Will the TWU support the Flight Attendants if they walk?

[mwa]

seems like I remember something about nonmembership in AFL-CIO as a factor.

 

[AANOTOK]

Short answer- NO!

 

[jimntx]

With all this speculation, let's not lose sight of the fact that none of us is any where close to a strike at this point. The APFA has said that they are "going to" ask to be released from negotiations.

However, as far as I know, they haven't yet. And, that is only the first step. It is not a given that they will be released. And, then there are all the other steps that have been put in place to prevent a strike except as a last resort.

And, the latest offer from the company has a lot to say for it. I would hope that the APFA will at least discuss this in mediated sessions before rejecting it out of hand.

I don't think I need to pack my overnight picket bag just yet.

 

[eolesen]

Oh, spare me the "Unions are like Rosa Parks and Ghandi" crap. It's a friggin' job, not the color of your skin.

Believe it or not, Bob, I try to honor legitimate picket lines.

But please try to explain in fifth grade language how a dispute between Eastern and its management can justify screwing up the 350,000 rail commuters who used Metro North or the LIRR to get to/from work, or the 15-20 people who rode Amtrak at the time?...

Had Lorenzo owned or had financial interests in either railroad, I could see pickets as justifiable.

If the IAM wanted to simply put up informational pickets at Grand Central or Penn Station, that's reasonable.

But that wasn't their intent at all. They knew if they set up picket lines at Sunnyside, Penn Station, Grand Central, etc., the UTU and other railroad unions wouldn't cross them.

Again, these were companies and people who had absolutely nothing to do with the dispute, and weren't supporting Lorenzo at all.

They have a term for those who hold innocents/non-combatants hostage until their demands met. Depending on the circumstances, it's called kidnapping, extortion or hijacking. Either way, it's thuggery in my book.

But I'm more than willing to hear your justifications for secondary boycotts/strikes, or anyone else's for that matter.

 

[Bob Owens]

Oh, spare me the "Unions are like Rosa Parks and Ghandi" crap. It's a friggin' job, not the color of your skin.

No its about exploitation. Fighting for a fair days wage. Its about the disempowered collectively taking on those with power. The laws under the RLA give the carriers an unfair advantage.Yea its a job, a job that we've sacrificed a lot for, that we've invested many years of our lives in and its how we take care , or at least try, to take care of our families.

Believe it or not, Bob, I try to honor legitimate picket lines.

Key word being "legitimate" (according to your standards) no doubt.

But please try to explain in fifth grade language how a dispute between Eastern and its management can justify screwing up the 350,000 rail commuters who used Metro North or the LIRR to get to/from work, or the 15-20 people who rode Amtrak at the time?...

The intent is to get support from other workers who are under the oppressive rules of the RLA. Its a contest between workers and Capitalists. Its one of the few tools that the law allow so we have to work with what we got.

Had Lorenzo owned or had financial interests in either railroad, I could see pickets as justifiable.

Well there was more to the EAL struggle than Frank Lorenzo,

If the IAM wanted to simply put up informational pickets at Grand Central or Penn Station, that's reasonable.

Sure to you, because you know that it would be ineffective. Then you could comment on how rediculous they are to be picketing and wasting their time.

But that wasn't their intent at all. They knew if they set up picket lines at Sunnyside, Penn Station, Grand Central, etc., the UTU and other railroad unions wouldn't cross them.

Exactly and thats their choice because of the kinship between workers who realize that only if we support each other can we overcome the huge disparity in power between workers and the forces of capitalism.

Again, these were companies and people who had absolutely nothing to do with the dispute, and weren't supporting Lorenzo at all.

How do you know that? The fact is they do support each other through the Commerce Department and various lobby groups that push for legislation that restricts our rights.

They have a term for those who hold innocents/non-combatants hostage until their demands met. Depending on the circumstances, it's called kidnapping, extortion or hijacking. Either way, it's thuggery in my book.

Really? You mean like when the insurance company raises your rates and threatens to cancel your coverage if you dont pay? Like when the oil companies double their prices? Sure they dont set up pickets because they dont have to, they can simply charge as much as the market will bear but we cant do that. People are just as dependant on what those and many other industries provide but they arent constrained like workers are, they are free to set prices to whatever the market will bear regardless to what it does to society on the whole.

But I'm more than willing to hear your justifications for secondary boycotts/strikes, or anyone else's for that matter.

The fact is that the playing field is not level, secondary strikes is an attempt to gain support from other workers to expand the struggle. Its a recognition that the struggle is universal and not just confined to that single employer. They agree to honor the line because they realize that a rising tide lifts all boats and due to the huge advantage that employers and Capital have that we must stick together, the results of the last thirty years where wealth has been diverted away from those who produce to those who own is not accidental nor is it inevitable, its the result of deliberate policies and laws that were put in place by capitalists to serve the interests of capitalists.

Anyone who denies that there is a struggle in place between Capitalists and workers is either blind or a liar. Corporations are sitting on record amounts of Cash, withholding it from the economy and keeping millions unemployed. Its no accident. Ever since it became inevitable that Communism was falling Capital has reasserted itself in a drive to strip wealth away from its workers, and they have done a very good job at it.

Hey, give us the right to strike on the amendable date just like everyone under the NLRA and I'd be willing to give up the right to a secondary strike.

If Capital has the right to act collectively then so should labor. If Capital can "hold the public hostage" with their prices why do you object when workers threaten to withdraw their labor in an effort to increase their earnings so they can pay those inflated prices? Our real earnings have declined by over 40%, our standard of living is in decline as cororations simply charge more and more for what they provide, if we dont pay their inflated prices we cant get what we need. Who is holding whom hostage here?

The fact is that when one airline or employer is successful at reducing compensation all workers are at risk. So its in our collective best interests to support each other.As I said earlier the fact that Corporations are holding on to record amounts of cash is no accident, it came from somewhere, it came from their workers.

Nobody wants to strike, nor do we want to inconvienence other working people but we really dont have other reasonable options. The company has already slashed our compensation by 40%, now they want to slash it another 18%. What does that mean to us? It means no ability to retire, ever, it means we wont be able to send our kids to college, it means we will be in debt to the day we die. The fact is the inconvienence of a secondary strike is no more damaging than a snowstorm, a few days and its all over, but if the company wins it means permanent reductions to our standard of living and more than likely the same to the majority of those inconvieneced as well.

 

[eolesen]

I'm all in favor of putting airline unions under Taft-Hartley.

The rest of your post?

"Workers of the world unite" didn't work out to well for the Marxists.

 

[Hopeful]

But please try to explain in fifth grade language how a dispute between Eastern and its management can justify screwing up the 350,000 rail commuters who used Metro North or the LIRR to get to/from work, or the 15-20 people who rode Amtrak at the time?...

Since the company usually has the upper hand, then the unions must use whatever tools available to them to counter mighty management. The government had no problem watching Lorenzo destroy countless careers and lives at first Continental, then Eastern. And that was far worse than inconveniencing commuters.

 

[frontline]

They have been negotiating for LESS time and are already the HIGHEST PAID in the industry. So no, I will not be supporting a walkout. Won't happen anyway, NMB won't release them.

 

[700UW]

They are not the highest paid, the IAM represented at CO make more and WN does also.

And not supporting them makes you a traitor to the labor movement

 

[Bob Owens]

I'm all in favor of putting airline unions under Taft-Hartley.

The rest of your post?

"Workers of the world unite" didn't work out to well for the Marxists.

Well it works well for our Brothers and Sisters in Europe, so well in fact that you promote that working people should give up on America and move there.

 

[eolesen]

No, Bob. I suggested you do us all a favor and move there, since you believe the grass is really so much greener over there.

And is it really working in Europe anymore? This is posted last year on Fedee.Com:

Over the last twenty years there has been a widespread decline in trade union membership throughout most of western Europe. Since the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, unionisation in many eastern European states has collapsed at an even more dramatic rate. In Poland, for example, today's 14 % level of unionisation is in marked contrast to that of the Soviet-controlled era, when almost all workplaces were unionised. Most of those who remain trade union members in Poland work for former state-owned companies.

In only 8 out of the current 27 member states of the European Union (EU) are more than half of the employed population members of a trade union. In fact, the EU's four most populated states all have modest levels of unionisation, with Italy at 30%, the UK 29%, Germany 27% and France at only 9%.

As a consequence, three out of every four people employed in the EU are now not members of a trade union. Furthermore, in every EU country outside Scandinavia (except Belgium), trade union membership is either static or continues to decline. Even in the UK, where a clear formal procedure for trade union recognition was introduced through the 1999 Employment Relations Act, the unionisation of employees has remained stable.

FedEE estimates that, in the medium term, the average level of unionisation across the EU will fall even further - from 26.3% today to just under 20% by 2010.

You'll always find places where they still have a stranglehold, but unions have become marginalized globally, not just in the US.

 

[Hopeful]

They are not the highest paid, the IAM represented at CO make more and WN does also.

And not supporting them makes you a traitor to the labor movement

I would love to be released, go on strike and have the company impose a slave wage and workrule based contract on those who choose to roll over like puppies waiting for their bellies to be rubbed. People like frontline will become more of a slave to this company and will gladly accept whatever scraps they choose to give him.

 

[frontline]

They are the highest paid. FAs at Southworst work nearly twice as many hours to make a little more on the whole. So per hour they make far less than AA FAs.

As for you, Hopeful, enjoy your new career. Because that's exactly what your brand of militant unionism is going to result in. What kind of person wants a contract imposed? And how am I the puppy when you are the one pushing for the worst case outcome? What you advocate would give management exactly what it wants, a very low cost contract that they could impose. What a ridiculous idea. Your "logic" is what's bankrupt.

 

[Bob Owens]

No, Bob. I suggested you do us all a favor and move there, since you believe the grass is really so much greener over there.

I'm sure that fascits would love it if all those who spoke for those who actaully work for a living simply either accepted what people like you support or opted to leave but we still have the right to voice our opinions and seek out what best suites our interests.

And is it really working in Europe anymore? This is posted last year on Fedee.Com:

Not exactly an unbiased source, still I beleive those lower rates of unionization are still higher than they ever were stateside. Unions dont have to represent the majority of the workforce to be effective and most workers benifit, even non-union when unions succeed. The fact is that as unions decline in this country so does our standard of living based upon one person working a 40 hour week.

Is it working in Europe? Yes, they have more time off work, better health care, live longer, fewer personal bankruptcies poverty and less wealth inequality. Show me a country that has very low unionization rates and you will see a country with high poverty, extreme wealth inequality, shorter lifespans and longer workweeks, like us.

You'll always find places where they still have a stranglehold, but unions have become marginalized globally, not just in the US.

I agree that Capital has been very successful at marginalizing the labor movement, but what I see as the problem is the fact that the leaders of these unions get their six figure salaries and become afraid to fight. Mike Quill and many others got carted off to jail in defense of workers rights, how many leaders today would do that? Strikes were always a risky tactic but the reluctance to go that way has resulted in labor being marginalized. Capital will continue to take as long as they meet no resistance and their greed goes unchallenged. If the rate of strikes had increased and workers pay went down then I would say that the power and effectiveness of unionization has declined, but the rate of work stoppages is at an all time low, we had more before unions were made legal.

The fact is the first strike will be the toughest. Capital will go to great lengths to make sure it fails. Capital knows that a very public failure would have a chilling effect when it comes to future strikes. So, for that reason its of the utmost importance that labor does the same thing that Capital does, support what you may at times consider to be a competitor against the true common opponent.

 

[FWAAA]

They are the highest paid. FAs at Southworst work nearly twice as many hours to make a little more on the whole. So per hour they make far less than AA FAs.

I don't think that's accurate. According to AA's own propaganda site, WN FAs top out at $60.70/hr (hourly equivalent since WN FAs are paid by the "trip") and CO FAs top out at $50/hr domestic/$51/hr international. Both are higher than APFA contract top-out, WN significantly so and CO just barely higher:

http://www.aanegotiations.com/apfaWages.asp

AA's FAs are more expensive to AA than are WN FAs to WN or CO FAs to CO because of the low productivity of AA's FAs:

http://www.aanegotiations.com/apfaProductivity.asp

Yet another example of higher wages at WN equaling lower costs at WN. Pay employees high wages in exchange of productivity and efficiency and your labor costs don't have to be the highest.