Teamsters "raiding" TWU?

[Anomaly]

In contrast, TWU after taking industry leading concessions in 2003 for 9 years, just lost the pensions, retirement medical, and 35% outsourcing, along with thousands fo jobs lost.


Great job?

As did virtually every other airline that has gone through bankruptcy since the fall of the CAB. But narrow visioned folks like you will continue to blame the union for the failures of the company.

Maybe extending the SWA agreement in 2004 compared to what the TWU did was a damn smart move.

Great job?

Like MOST other airlines, AA was not profitable at that time. amfa had a chance to seize on an opportunity, but instead they failed to recognize it if the rant from swamt about 2001 is truthful. He states all swa like all other airlines in 2004 was crying poor after the 2001 industry melt down, but after reading the 10K report from the SEC filings, it sure appears as if there was a different story. The Teamsters would not make this mistake. Besides the fact that amfa does not have an organizing department, you do not have a research department either. We have that with the Teamsters and more. We have research and strategies departments that do nothing but pour over the annual and financial reports of the companies we have contracts with. When we are ready to negotiate, WE KNOW if the company is telling us the truth or not.

Here again is my unanswered response to swamt's claim that WN was loosing money. See if you can figure it out. Apparently he could not.

On the subject of amfa's choice to extend the 2004 agreement rather than negotiate it as promised during the earlier campaign;

At year end in 2004 Southwest had 417 aircraft and provided service to 60 airports in 31 states and they wanted to continue growing. Operating revenues were up 10% over 2003 and SWA enjoyed a profit of $313 million for the year. Southwest had contractual obligations and commitments primarily with regard to future purchases of aircraft, payment of debt, and lease arrangements. Along with the receipt of 47 new 737-700 aircraft in 2004 (one of which was leased), the Company exercised its remaining options for aircraft to be delivered in 2005, and several more options for aircraft to be delivered in 2006.

The following two sites are WN's 2004 presentation to stockholders and employees and the second one is their actual 10K Securities Exchange Commission filings.

http://www.airtimes....t/ar/wn2004.pdf
http://www.getfiling...-05-002093.html

swamt, you were apparently mislead in to believing that amfa did something for you, but all along your airline was extending your contract so it could purchase more aircraft among other things.

In fourth quarter 2004, Southwest was selected as the winning bidder at a bankruptcy-court approved auction for certain ATA Airlines, Inc. (ATA) assets. As part of the transaction, which was approved in December 2004, Southwest agreed to pay $40 million for certain ATA assets, consisting of the rights to six of ATA’s leased Chicago Midway Airport gates and the rights to a leased aircraft maintenance hangar at Chicago Midway Airport. An initial payment of $34 million in December 2004 is classified as an intangible asset and is included in “Other assets” in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. In addition, Southwest provided ATA with $40 million in debtor-in-possession financing while ATA remains in bankruptcy, and has also guaranteed the repayment of an ATA construction loan to the City of Chicago for $7 million. And there is more...

Fuel hedging created a gain in 2004 of $455 million and there was a smaller gain of $13 million due to company reorganizing.

Do you want to know how much your officers, board of directors and CEO made during the year amfa extended your contract?

I offer you the sites to check it out for yourself.

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

As this thread's title states why can't the twu diehards acknowledge the teamsters are raiding their beloved twu? Why can't the twu diehards acknowledge the teamsters are the same as the twu?

Go AMFA!

 

[swamt]

But you are working under an extended IBT contract. AMFA did not negotiate your wages, but they did extend them in exchange for outsourcing work to El Salvador. Nice job.

I have never stated that AMFA dId not extend. Again I will ask, what did all the other airlines do wIth their first contract after 9-11?? What has your airline done since 9-11?? Once again, I'll take an extension over anything the teamsters and TWU have nego over the last 10 years combined...

 

[Anomaly]

I have never stated that AMFA dId not extend. Again I will ask, what did all the other airlines do wIth their first contract after 9-11?? What has your airline done since 9-11?? Once again, I'll take an extension over anything the teamsters and TWU have nego over the last 10 years combined...

But one of the many amfa promises is to NEGOTIATE strong contracts, right? Extending is not a definition of negotiations. amfa extended at Alaska as well. Alaska too, is profitable. The point you are so cleverly trying to evade, is the speculation and indeed the reputation that amfa is very weak in negotiating contracts. If push comes to shove, as was the case in 2004 with WN, amfa has proven it's leadership will fold and take the extend option. What happened to that fighting spirit?

There is no argument on how bad the other airlines were doing, or how poorly the unions at ALL these airlines responded. Southwest, again, was not in this position. Of most/all the airlines during this period, only Southwest MADE A REAL PROFIT. Instead of negotiating a contract at a time that they could have really shined and showed some stuff, amfa folded. If the IBT had done that you would have been plastering it all over the boards, and rightly so.

This is one of my complaints about these amfa drives. The hype of people like you who see no fault in what your union does and are so willing to excuse their shortcomings, and those like Informer who have never been an active member of amfa and mix reality with self contrived campaign promises, do no favors for your fellow workers.

As mechanics, our natural tendencies are to fix what is broken and because of who we are, we choose to fix it ourselves. This is the appeal with amfa and the fabrication you sell. You use hyperbole in creating scenarios that either never existed or fall far below expectations. At the end of the day, amfa members are left with imagining excuses on why their association did not measure up, or they simply become disconnected and give up on unions in general. We see what category you are in.

Please do not continue with the 9-11 excuse because I proved it did not exist with amfa in 2004. Just answer: does amfa really have the drive and resources to enter in to contentious or difficult negotiations? Because that will be the stage at AA,

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

But one of the many amfa promises is to NEGOTIATE strong contracts, right? Extending is not a definition of negotiations. amfa extended at Alaska as well. Alaska too, is profitable. The point you are so cleverly trying to evade, is the speculation and indeed the reputation that amfa is very weak in negotiating contracts. If push comes to shove, as was the case in 2004 with WN, amfa has proven it's leadership will fold and take the extend option. What happened to that fighting spirit?

There is no argument on how bad the other airlines were doing, or how poorly the unions at ALL these airlines responded. Southwest, again, was not in this position. Of most/all the airlines during this period, only Southwest MADE A REAL PROFIT. Instead of negotiating a contract at a time that they could have really shined and showed some stuff, amfa folded. If the IBT had done that you would have been plastering it all over the boards, and rightly so.

This is one of my complaints about these amfa drives. The hype of people like you who see no fault in what your union does and are so willing to excuse their shortcomings, and those like Informer who have never been an active member of amfa and mix reality with self contrived campaign promises, do no favors for your fellow workers.

As mechanics, our natural tendencies are to fix what is broken and because of who we are, we choose to fix it ourselves. This is the appeal with amfa and the fabrication you sell. You use hyperbole in creating scenarios that either never existed or fall far below expectations. At the end of the day, amfa members are left with imagining excuses on why their association did not measure up, or they simply become disconnected and give up on unions in general. We see what category you are in.

Please do not continue with the 9-11 excuse because I proved it did not exist with amfa in 2004. Just answer: does amfa really have the drive and resources to enter in to contentious or difficult negotiations? Because that will be the stage at AA,

You use the word fabrication. That's good because the twu fabricated democracy to benefit a select few sellouts NOT the membership.

The twu fabricated slogans to replace a real desire to protect our craft.

The twu fabricated an alliance with the teamsters to attempt to fend of AMFA.

And best of all the twu fabricates people who must hide behind an alias whenever they try to promote the twu.

Go AMFA!

 

[Anomaly]

You use the word fabrication. That's good because the twu fabricated democracy to benefit a select few sellouts NOT the membership.

The twu fabricated slogans to replace a real desire to protect our craft.

The twu fabricated an alliance with the teamsters to attempt to fend of AMFA.

And best of all the twu fabricates people who must hide behind an alias whenever they try to promote the twu.

Go AMFA!

Slogans..... ? Considering amfa's desire to extend contracts instead of negotiate for improvements, here is a new amfa slogan you can relate to.

“Status Quo or worse is the road to airline profitability.” go amfa???

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

Slogans..... ? Considering amfa's desire to extend contracts instead of negotiate for improvements, here is a new amfa slogan you can relate to.

“Status Quo or worse is the road to airline profitability.”

I'll match that with...
"We're the twu and we bastardized democracy so a select few can drink from the "Black Chalice of Greed" while the membership lives under concessions as we wrap ourselves warmly with unaccountability. Our dedication to fighting FOR the membership is replaced with fighting AGAINST the membership which comes along with our 3X what our members earn."

A little lengthy but I'm sure if placed on a t-shirt there is someone in the international who could wear it.

Go AMFA!

 

[swamt]

But one of the many amfa promises is to NEGOTIATE strong contracts, right? Extending is not a definition of negotiations. amfa extended at Alaska as well. Alaska too, is profitable. The point you are so cleverly trying to evade, is the speculation and indeed the reputation that amfa is very weak in negotiating contracts. If push comes to shove, as was the case in 2004 with WN, amfa has proven it's leadership will fold and take the extend option. What happened to that fighting spirit?

There is no argument on how bad the other airlines were doing, or how poorly the unions at ALL these airlines responded. Southwest, again, was not in this position. Of most/all the airlines during this period, only Southwest MADE A REAL PROFIT. Instead of negotiating a contract at a time that they could have really shined and showed some stuff, amfa folded. If the IBT had done that you would have been plastering it all over the boards, and rightly so.

This is one of my complaints about these amfa drives. The hype of people like you who see no fault in what your union does and are so willing to excuse their shortcomings, and those like Informer who have never been an active member of amfa and mix reality with self contrived campaign promises, do no favors for your fellow workers.

As mechanics, our natural tendencies are to fix what is broken and because of who we are, we choose to fix it ourselves. This is the appeal with amfa and the fabrication you sell. You use hyperbole in creating scenarios that either never existed or fall far below expectations. At the end of the day, amfa members are left with imagining excuses on why their association did not measure up, or they simply become disconnected and give up on unions in general. We see what category you are in.

Please do not continue with the 9-11 excuse because I proved it did not exist with amfa in 2004. Just answer: does amfa really have the drive and resources to enter in to contentious or difficult negotiations? Because that will be the stage at AA,

REPEAT: I would rather take an extension than what all the other unions provided for their members since and prior to 9-11 COMBINED.
You Damn right AMFA has the resources and drive to enter into difficult nego's. It will be more like, will the AA members be ready to hold out for a difficult contract? Your membership has already shown how easily they cave to concessions, not only in 2013, but also in 2003, 1993, and 1983.
For you to tell me that 9-11 didn't effect us is BS. It effected all airlines. And yes it had a direct effect during nego's. Just like your union's current concessions agreement with AA has a direct effect on us as well. Just because SWA was able to stay profitable before, during, after and since 9-11 doesn't mean we were not greatly effected.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

This is one of my complaints about these amfa drives. The hype of people like you who see no fault in what your union does and are so willing to excuse their shortcomings,

Ironic that you chide AMFA supporters when you are guilty of the shortsightedness you yourself describe when it comes to teamsters campaign drives/promises.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

swamt, I have a question for you...

At SWA, did AMFA force you into an extension or did the members make the choice?

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

TWU informer, on 20 October 2012 - 09:35 AM, said:

In contrast, TWU after taking industry leading concessions in 2003 for 9 years, just lost the pensions, retirement medical, and 35% outsourcing, along with thousands fo jobs lost.


Great job?

As did virtually every other airline that has gone through bankruptcy since the fall of the CAB. But narrow visioned folks like you will continue to blame the union for the failures of the company.

Right, so as AMFA never negotiated in section 6 at UAL, by your own reasoning above, you are just as narrow visioned as you continue to blame AMFA at UAL.

Hypocrite

 

[swamt]

Slogans..... ? Considering amfa's desire to extend contracts instead of negotiate for improvements, here is a new amfa slogan you can relate to.

“Status Quo or worse is the road to airline profitability.” go amfa???

Again Anomaly, What did your union get it's members for the fist contract after 9-11? Was it an improvement? No. Was it an extension? Yes, "an extention of concessions". Was it concesionary? Yes it was.

Now, did AMFA's first contract after 9-11 provide improvements? Yes, we continued to receive raises for an extension of time. Was it an extension? Yes it was with raises. Was it concesionary? Hell no it was not. Plus, there was no lay-offs, rifs, or station reductions anywhere. Can you say that about your current union or the IBT? No, you cannot!!! Carry on sir.

 

[swamt]

swamt, I have a question for you...

At SWA, did AMFA force you into an extension or did the members make the choice?

Company ran an extention by the nego team, they said they would have to ask the membership. After surveying the membership thru several meetings and Q and A's the nego team told the company to bring one out for a vote.
The members voted on it and it passed. No. AMFA did not force us to take anything. AMFA did the right thing and asked the members what they wanted them to do. This was one of the main reasons we brought in AMFA after firing the teamsters in a record 2 weak card drive. I know your bored with that phrase but it just seems to roll so smoothly off the tongue. LOL...

 

[Anomaly]

Company ran an extention by the nego team, they said they would have to ask the membership. After surveying the membership thru several meetings and Q and A's the nego team told the company to bring one out for a vote.
The members voted on it and it passed. No. AMFA did not force us to take anything. AMFA did the right thing and asked the members what they wanted them to do. This was one of the main reasons we brought in AMFA after firing the teamsters in a record 2 weak card drive. I know your bored with that phrase but it just seems to roll so smoothly off the tongue. LOL...

But what was told to them during these informational meetings? Was it negative scare tactics about the plight of the industry since 9-11 and extensions were the best options? In 2004, WN had made a profit of more than $300 Million, ordered dozens of new aircraft and enjoyed fuel savings it was able to reinvest which totaled more than $450 million. Just answer yes or no to this; did amfa explain all this to the members?

After learning of such a financially stable company platform, I would not have voted for an extension nor suggested one.

Again Anomaly, What did your union get it's members for the fist contract after 9-11? Was it an improvement? No. Was it an extension? Yes, "an extention of concessions". Was it concesionary? Yes it was.

Now, did AMFA's first contract after 9-11 provide improvements? Yes, we continued to receive raises for an extension of time. Was it an extension? Yes it was with raises. Was it concesionary? Hell no it was not. Plus, there was no lay-offs, rifs, or station reductions anywhere. Can you say that about your current union or the IBT? No, you cannot!!! Carry on sir.

You say there was no lay off's or rif's but at the same time attrition was allowed to play the course without replacement. Your mechanics per aircraft ratio continued to go down in order to accomplish outsourcing maintenance to South America. Many of us consider this the same thing as a lay off.

 

[Anomaly]

Right, so as AMFA never negotiated in section 6 at UAL, by your own reasoning above, you are just as narrow visioned as you continue to blame AMFA at UAL.

Hypocrite

Wow.... what a stretch.