[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/8/2003 8

29 PM Tim Nelson wrote:
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/8/2003 12

04 PM diogenes wrote:
Plenty of finger-pointing to go around on this one.
1. Obviously, if the IAM were more responsive to the membership, and created an environment of open, honest debate, there would never be a successful drive to replace them.
2. I'd be careful about anointing AMFA the saviour. They generally pop out of the woodwork when the target union is going thru a rough patch, a la the IAM at UA. Didn't here a whole bunch about AMFA when UA and the IAM were riding high in the 90's. Moreover, I'd be extrememly concerned when the stated position of AMFA is everyone would be better off if UA went under. Sounds like AMFA's throwing a drowning UA an anchor.Lastly, I don't see AMFA, or anyone else being able to do any better in this climate. Look how mighty ALPA is getting b***h-slapped at US.
3. Lastly, even if AMFA is the cat's pajamas, the timing sucks...........if you want UA to survive.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Diogenes,
I think your judgement on ALPA might be premature. At any rate, a few points on your comments.
1. A few months ago, we were led to believe that the judge had horns that go all the way to the ceiling. The end result was misinformation and fear.
On the other hand, we see how ALPA went to the judge, and the judge ruled in ALPA's favor in its main objection to the US AIRWAYS position. So now, ALPA forced an arbitrator to decide the pension issue.
For that I must applaud the ALPA members for taking the case to the judge instead of coiling up in the fetus position.
At any rate, it is premature to make a final judgement on ALPA and how they will make out with all this. We know that going in, US AIRWAYS wanted to fund only $850 million in a new pension over 7 years.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the fruit of negotiaitons boost the funding up to over $1 billion dollars. There is plenty of wiggle room for US AIRWAYS on the back end of the 7 year period. After all, they project hundreds of millions in net profit after the next 18 months.
2. The timing sucks if you want United to survive???
Exactly how will a union petition tank United?
----------------
[/blockquote]
------------------------------------------
Hi Tim,
Sorry I missed the post;been away for awhile.
Briefly, the AMFA petition at UA is deadly for one reason. It takes time, and UA doens't have any. All management has to do is say we are not going to negotiate with a group who's representation is in question; get back to us when you sort it out. Takes at least a year to decert/recert, and historically takes longer, and UA doesn't have a year. In the meantime, I'd guess contracts get abrogated.
I certainly support the right the workforce to choose/change their representation, but the timing could not be worse.
PITBull, you sure got my back, girl. Gracias, mi bonita amigo.