Dont you think everyone who is eligible has a right to vote if an election is to be held?
I feel that anyone who is eligible should be able to vote, where we dissagree is what makes someone "eligible".
If they are not even part of our contract group they should not be allowed to vote. The TWU stated that our combined contract group was around 16000 back in 2001. Figure that in any given year there is around a 5% rate of attrition, and AA has not been hiring replacements over the last few years so that drops the number by around 2300, so in reality the number should be around 14000, including those laid off.
By the way I thought that we took all those concessions to save jobs? Should we have given a liitle more to save everyone? What was the cutoff point? What made you decide what number of layoffs was acceptable and what was not? Could it be that the company just did as they pleased and you guys made up excuses around their actions hoping that no one would question you?
I feel that anyone who is eligible should be able to vote, where we dissagree is what makes someone "eligible".
If they are not even part of our contract group they should not be allowed to vote. The TWU stated that our combined contract group was around 16000 back in 2001. Figure that in any given year there is around a 5% rate of attrition, and AA has not been hiring replacements over the last few years so that drops the number by around 2300, so in reality the number should be around 14000, including those laid off.
By the way I thought that we took all those concessions to save jobs? Should we have given a liitle more to save everyone? What was the cutoff point? What made you decide what number of layoffs was acceptable and what was not? Could it be that the company just did as they pleased and you guys made up excuses around their actions hoping that no one would question you?