TWU and IAM representation alliance vote

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

here u go SWAMT

Just remember who had the idea. I thought about altering the logo... but with people like 700UW around......
 
🙂
 
Someone needs to paste this around TULE.
 

 

[TRAVIS]

Just remember who had the idea. I thought about altering the logo... but with people like 700UW around......
 
🙂
 
Someone needs to paste this around TULE.
 

It was a good idea.. I don't think AMFA will mind the color change. It looks good for a quick fix color change LOL

 

[TRAVIS]

WOULD LOOK REAL GOOD AS A BUMPER STICKER??????????????? YOU KNOW A CARD AND BUMPER STICKER ON THE WINDSHIELD OF ALL THE CARS IN THE PARKING LOTS IN PHX,DFW,CLT,PHL,PIT,MIA MIGHT BE A REAL GOOD IDEA........

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

It was a good idea.. I don't think AMFA will mind the color change. It looks good for a quick fix color change LOL

It sure does. Real clean. You did a great job.

 

[1AA]

Received this from my union the TWU this morning.  Pay attention to the underlined text and especially the RED underlined text. The union is not going to come out and tell you two things. That they themselves do NOT want the Association and utilize the "WRITE IN" option of a union of your choice. Care to guess what that union would be?
Their initials are.
 
A.M.F.A.
 
  
[SIZE=10pt]August 9, 2014[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]To the Membership,[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]Local 591 has received several phone calls regarding the vote for the “TWU/IAM Association.”  By now the membership should have seen the joint filing by TWU and IAM International’s, which speaks to their desire for the “Association.”[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]Of critical concern however is the unfortunate misinformation provided in a “Shop Steward Training letter,” written by Local 514’s Vice President, Gary Yingst, and Executive Board Member David Corbit.  This letter has also been posted on the Local 514 website and both mischaracterizes, and is causing confusion on how the National Mediation Board (NMB) would conduct the vote, by stating:  [/SIZE]“The Association vote will be the same as any representation vote if the Association isn’t voted in we would lose our current CBA.”  In addition, another rumor has surfaced that, “the NMB ballot will only have two options – either the “TWU/IAM Association” or “No Representation.”   Local 514’s letter and the rumors are not correct.
 
[SIZE=10pt]The first step in the process is the NMB will grant a “single carrier” ruling.  Once the single carrier ruling is awarded, several timed events take place.  First, there will be a period for an intervener to apply to be on the ballot, after that their will be an NMB sanctioned election.  As confirmed by the NMB, at the very least, the following options will be on the NMB ballot: “TWU/IAM Association,” “No Representation,” and [/SIZE]“Other” (where a member can write their choice for “Representation”) a named “Intervener” may also be placed onto the ballot if enough cards are submitted and accepted by the NMB.
 
[SIZE=10pt]To avoid additional confusion, the combined total for the “TWU/IAM Association,” “Other,” and “Intervener” (if there are any on the ballot) votes will count as “votes cast for Representation.” Only those votes for “No Representation” will be counted for an “open shop” or becoming an “at will employee” as referenced in the Yingst/Corbit letter.  So, as long as the total number of “Bargaining Representative” votes exceeds the “No Representation” votes cast, we will continue working under our collective bargaining agreement until a “New, Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement” is negotiated.[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]Since many of our Local 591 members may have read or received a copy of the Local 514 letter, I believe it unconscionable to leave the record “uncorrected.” My main reason for this letter is not to politicize or polarize the membership, but rather to make sure that the membership understands they have options, but a vote cast for “No Representation” is not in any of our collective best interests.  I have been told that some members feel that voting for “No Representation in protest” will prove a point to TWU, but in reality it will only hurt us as a “collective body.”[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]In closing, if you choose not to vote for the “Association” that is your right, I would strongly urge that you utilize the “other” option and write in a vote for “Representation” on the ballot. [/SIZE] As I expressed earlier, so long as the total votes “for Representation - including the “Association,” “Other,” and an “Intervener” (if any are on the ballot), exceeds the number of votes for “No Representation,” we will remain a union shop.  The individual perils of having “No Representation” are far more painful then the current TWU and IAM contracts that provide members with critical items such as,  “Limits on Outsourcing and Scope, Just Cause for Discipline, Seniority Rights, and Work Rules for a fair and equitable distribution of Overtime and Field Trips;” which all become management rights “without Representation.”   Once again, I urge you to challenge anyone who is pushing for “No Representation,” by considering the facts and outcome when given the opportunity to vote “For Representation” over “No Representation.”
 
[SIZE=10pt]As this process continues, Local 591 will continue to provide further detailed fact based information.  We urge you to submit your questions about this election through your elected representatives or the “contact us” tab on the local591.com website.  Local 591 will get you the answers.  We also encourage you to become familiar with the NMB Rules and Representation Manual, and have provided the links to both below.[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]http://www.nmb.gov/about-nmb/nmb-rules/[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]http://www.nmb.gov/documents/representation/representation-manual.pdf[/SIZE]
 
 
Reference: http://www.local591.com/index.cfm?zone=/unionactive/view_article.cfm&HomeID=442933

 

[WeAAsles]

Ok.  I think everyone is on the same page as far as how the NMB will rule on the filing by the TWU/IAM.  Will they have to take the 6 months to give the ruling decision?  I would think not, since they have done all the investigation for SC status.  Pretty sure there will be an answer sooner.   Not sure if the AMFA organizers will be able to collect enough cards in the time period that will be alotted.  After the announcement they will get 30 days as stated above.  I hate to say it but I would be will to bet an announcement within the 3rd Q.


I don't think anyone is on the same page as to how they will rule? I think that decision is highly unknown since the association formation under the merger scenario may be a first and could be subject to a decider for a vote being in either direction. Yes the two unions together hold 100% of the membership but the fact that because of it there would be representative changes for members could cast the decision for a vote being needed or required?
 
Thx for the update WeAAsles.  What is your thoughts on the time frame?  Do you think they will take the 6 months from filing to announcement?  Same company just different work groups and different unions applying for the very same SCS that they just spent 6 months investigating.  Or is there more to it that they still have to investigate the unions and all work groups covered.   Sorry for all the questions, but this kind of movements by unions and companies are all new to me.  It appears you will get your wish, I can only hope I am wrong, but I don't think there will be enough time, unless the US guys can come around as quickly as we did when we fired the teamsters.  They are a small enough group to do so and they really do want change.  Good luck to you all no matter the outcome...

swamt there's really no way of knowing? The APA decision took a pretty long time and that could be because the ALPA are not going along with the APA's game plan? Our situation is different since both unions have come together and so far have agreements in place without any major issues. 

As for getting my wish, that's up in the air. I could say it's 50/50 and it could go either way but I have no mole inside the NMB that could give me a feel to what the eventual outcome might be? All we can do is wait and see and try to read other decisions from the past to maybe get a gauge on it. Since the APFA and APA are currently ahead of us that could paint some kind of picture when those decisions are rendered?

 

[WeAAsles]

Received this from my union the TWU this morning.  Pay attention to the underlined text and especially the RED underlined text. The union is not going to come out and tell you two things. That they themselves do NOT want the Association and utilize the "WRITE IN" option of a union of your choice. Care to guess what that union would be?
Their initials are.
 
A.M.F.A.
 
  
[SIZE=10pt]August 9, 2014[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]To the Membership,[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]Local 591 has received several phone calls regarding the vote for the “TWU/IAM Association.”  By now the membership should have seen the joint filing by TWU and IAM International’s, which speaks to their desire for the “Association.”[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]Of critical concern however is the unfortunate misinformation provided in a “Shop Steward Training letter,” written by Local 514’s Vice President, Gary Yingst, and Executive Board Member David Corbit.  This letter has also been posted on the Local 514 website and both mischaracterizes, and is causing confusion on how the National Mediation Board (NMB) would conduct the vote, by stating:  [/SIZE]“The Association vote will be the same as any representation vote if the Association isn’t voted in we would lose our current CBA.”  In addition, another rumor has surfaced that, “the NMB ballot will only have two options – either the “TWU/IAM Association” or “No Representation.”   Local 514’s letter and the rumors are not correct.
 
[SIZE=10pt]The first step in the process is the NMB will grant a “single carrier” ruling.  Once the single carrier ruling is awarded, several timed events take place.  First, there will be a period for an intervener to apply to be on the ballot, after that their will be an NMB sanctioned election.  As confirmed by the NMB, at the very least, the following options will be on the NMB ballot: “TWU/IAM Association,” “No Representation,” and [/SIZE]“Other” (where a member can write their choice for “Representation”) a named “Intervener” may also be placed onto the ballot if enough cards are submitted and accepted by the NMB.
 
[SIZE=10pt]To avoid additional confusion, the combined total for the “TWU/IAM Association,” “Other,” and “Intervener” (if there are any on the ballot) votes will count as “votes cast for Representation.” Only those votes for “No Representation” will be counted for an “open shop” or becoming an “at will employee” as referenced in the Yingst/Corbit letter.  So, as long as the total number of “Bargaining Representative” votes exceeds the “No Representation” votes cast, we will continue working under our collective bargaining agreement until a “New, Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement” is negotiated.[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]Since many of our Local 591 members may have read or received a copy of the Local 514 letter, I believe it unconscionable to leave the record “uncorrected.” My main reason for this letter is not to politicize or polarize the membership, but rather to make sure that the membership understands they have options, but a vote cast for “No Representation” is not in any of our collective best interests.  I have been told that some members feel that voting for “No Representation in protest” will prove a point to TWU, but in reality it will only hurt us as a “collective body.”[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]In closing, if you choose not to vote for the “Association” that is your right, I would strongly urge that you utilize the “other” option and write in a vote for “Representation” on the ballot. [/SIZE] As I expressed earlier, so long as the total votes “for Representation - including the “Association,” “Other,” and an “Intervener” (if any are on the ballot), exceeds the number of votes for “No Representation,” we will remain a union shop.  The individual perils of having “No Representation” are far more painful then the current TWU and IAM contracts that provide members with critical items such as,  “Limits on Outsourcing and Scope, Just Cause for Discipline, Seniority Rights, and Work Rules for a fair and equitable distribution of Overtime and Field Trips;” which all become management rights “without Representation.”   Once again, I urge you to challenge anyone who is pushing for “No Representation,” by considering the facts and outcome when given the opportunity to vote “For Representation” over “No Representation.”
 
[SIZE=10pt]As this process continues, Local 591 will continue to provide further detailed fact based information.  We urge you to submit your questions about this election through your elected representatives or the “contact us” tab on the local591.com website.  Local 591 will get you the answers.  We also encourage you to become familiar with the NMB Rules and Representation Manual, and have provided the links to both below.[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]http://www.nmb.gov/about-nmb/nmb-rules/[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]http://www.nmb.gov/documents/representation/representation-manual.pdf[/SIZE]
 
 
Reference: http://www.local591.com/index.cfm?zone=/unionactive/view_article.cfm&HomeID=442933

I think that you are over analyzing the intention of the letter put out that you received. The intention as I read it is to clarify the misguided notion that some out there have that to vote no union will wind up hurting the TWU more than the members they represent. I think the letter is one of the better summaries I've read that convey the message that choosing that option would be a very grave mistake for any and all of your members.

As far as the part that you highlighted in red, yes that can be construed as an endorsement for an option of other if that's how you want to read it? But I see it more as a statement that if you are not going to vote for the association that you at least make sure that you write in another union choice then. Whatever that choice is, is yours of course to make absolutely. As far as it being a particular endorsement, there is no evidence in the writing to support that.

 

[AANOTOK]

I would agree WeAAsles. To me, it is a letter of clarity, but as far as an endorsement, I would consider that a stretch.

 

[1AA]

I can tell you that within our AMT department we all agree on several things. We do not want the Association. We do not want the TWU. We do not want the IAM. Forget about the Teamsters for obvious reasons. We are currently and actively involved in a AMFA drive at both AA and USAir. With that mind set within our AMT work area when one thinks about getting rid of the TWU or the alliance which union do you think comes to mind? Petersons letter of clarification states that we have options and he points out several things and one is to use the write in option over the No union option if we do not want the alliance. Message was sent loud and clear. You have to be within the AMT community to have come to that conclusion. I am not sure how many TWU members outside of the M&E group even know who or what AMFA is. We do and it is discussed in the work place in one form or another daily.

 

[1AA]

I would agree WeAAsles. To me, it is a letter of clarity, but as far as an endorsement, I would consider that a stretch.

I never said it was an endorsement just like Peterson said to vote AMFA on the write in.
It not an assumption either. This is a conclusion that the union is NOT fully endorsing the Alliance and is telling us to utilize the write in option of your choice of representation. We in the M&E department are currently discussing AMFA and ways to stop or remove the TWU/IAM/Alliance.

 

[WeAAsles]

I never said it was an endorsement just like Peterson said to vote AMFA on the write in.
It not an assumption either. This is a conclusion that the union is NOT fully endorsing the Alliance and is telling us to utilize the write in option of your choice of representation. We in the M&E department are currently discussing AMFA and ways to stop or remove the TWU/IAM/Alliance.

If that were true then you would have all of the cards you need to force a vote. I do know how many cards short you are and where you are short. That tells me that at least currently not everyone is in agreement with you. Would you like to discuss those groups and geographical areas where your drive is currently short?

 

 

[1AA]

If that were true then you would have all of the cards you need to force a vote. I do know how many cards short you are and where you are short. That tells me that at least currently not everyone is in agreement with you. Would you like to discuss those groups and geographical areas where your drive is currently short?

 

Have you ever done a card drive in this magnitude? Now we are doing a TWO airline card drive because of the SCS filing. That is not a easy task. I can tell you that cards are coming in daily from both airlines. Bottom line is we at both airlines do not want any part of this alliance and we all want to get rid of the TWU and IAM from both sides.

 

[Kev3188]

Have you ever done a card drive in this magnitude? Now we are doing a TWO airline card drive because of the SCS filing. That is not a easy task.

Truth!

Ready room to ready room. Person to person. One card at a time.

Nothing of value ever comes easy...

 

[WeAAsles]

Have you ever done a card drive in this magnitude? Now we are doing a TWO airline card drive because of the SCS filing. That is not a easy task. I can tell you that cards are coming in daily from both airlines. Bottom line is we at both airlines do not want any part of this alliance and we all want to get rid of the TWU and IAM from both sides.

ALL? Ok. I wish you good luck in your drive.

 

[700UW]

Largest drive was back when the IAM organized and won the UA CSA and RES.