No Union; Crewmembers Send IAM Packing
Aug 1, 2006, 3:41 pm
#31
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13
you're absolutely right, i shouldn't have jumped to conclusions before knowing all my facts and i apologize. it's just that the IAM is a very sore subject w/ me and some of the ppl i work with. it's definitely a way to get the blood boiling! I hope jetblue can continue to be a profitable airline without having to call in the help of a union...who knows, maybe i'll send in my resume' if all works well!
Aug 1, 2006, 11:23 pm
#32
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Long Island, NY and Boca Raton, FL
Programs: JetBlue TrueBlue, AAdvantage, Rapid Rewards, Sky Miles, SPG, Marriott Rewards, HHonors, Hertz
Posts: 2,275
Originally Posted by Flygirl82
you're absolutely right, i shouldn't have jumped to conclusions before knowing all my facts and i apologize. it's just that the IAM is a very sore subject w/ me and some of the ppl i work with. it's definitely a way to get the blood boiling! I hope jetblue can continue to be a profitable airline without having to call in the help of a union...who knows, maybe i'll send in my resume' if all works well!
I'm not an airline employee (aviation is just a hobby and I follow the airline industry) however, I share your views on the IAM...unfortunately they do nothing for those they represent.
Aug 2, 2006, 7:18 am
#33
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Programs: DL SM Plat, B6 TrueBlue, UA MP, AAdvantage
Posts: 10,008
In the labor/management relationship, the workers have virtually no bargaining power without a union.
JetBlue NYFL: You listed an impressive array of benefits received by B6 employees. But what happens if B6 management decides to slash these benefits unilaterally? Without a collective bargaining agreement, which is nothing more than a contract between the company and the entity representing a certain category of workers (the union) there is no guarantee these benefits will continue.
Also, as has been pointed out, it is very likely indeed that without a strong union presence in the airline industry, B6's benefit package would not be nearly as generous.
Take a look at the airline industry: DL and WN essentially have the same degree of union presence in their companies. One airline is verging on liquidation while the other is the standout success story of the business. So I would suggest that the unions or lack thereof is not the issue.
I know that unions in America have a wretched image, conjuring images of corruption, organzied crime, job padding, mediocrity, etc.
The fact is that most unions in America today are nothing like that. Most unions work hard to represent their members and to help manage their benefits. Certainly if you want find corruption, thievery, etc. then I would suggest a much more likely candidate in America is the kleptocracy that has emerged in the past 20 years in places like Enron, WorldCom, etc.
The stereotype of the union worker is of the disgruntled, lazy employee who uses the union as a crutch for his/her lack of enterprise. I would suggest that an effective union would in fact make happier, more secure employees, who feel well represented and remunerated, better able to do their jobs without having to worry about the company slashing their benefits.
I run a TV production company, and while our business is substantially different from the airline industry, we voluntarily became a union company because we found, after extensive research, that the union was the actually the most cost-effective way for us to provide benefits to our employees. In our case at least, the union has actually saved us money. We've also found that union directors and technicians are the best of the best and it has improved the quality of our production.
And, in any case, let's face it: Unions are really very weak. In the airline industry unions have been essentially powerless to protect workers anyway.
I'm not saying that unions are perfect. What I am saying is to look at unions rationally, not through the unfair stereotype of unions that has been perpetrated by certain groups that have a stake in undermining the presence of unions in the workforce.
JetBlue NYFL: You listed an impressive array of benefits received by B6 employees. But what happens if B6 management decides to slash these benefits unilaterally? Without a collective bargaining agreement, which is nothing more than a contract between the company and the entity representing a certain category of workers (the union) there is no guarantee these benefits will continue.
Also, as has been pointed out, it is very likely indeed that without a strong union presence in the airline industry, B6's benefit package would not be nearly as generous.
Take a look at the airline industry: DL and WN essentially have the same degree of union presence in their companies. One airline is verging on liquidation while the other is the standout success story of the business. So I would suggest that the unions or lack thereof is not the issue.
I know that unions in America have a wretched image, conjuring images of corruption, organzied crime, job padding, mediocrity, etc.
The fact is that most unions in America today are nothing like that. Most unions work hard to represent their members and to help manage their benefits. Certainly if you want find corruption, thievery, etc. then I would suggest a much more likely candidate in America is the kleptocracy that has emerged in the past 20 years in places like Enron, WorldCom, etc.
The stereotype of the union worker is of the disgruntled, lazy employee who uses the union as a crutch for his/her lack of enterprise. I would suggest that an effective union would in fact make happier, more secure employees, who feel well represented and remunerated, better able to do their jobs without having to worry about the company slashing their benefits.
I run a TV production company, and while our business is substantially different from the airline industry, we voluntarily became a union company because we found, after extensive research, that the union was the actually the most cost-effective way for us to provide benefits to our employees. In our case at least, the union has actually saved us money. We've also found that union directors and technicians are the best of the best and it has improved the quality of our production.
And, in any case, let's face it: Unions are really very weak. In the airline industry unions have been essentially powerless to protect workers anyway.
I'm not saying that unions are perfect. What I am saying is to look at unions rationally, not through the unfair stereotype of unions that has been perpetrated by certain groups that have a stake in undermining the presence of unions in the workforce.
Aug 2, 2006, 8:30 am
#34
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: California
Programs: AS,WN,UA,B6,hotels
Posts: 4,239
Originally Posted by TWA Fan 1
In the labor/management relationship, the workers have virtually no bargaining power without a union.
JetBlue NYFL: You listed an impressive array of benefits received by B6 employees. But what happens if B6 management decides to slash these benefits unilaterally? Without a collective bargaining agreement, which is nothing more than a contract between the company and the entity representing a certain category of workers (the union) there is no guarantee these benefits will continue.
Also, as has been pointed out, it is very likely indeed that without a strong union presence in the airline industry, B6's benefit package would not be nearly as generous.
JetBlue NYFL: You listed an impressive array of benefits received by B6 employees. But what happens if B6 management decides to slash these benefits unilaterally? Without a collective bargaining agreement, which is nothing more than a contract between the company and the entity representing a certain category of workers (the union) there is no guarantee these benefits will continue.
Also, as has been pointed out, it is very likely indeed that without a strong union presence in the airline industry, B6's benefit package would not be nearly as generous.
And, in any case, let's face it: Unions are really very weak. In the airline industry unions have been essentially powerless to protect workers anyway.
There is also a positive feedback loop where if a business is losing lots of money (where pay and benefits are cut or threatened to be cut), employee morale sags, so employees become less productive, often resulting in the business losing even more money. At the extreme, labor disputes leading to strikes or lockouts can occur, which lose lots of money for all parties involved in the business.
Aug 2, 2006, 8:54 am
#35
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Programs: DL SM Plat, B6 TrueBlue, UA MP, AAdvantage
Posts: 10,008
Originally Posted by tjl
This does not mean that actually having a union is necessarily beneficial in a given situation, although it does mean that the ability to form a union is beneficial.
Originally Posted by tjl
It is pretty hard to protect employees at a business that is losing lots of money.
There is also a positive feedback loop where if a business is losing lots of money (where pay and benefits are cut or threatened to be cut), employee morale sags, so employees become less productive, often resulting in the business losing even more money. At the extreme, labor disputes leading to strikes or lockouts can occur, which lose lots of money for all parties involved in the business.
There is also a positive feedback loop where if a business is losing lots of money (where pay and benefits are cut or threatened to be cut), employee morale sags, so employees become less productive, often resulting in the business losing even more money. At the extreme, labor disputes leading to strikes or lockouts can occur, which lose lots of money for all parties involved in the business.
Aug 2, 2006, 12:56 pm
#36
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 862
Originally Posted by TWA Fan 1
In the labor/management relationship, the workers have virtually no bargaining power without a union.
Take a look at the airline industry: DL and WN essentially have the same degree of union presence in their companies. One airline is verging on liquidation while the other is the standout success story of the business. So I would suggest that the unions or lack thereof is not the issue.
I would suggest that an effective union would in fact make happier, more secure employees, who feel well represented and remunerated, better able to do their jobs without having to worry about the company slashing their benefits.
Aug 2, 2006, 1:20 pm
#37
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Long Island, NY and Boca Raton, FL
Programs: JetBlue TrueBlue, AAdvantage, Rapid Rewards, Sky Miles, SPG, Marriott Rewards, HHonors, Hertz
Posts: 2,275
TWA Fan 1, you do bring some very interesting views to the table. Thanks for that extensive post!
I know that it is very dangerous to predict anything at all in the airline industry, but if I had to take an honest guess, I would say that jetBlue management has no intention whatsoever of slashing the benefits of their people. There may be some reasons, but the one that stands out most is management obviously has a strong opposition to unionization at jetBlue. This subject comes up often and Neeleman has said numerous times that he is not "anti-union" because unions have done some great things in American history. He just believes that it is not needed at jetBlue because they take good care of and listen to their people.
I think there are benefits to both having and not having a union. In your industry a union may be advantageous, however I just believe that the main reason why jetBlue won't take those benefits away from the workers is that it will avoid any thought of bringing in a union.
I know that it is very dangerous to predict anything at all in the airline industry, but if I had to take an honest guess, I would say that jetBlue management has no intention whatsoever of slashing the benefits of their people. There may be some reasons, but the one that stands out most is management obviously has a strong opposition to unionization at jetBlue. This subject comes up often and Neeleman has said numerous times that he is not "anti-union" because unions have done some great things in American history. He just believes that it is not needed at jetBlue because they take good care of and listen to their people.
I think there are benefits to both having and not having a union. In your industry a union may be advantageous, however I just believe that the main reason why jetBlue won't take those benefits away from the workers is that it will avoid any thought of bringing in a union.
Aug 2, 2006, 1:23 pm
#38
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Programs: DL SM Plat, B6 TrueBlue, UA MP, AAdvantage
Posts: 10,008
Originally Posted by L Dude 7
While a union has bargaining power with management, unionized workers have virtually no bargaining power with a union.
Originally Posted by L Dude 7
I think the key is that effective management would do the same thing. If employees are confident in their job and working conditions, a union would merely get in the way. As we've seen with other airlines, unions can even reduce job security (as in the case of Northwest mechanics.) And pay cuts seem to be coming down to union workers. Unionization is probably the easier route for management. They simply need to negotiate with a few people in the union to set a contract for a few years. Without a union, management must pay attention to many other interests. They have the ability to implement (and almost a requirement) to implement continuous smaller changes.
My point, however, is that dismissing unions out of hand is a mistake. Unions can be good for both labor and management, given the right circumstance.
Aug 2, 2006, 1:44 pm
#39
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Programs: DL SM Plat, B6 TrueBlue, UA MP, AAdvantage
Posts: 10,008
Originally Posted by jetBlueNYFL
TWA Fan 1, you do bring some very interesting views to the table. Thanks for that extensive post!
I know that it is very dangerous to predict anything at all in the airline industry, but if I had to take an honest guess, I would say that jetBlue management has no intention whatsoever of slashing the benefits of their people. There may be some reasons, but the one that stands out most is management obviously has a strong opposition to unionization at jetBlue. This subject comes up often and Neeleman has said numerous times that he is not "anti-union" because unions have done some great things in American history. He just believes that it is not needed at jetBlue because they take good care of and listen to their people.
I think there are benefits to both having and not having a union. In your industry a union may be advantageous, however I just believe that the main reason why jetBlue won't take those benefits away from the workers is that it will avoid any thought of bringing in a union.
I know that it is very dangerous to predict anything at all in the airline industry, but if I had to take an honest guess, I would say that jetBlue management has no intention whatsoever of slashing the benefits of their people. There may be some reasons, but the one that stands out most is management obviously has a strong opposition to unionization at jetBlue. This subject comes up often and Neeleman has said numerous times that he is not "anti-union" because unions have done some great things in American history. He just believes that it is not needed at jetBlue because they take good care of and listen to their people.
I think there are benefits to both having and not having a union. In your industry a union may be advantageous, however I just believe that the main reason why jetBlue won't take those benefits away from the workers is that it will avoid any thought of bringing in a union.
I will agree that in the traditional paradigm a union would muck things up in a context like B6.
But a lot has changed since the heyday of the ILGWU.
Just take a look at WN. Very unionized and it doesn't seem to create any problems.
I'm not saying unions are right for B6 but I do think all parties concerned should carefully weigh the pros and cons of going union without imagining that going union means inviting Tony Provenzano to the bargaining table...
Aug 2, 2006, 1:58 pm
#40
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Long Island, NY and Boca Raton, FL
Programs: JetBlue TrueBlue, AAdvantage, Rapid Rewards, Sky Miles, SPG, Marriott Rewards, HHonors, Hertz
Posts: 2,275
TWA Fan 1, I know you support jetBlue as much as I do! I mean, you left CO's elite status for jetBlue!!!
As far as unions, of course there are pros and cons...I just guess my view on it is "If it ain't broke, why fix it?" JetBlue's people are very happy where they work...well the majority, at least. If they weren't a union would have been voted in. The IAM failed to get 35% of the people to allow a vote...as long as management keeps them happy, why go through the trouble of having a third party and added union dues?
I'm not at all saying unions are bad. All I am saying is that when a company like jetBlue communicated directly with its people on a regular basis and keeps them happy, why have the union mess? It didn't do much for DL's pilots...or NW's people.
As far as unions, of course there are pros and cons...I just guess my view on it is "If it ain't broke, why fix it?" JetBlue's people are very happy where they work...well the majority, at least. If they weren't a union would have been voted in. The IAM failed to get 35% of the people to allow a vote...as long as management keeps them happy, why go through the trouble of having a third party and added union dues?
I'm not at all saying unions are bad. All I am saying is that when a company like jetBlue communicated directly with its people on a regular basis and keeps them happy, why have the union mess? It didn't do much for DL's pilots...or NW's people.
Aug 2, 2006, 2:15 pm
#41
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by TWA Fan 1
Just take a look at WN. Very unionized and it doesn't seem to create any problems.
I'm not saying unions are right for B6 but I do think all parties concerned should carefully weigh the pros and cons of going union without imagining that going union means inviting Tony Provenzano to the bargaining table...
Knowing what I know now, I wouldve voted no, no, no. they did nothing to fight for us. all they did was scare us into thinking that if we did not take their negotiation at the time all of our jobs were in great danger (like we weren't worried enough after 9/11). Now, I am paying out some serious union dues every month and I have never seen any good come from the IAM. We can't even hardly keep union representation at our station because it's so hard to get anything done!
On the other hand, our flight attendants were fought for very hard. their union stood behind them and supported them until they got what both the employees and the company agreed on together. Just seeing how hard their union worked for them and knowing it could be done for us makes me cringe to think we have to wait until 2008 to re-negotiate.
Maybe there are some great unions out there. unfortunately i have yet to be a part of one.
Aug 2, 2006, 5:31 pm
#42
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Programs: DL SM Plat, B6 TrueBlue, UA MP, AAdvantage
Posts: 10,008
Originally Posted by jetBlueNYFL
TWA Fan 1, I know you support jetBlue as much as I do! I mean, you left CO's elite status for jetBlue!!!
As far as unions, of course there are pros and cons...I just guess my view on it is "If it ain't broke, why fix it?" JetBlue's people are very happy where they work...well the majority, at least. If they weren't a union would have been voted in. The IAM failed to get 35% of the people to allow a vote...as long as management keeps them happy, why go through the trouble of having a third party and added union dues?
I'm not at all saying unions are bad. All I am saying is that when a company like jetBlue communicated directly with its people on a regular basis and keeps them happy, why have the union mess? It didn't do much for DL's pilots...or NW's people.
As far as unions, of course there are pros and cons...I just guess my view on it is "If it ain't broke, why fix it?" JetBlue's people are very happy where they work...well the majority, at least. If they weren't a union would have been voted in. The IAM failed to get 35% of the people to allow a vote...as long as management keeps them happy, why go through the trouble of having a third party and added union dues?
I'm not at all saying unions are bad. All I am saying is that when a company like jetBlue communicated directly with its people on a regular basis and keeps them happy, why have the union mess? It didn't do much for DL's pilots...or NW's people.
I just wanted to make it clear that the knee-jerk anti-union mentality which is pretty much universal in the United States is not necessarily an accurate image of the union movement, nor is rejecting a union per se in the best interest of either the workers or management for that matter.
P.S.: regarding my elite status on CO, I should clarify that I will still qualify for CO Silver because of my international travel. I'd love to fly internationally on B6, however. Can you imagine the jetBlue A-380, "Blue Whale" ?