TWU-IAM Finally Getting Ready for JCBA Negotiations

[NYer]

What if 2 wanted an ass but the 3rd didnt? What if the 3rd guy was the biggest but was outnumbered by the other 2. Or any other scenario combo? This smells ripe for discrimination and exploitation of workers rights.

 
If they didn't agree then there would be a need for those to be considered to file with the NMB and show interest by 50%, plus one of the total number of all members to be represented.

 

[NYer]

 
Maybe you are correct. But this is exaclty why "unions" are getting such a bad name and negative opinions amongst younger workers.
 
My check-off authorization is not showing my interest in this association. It only authorizes deduction of my union dues.
 
When we voted on the CBA, it doesn't give the representative the right to use the CBA as showing my interest in anything other than the language contained in the CBA.
 
And my name on the senoirity list? Neither the CBA or anything else ever claimed that my name on this lsit would be used for anything other than promotions/demotions/transfers ect. Not some claim that I am interested in something I never signed up for or voted on. 
 
Even if this is the NMB stance, it is about and Anti-American as it gets. No wonder organized labor is going down the tubes so fast. Dictators propogating anti democracy using under handed political influence against my freedom to choose and even paid for out of my paycheck.

 
According to NMB rules, when a merger is completed and unions move to represent they can use check-off, seniority lists and even the CBA to satisfy the show of interest. The point where everyone gets confused is their belief that the Association suddenly becomes a third party, when it does not. The Association merely allows the two unions to be able to negotiated a CBA for the totality of the membership. All other representational duties remain with the TWU and the IAM.
 
You know where you have freedom? You can leave this company and this union at any moment you choose. You came here voluntarily and you can leave voluntarily. Ah, freedom.
 
As a matter of fact, you even have the freedom to try and get cards signed to have anyone else represent you. So go get your cards signed, rally the troops and if 50%, plus yourself agree then you can move on with your choice. Ah, freedom.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

Single Carrier and Single Transportation are used interchangeably by the NMB. The term Single Carrier might not be mentioned in the Representation Manual but it sure is in NMB determinations. The FAA determines Single operating Certification
 
Regarding NMB rules on Mergers.
 
NMB language regarding single transportation applications and the resulting representation disputes.
 
"19.2 Authority
Pursuant to Section 2, Ninth, the NMB, upon application, has the authority to resolve REPRESENTATION DISPUTES arising from a merger involving a Carrier or Carriers covered by the RLA. The NMB will consider there representation issues on a CASE-BY-CASE basis."
 
"19.4" Initiation of Procedure for Determination of a Single Transportation System
Any organization or individual may file an application, supported by evidence of representation or a showing of interest (See Section 19.601), seeking a NMB determination that a single transportation system exists."
 
"19.5 Merger Investigations
After an application is filed, the NMB will conduct a pre-docket investigation to determine a single transportation system exists. The investigation may take ANY FORM appropriate to the determination."
 
"19.6 Procedure After Finding Single Transportation System
If the NMB determines that a single transportation system exists, the investigation will proceed to address the representation of the proper craft or class. The bar rules in NMB Rule $1206.4 (29 CFR $ 1206.4) do not apply to application filed under this section"
 
"19.601 Showing of Interest on the Single Transportation System
All applicants must submit evidence of representation or showing of interest from at least fifty(50 percent of the employees in the craft or class.
Evidence of representation or showing of interest from incumbent organizationS or individuals on the affected carrier(s) includes, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, a seniority list, dues check-off list, a current collective bargaining agreement or a certification, or OTHER INDICIA of current representation.
If the organization or individual filing the application does not represent any of the employees covered by the application, showing of interest is proved by valid authorization cards. (See Section 3.0)" (If this sentence applied why wasn't the Associations application rejected?)
 
"19.602 If not already filed with the initial application, organizations (Incumbents and Intervenors) have thirty (30) calendar days from the date of the NMB's single transportation system determination to submit evidence of a showing of interest or to SUPPLEMENT the showing of interest on the single transportation system.
Applications that do not meet the showing of interest requirements will be dismissed."
 
And again I am not saying there will not be a vote and the Association may have requested one in their application but the NMB clearly has exclusive jurisdiction over representational disputes (yes single carrier application turn into representation disputes, look at NMB language in their determinations of single carrier applications)
 
The courts "consistently have refused to review NMB decisions which are based upon a facet of a representation case within the discretion of the Board, such as the sufficiency of a showing of interest, voter eligibility, voting procedures, or the decision whether or not to conduct and investigation. Indeed, courts have held that even the NMB failure to follow it own rules is not grounds for judicial review"
 
All those screaming for a lawsuit if they don't get their way can forget it. You will not overturn the coming NMB ruling no matter what they rule.

 

[scorpion 2]

The IAMNPF is funded to 105% and AA has already had pension relief from the reform act that was passed.
 
Your frozen pension isnt 100% funded nor has enough money to generate its liabilities without AA funding it, it was frozen for a reason, if it was fully funded and could generate enough money to pay the future liabilities it would have never been frozen.
 
I believe AA paid $781 million into last year.

Sounds like a sales pitch coming or maybe a forced feed by the corrupt industrial union machine. Like the twu's own retirement councilor stated. He would rather have AA responsible for his pension funding rather than one thats funded by contributions from its members only.

 

[scorpion 2]

According to NMB rules, when a merger is completed and unions move to represent they can use check-off, seniority lists and even the CBA to satisfy the show of interest. The point where everyone gets confused is their belief that the Association suddenly becomes a third party, when it does not. The Association merely allows the two unions to be able to negotiated a CBA for the totality of the membership. All other representational duties remain with the TWU and the IAM.
 
You know where you have freedom? You can leave this company and this union at any moment you choose. You came here voluntarily and you can leave voluntarily. Ah, freedom.
 
As a matter of fact, you even have the freedom to try and get cards signed to have anyone else represent you. So go get your cards signed, rally the troops and if 50%, plus yourself agree then you can move on with your choice. Ah, freedom.

Nothing like industrial unions hiding from their members.

 

[MetalMover]

 
 
As a matter of fact, you even have the freedom to try and get cards signed to have anyone else represent you. So go get your cards signed, rally the troops and if 50%, plus yourself agree then you can move on with your choice. Ah, freedom.

Hey, keyboard tough guy....Here's a challenge for you...TRY GETTING 50% OF THE MEMBERS+YOURSELF TO VOTE THIS ASSOCIATION IN!

 

[WeAAsles]

Hey, keyboard tough guy....Here's a challenge for you...TRY GETTING 50% OF THE MEMBERS+YOURSELF TO VOTE THIS ASSOCIATION IN!

Your choice will be Association, no union and write in option. The write in option won't get enough to override the other two. Do you think there's any possibility your group would be interested in the no union option?

Thankfully I don't hear too many in my group that would even contemplate that idea. And I talk to a lot of people.

 

[WeAAsles]

Sounds like a sales pitch coming or maybe a forced feed by the corrupt industrial union machine. Like the twu's own retirement councilor stated. He would rather have AA responsible for his pension funding rather than one thats funded by contributions from its members only.

I don't know one fleet president who has expressed any interest in putting our frozen plan into the IAMPF. I think some of you guys think the boogeyman is hiding in your closet.

The IAMPF has a fiduciary responsibility to those who are participants. Putting a severely underfunded pension into that plan I don't think fits the guidelines for being responsible. Especially if they would need to cut everyone's future payout to get it back into green status.

The whole thing makes a good scary bedtime story though.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

Single Carrier and Single Transportation are used interchangeably by the NMB. The term Single Carrier might not be mentioned in the Representation Manual but it sure is in NMB determinations. The FAA determines Single operating Certification
 

 
And again I am not saying there will not be a vote and the Association may have requested one in their application but the NMB clearly has exclusive jurisdiction over representational disputes (yes single carrier application turn into representation disputes, look at NMB language in their determinations of single carrier applications)
 
The courts "consistently have refused to review NMB decisions which are based upon a facet of a representation case within the discretion of the Board, such as the sufficiency of a showing of interest, voter eligibility, voting procedures, or the decision whether or not to conduct and investigation. Indeed, courts have held that even the NMB failure to follow it own rules is not grounds for judicial review"
 
All those screaming for a lawsuit if they don't get their way can forget it. You will not overturn the coming NMB ruling no matter what they rule.

 
So, Single Carrier and Single Transportation are used interchangeably by the NMB?
 
Okay, I'm game - here again is the link to the NMB website, just point out where they use Single carrier Status "interchangeably"
 
http://www.nmb.gov/
 
As for the rest of your opinion & quote, Yes I've read the Paul,Hastings Introduction to the RLA too.
 
And while I freely admit it is rare for the NMB to be overturned, it has, in point of fact, happened. Something clearly pointed out in the Paul,Hastings piece you quoted from.
 
Take the ibt/CWA association at US - The NMB cited, at length, the measures each union went to in polling their respective memberships prior to their filing. The NMB cites this in their determination.  You have the same situation occurring with the AA/US merger, if the NMB ignores the lack of membership buy in, and certifies the alliance, that would stand in direct contradiction to their previous stance with the ibt/CWA.
 
If it happens, maybe they wont be able to overturn it, but with the turmoil displayed thus far from the Mechanic ranks, I certainly think someone will try.
 
You only miss 100% of the shots you never take.

 

[MetalMover]

Your choice will be Association, no union and write in option. The write in option won't get enough to override the other two. Do you think there's any possibility your group would be interested in the no union option?

Thankfully I don't hear too many in my group that would even contemplate that idea. And I talk to a lot of people.

I do not believe there would be enough vote for NO UNION to prevail. The "write in" option, if allowed, will dilute the entire vote. The numbers might surprise you from the mechanics' view point.
However, if the fair vote of ASSOCIATION YES OR NO were to be allowed, the association would fail miserably in a straight up or down vote.

 

[WeAAsles]

I do not believe there would be enough vote for NO UNION to prevail. The "write in" option, if allowed, will dilute the entire vote. The numbers might surprise you from the mechanics' view point.
However, if the fair vote of ASSOCIATION YES OR NO were to be allowed, the association would fail miserably in a straight up or down vote.

I won't argue with your opinion and I think both unions have not done a good job yet in expressing what the supposed benefits can be with this alliance. I still think it's better than the alternative of members fighting each other because they lost the union they like or are used to though. I just don't believe unions should fight unions when the membership numbers are already so ridiculously low.

I guess my philosophy is just different then most of the posters on this site.

 

[NYer]

Hey, keyboard tough guy....Here's a challenge for you...TRY GETTING 50% OF THE MEMBERS+YOURSELF TO VOTE THIS ASSOCIATION IN!

I'm not the one complaining about the process.

 

[MetalMover]

I'm not the one complaining about the process.

Why would you? You are all for the association and do not even want a vote. 
Give a straight up or down vote, the association would lose by a landslide.Then what would you support?

 

[scorpion 2]

I don't know one fleet president who has expressed any interest in putting our frozen plan into the IAMPF. I think some of you guys think the boogeyman is hiding in your closet.
The IAMPF has a fiduciary responsibility to those who are participants. Putting a severely underfunded pension into that plan I don't think fits the guidelines for being responsible. Especially if they would need to cut everyone's future payout to get it back into green status.
The whole thing makes a good scary bedtime story though.

Heres one for you. Get it in writing from Lombardo and Buffy that it will not happen and I will shut the fuk up!

 

[NYer]

Why would you? You are all for the association and do not even want a vote. 
Give a straight up or down vote, the association would lose by a landslide.Then what would you support?

At that point, I'd support what the majority has chosen.