usairways_vote_NO
Veteran
- Sep 9, 2002
- 1,882
- 57
700UW said:
Thats correct there wasn't a strike vote put out by IAM. You know as well as I a vote is used to show the solidarity of the membership.
Ual Mechs Vote No, Authorize Strike
- Thread starter PHL
- Start date
Thats correct there wasn't a strike vote put out by IAM. You know as well as I a vote is used to show the solidarity of the membership.
willyloman
Member
- Jan 23, 2003
- 72
- 0
a320av8r said:
U codeshares with UAL. Supposedly, codesharing revenue contributes an extra $300 million annually for both U and UAL. If UAL goes under so does U, and vice a versa.Therefore, you should care if you want to keep your job.
700UW said:
WHAT!!!!!
The membership bombarded the company??? How do you know that? The company told you??? And you believed them???
The company said it would conduct its own ratification vote? SO!!! What legal basis would such a vote have? NONE!!!!!!!
No kidding. And it was probably the International who told you about the company getting bombarded and conducting their own vote right?
700UW said:
They were probably just looking for their leaders who would not take any position.
My Union, well while I was an officer in the TWU I did what I could to make it a real union with some fight and accountability, but according to the TWU International such things amount to dual unionism, so the International removed me, not the members. Now I'm working on getting rid the the TWU altogther.
I didnt become an officer for a new career, I like being a mechanic, I became an officer in order to try and save my career.
U
UAL_TECH
Guest
700UW said:
Bob,
700UW has a valid point.
The USAir 'membership' are collective capitulators (being civil
) under the BK gun-to-the-head situation. The 'membership' folded and opted to bring the rest of us down for milk and cheese.The TWU at AA was merely 'threatened' with BK and wetted their pants like a bunch of one year olds seeing their first cat.
Take Care,
B) UT
UAL_TECH said:Bob,
700UW has a valid point.
The USAir 'membership' are collective capitulators (being civil
The TWU at AA was merely 'threatened' with BK and wetted their pants like a bunch of one year olds seeing their first cat.
Take Care,
B) UT
[post="243301"][/post]
Well lets not forget that the mechanics at UAL, under the IAM agreed to massive concessions including wiping out a lot of overhaul, however those same members said no this time.
The vote at AA was close. If our Local had a little more money and time we probably could have gotten the system to reject it. Over 90% of Local 562 members voted NO. We took an ad out to Local 514s members in the Tulsa World with the same information that we gave to our members and we recieved many many phone calls from Tulsa members thanking us for the info. We did not have enough to do the same in Kansas City and KC voted overwhelmingly in favor of it providing the 700 that put it through. If MCI was not in the system the vote would have been rejected.
The TWU International was clear in that they wanted us to accept the concesions. Had the TWU said the opposite the members would have voted NO.
We were working against the International and they had a lot more resources than we did.
The fact is if the members were being led they would follow. If the IAM had made any effort to fight the company and the judge and told the members that they were going to fight and they wanted them to vote NO the members would have rejected the agreement. Instead the IAM offered nothing but "We will support your decision if you make the grave decision to reject this final offer which will probably mean that you will lose your job and have nothing to live for, but we will stand by you, whatever you decide."
U
UAL_TECH
Guest
a320av8r said:
Mr. Head,
Just a thought, but I would recommend that you not post on the UA board (again
) either.B) UT
Thank goodness you are in the minority PineyBob (but we always knew you weren't rating US fairly against the others) Most analysts come to a completely opposite conclusion than you do.
Read This
Take US Airways. The company is in its second Chapter 11 restructuring and Wharton professors are surprised that judges believe the airline can become a viable company again. "It's ludicrous to allow a company to go bankrupt repeatedly," says marketing professor David Reibstein. "The intent of bankruptcy is to help a company restructure and pay off its debt. A company should only be allowed in Chapter 11 if you believe it can survive." His prognosis for US Airways isn't good. Southwest is encroaching on US Airways’ Pittsburgh hub after taking on the airline in Philadelphia, a strategy that will probably be "the final nail in the coffin."
Whether the bankruptcy process needs to be reformed is unclear, but at the very least judges should do more due diligence, experts at Wharton say. "I think judges hearing cases need to really assess the ability of an airline†to get out of bankruptcy, suggests Reibstein. "It's irresponsible for judges to think some of these companies can make it."
In the case of US Airways, Allen says it's very possible that a judge will eventually pull the plug on the company even though it is currently winning concessions from employees to cut costs. United, the other airline in bankruptcy, may be able to emerge from Chapter 11 because of revenues it earns from international routes.
Read This
Take US Airways. The company is in its second Chapter 11 restructuring and Wharton professors are surprised that judges believe the airline can become a viable company again. "It's ludicrous to allow a company to go bankrupt repeatedly," says marketing professor David Reibstein. "The intent of bankruptcy is to help a company restructure and pay off its debt. A company should only be allowed in Chapter 11 if you believe it can survive." His prognosis for US Airways isn't good. Southwest is encroaching on US Airways’ Pittsburgh hub after taking on the airline in Philadelphia, a strategy that will probably be "the final nail in the coffin."
Whether the bankruptcy process needs to be reformed is unclear, but at the very least judges should do more due diligence, experts at Wharton say. "I think judges hearing cases need to really assess the ability of an airline†to get out of bankruptcy, suggests Reibstein. "It's irresponsible for judges to think some of these companies can make it."
In the case of US Airways, Allen says it's very possible that a judge will eventually pull the plug on the company even though it is currently winning concessions from employees to cut costs. United, the other airline in bankruptcy, may be able to emerge from Chapter 11 because of revenues it earns from international routes.
- Banned
- #41
I was in court, the IAM did fight the judge, were you there? Did you witness it?
The laws are against the workers if you have not realized that.
The judge's only responsibility is to ensure the creditors get maximum value back. Since AA has not filed I would not expect you to understand that.
The laws are against the workers if you have not realized that.
The judge's only responsibility is to ensure the creditors get maximum value back. Since AA has not filed I would not expect you to understand that.
700UW said:
The courtroom is the last place to fight a Judge. Its his own turf. You make it clear that the fight will not be in the courtroom but on the tarmac and in the terminals as your members will not tolerate injustice.
When he said that he was imposing temporary terms the IAM should have said they were going to have a temporary strike until their negotiated terms were put back in place PERIOD< GOOD NIGHT YOUR HONOR>
Then if he put them in jail so be it, like Mike Quill told the Judge- "putting me in jail will not get your trains running".
Do you think that unfavorable laws are a new development? Wake up!!! The only reason why unfavorable laws were ever changed is because the unions violated them to the point that it was too costly and disruptive to enforce them.
The government changed the laws to get labor peace, now years later they have reversed things once again, so guess what that means for labor? No Justice-No Peace.
They usually never eliminated the unfair laws, they simply wrote new ones that kind of neutralized the bad ones, over the last twenty years or so they have been eliminating the newer ones and exposing us to the bad ones again.
As long as we quietly stand by and allow them to screw us they will, the only way we have leverage is when we will no longer produce for them!!!!!
spacewaitress
Senior
- Aug 27, 2002
- 468
- 0
Fly,
Seems like the outlook for UAL changes daily as events change. Surely though, you can't deny the the loss we just had and how bad it is for UAL. It amounts to the yearly concessions the company wants from all labor.
Even AFA says circumstances worked in our favor for our TA. Either UAL shuts down, or they'll be back soon asking for more.
Just my opinion.
Seems like the outlook for UAL changes daily as events change. Surely though, you can't deny the the loss we just had and how bad it is for UAL. It amounts to the yearly concessions the company wants from all labor.
Even AFA says circumstances worked in our favor for our TA. Either UAL shuts down, or they'll be back soon asking for more.
Just my opinion.
The judge isn't a business man much less someone who know how to run a complex enterprise such as an airline. He is there to interperet the law and apply it where applicable. I would put more faith in business professors, who teach how to run a company, than a judge who really know little about business.Fly said:
