Well the structure of Locals tend to be common, sure there are differences but there is little doubt that consolidation could not be any worse than what we have now. At the very least we would end up with a better financed Local. One of the problems with the current structure is that there is no one that can be held responsible. A powerless Local President could reasonably claim that he had fought for what the members wanted but other locals were not on board, in fact they all could make the same claim without any means available for verification by the members.
Consolidation, if it continued through the contract group could lead to ownership of the contract by that singular Local, like most other Locals have. If everyone under the contract was in one Local there would no longer be a need for International ownership of the contract.
Fair enough, but I think that two very different concepts are behing discussed here. One is an International conspired deal of a singular voice from the line chosen by the Presidents of the five Locals. That I disagree with, the other is to merge the line locals into one local, One president and one E-board. That I favor, as long as they go with an electronic local.
I remember it well.
Thats because the law makes the assumption that the person or persons making that decision will ultimately be held accountable during an election, as is the norm. While it is very common to have one Local that has several contracts its much less common to have twenty Locals under one contract. This is the main source of our problems. The structure keeps the members divided and powerless while the International has immunity from electoral accountability from the members at AA.
You cant check what isnt there. As the lawsuit pointed out none of these locals are party to the agreement.All that having several line locals does is dilute the financial resources of line local members by having the expense of five locals, all under one contract where none of them are party to it.
When the issue of recall was brought up at the 2001 Convention Sonny Hall tstified that any Local that wanted to put recall provisions in their bylaws was free to do so, I believe that some already have them. So under one Local we could have recall.
Well actually the dictaorship lies with the International. However in their attempt to construct the illusion of democracy they allow Tulsa to weild a roll call vote at Presidents council meetings. This practice allows the President from Tulsa to totally ignore the needs of any other workgroup. The only thing that having 5 line locals does is give line mechs " five witnesses". The fact is line mechs would have more of a say in things if we were all included in Local 514.
You may find that incredible but let me illustarate a point.
One of the most critical stations for anyone running for office at Local 562 is SJU. SJU?? They only have 50 guys compared to 400 at JFK and 100 at LGA. Why is SJU so critical? Because they vote and because they usually vote the same. SJU can not be ignored by anyone seeking an "at large" position in Local 562.
Lets say we were all in Local 514, sure the President would most likely be someone from Tulsa(Just as every President from Local 562 has been from JFK) but in order to win no candidate could afford to ignore 4000 line workers, especially if they have a high turnout. (Typically, local 514 Presidents get into office with less than one third of the memberships vote)
The fact is we know that what we have now is totally ineffective. We have an unaccountable International that owns the contract. We have 5 small, financially strapped, powerless locals that are unable to challenge the International.Sure it provides a good gig for the few that can escape the floor and pick up an extra twenty grand or so but it doesnt do anything for the majority of members. Having a more consolidated but just as accountable local can put us in a better position than where we are now, at its worst we could end up with what we have now.
