters. You all simply chose to extend the lead by selling off work to El Salvador. Now that SWA apparently has some different plans for your group, how do you like that decision now?

To be clear, you managed to come to an agreement in the Airtran seniority integration with the help of the Teamsters. You refuse to recognize that the IBT had a major part in this as the outgoing representatives of Airtran mechanics. You also refuse to admit that it was in our side’s best interest to expedite the negotiations. SWA mechanics had nothing but time and were willing to delay the proceedings as long as needed in order to prevent fairness (but you don't want to get me started on that subject again). Simply stated, it was the Teamsters that created and paved the road to have your SLI transition agreement in the relatively short time it took. Did you forget that little fact? Please share this with WNMECH…. She forgot too

Perhaps you should take a look at your own airline page and read the answer to a question I asked. WNMECH very correctly answered that there is no forgone conclusion to the subject of retroactive payment. "It must be negotiated for each time" was the exact answer, and without very explicit language to the contrary, again WNMECH is correct. You claim that you do not care how long negotiations takes under amfa, but I would bet you will be saying differently if you get less than 100% retro 2 years from now. The RLA, unfortunately, is written to benefit the travel corporations and the fact that there is no expiration date or forced retroactive payment for overdue agreements supports this fact. In other words, I very seriously doubt your statement 'They can take as long as they like, if need be' is truthful.

I appreciate the wishes of good luck. I do not doubt that even with the Teamsters representing us a bit of luck could do some good. However, you should take a real look at your own situation. Your group could benefit from some luck as well. In this industry and economy, we are all targets for the corporations. As soon as you can wrap around this very real fact, you will learn that me or the Teamsters are NOT your enemy. We are all under attack and it will take a powerhouse and two miracles to protect our jobs and wages from going to some overseas country or outside interest. The Teamsters are easily the best union to come terms in the defense of airline mechanics. Why not, they protected your group for years. Remeber??

 

[Just Another BK]

US last BK Contract and subsequent TA had Furloughed Mechanic and Related after 5 Years coming back at the bottom of the pay scale ! Since the Company couldn't get enough new hires off the street to take the low starting wages in places like Philly, Bos, LGA and DCA they agreed to waive this clause and bring back at the wage scale they left which makes sense. Why would anyone deserve to get paid more after being furloughed for many years. That's old school language. That's why the Steel Industry collapsed. They had up 26 weeks of vacation at one time. Well guess what those employees and their Unions finally tipped the scales into Bankruptcy as well. Times change, either live with it or move on to some other line of work.

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

Why would anyone deserve to get paid more after being furloughed for many years. That's old school language. That's why the Steel Industry collapsed. They had up 26 weeks of vacation at one time. Well guess what those employees and their Unions finally tipped the scales into Bankruptcy as well. Times change, either live with it or move on to some other line of work.

You "deserve" what you negotiate. And to say the employees caused the collapse of the steel industry is pure nonsense.

It takes two to make a contract. A company agrees to the terms in a contract. Of they cannot afford them, or it will "collapse" the company, then do not agree to give it away.

 

[brownmech]

The teamsters are a scab union. Scabsters. Aka.....teamsters
Yes, they have former Continental airlines scabs acting as business agents.
They are selling out the United Airlines Mechanics.
The teamsters made many promises they haven't kept just to win representation and
They are using the same tactics to win over the American Airlines Mechanics.
Now I know why Southwest Mechanics kick out the scabsters.
Speak to Ual Mechaics and listen to them.
AA Mechanics , don't make the same mistake as Ual Mechanics.