94% of US Flight Attendants vote to authorize a strike (UPDATED)

 
Old Nov 23, 2012, 7:33 pm
  #31  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 539
Originally Posted by ffI
When the 3rd group you are bringing in has good relations with you already after your friendly talks to help them, bringing them in will get rid of the majority bloc from the east (old US) and get everybody to shut up and work
Yawn, this is why workers shouldn't waste time with all the bargaining crap. If management wants to do stupid power play moves to steamroll you might as well just get off the usual script. I've never worked anywhere dissatisfied employees couldn't grind it to a halt from the inside. Then of course you'll get management and all the keyboard jockeys moaning and whining about respect and fair play. Oh well, they don't care about you anyway.
Yinzer is offline  
Old Nov 23, 2012, 8:03 pm
  #32  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CLT
Programs: AA-EXP, MR-PP
Posts: 3,440
Originally Posted by cwe84
If the F/As give up the pairing with the pilots the F/As will lose a lot of "Me Too" clauses. Such as scheduling rules, rest issues, hotel policies etc. its not just the East that is holding out for that. Most airlines (except DL and WN) stick with their pilots on pairings. The new FAA rules will begin implementation soon and those will have an effect on pairing construction. I don't know anyone at my airline that would vote for a contract that split us up from our pilots.

I keep preaching it. Many of us are not after lots of money. We are after the QOL issues that are in the contract. East would have given up QOL issues so I dont blame them for voting down the contract. Two different times they went to the table. Two times they went with people who didnt listen to the group. Two times they got an agreement that the majority didnt want and two times it was voted down. Yes that was a Union issue. The strike vote was just the next part of the process that needed to be filled.

Now I don't expect people here to like unions... I know the vast majority of FTers loath them. They do have a purpose and many airlines need them for protection of the employees. I will also point out that I have a graduate degree in Business and I know that employment contracts should be written at every level. You better believe that Doug Parker & Co. have extensive contracts with the company that spells out everything from hours served to compensation to benefits. Tell me why is it that the top 1% should have a contract thats binding and enforceable but not the front line staff? (not that I am looking for a response since I know what the answers will be...)

Just think of your own contract with your employer. Im sure that some of you all will be able to relate when thinking of it that way.
Thank you for the explanation. This makes more sense. I think what we (customers?) are missing is information on this. I am not opposed to unions as they make sense in terms of bargaining power otherwise unavailable to individuals unless higher in management.

I still don't understand the "me too" part. If certain issues (hotels, etc...) are important, then write them into F/A contract and you don't depend on USALPA.
iztok is offline  
Old Nov 24, 2012, 3:55 pm
  #33  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: TPA for now. Hopefully LIS for retirement
Posts: 13,632
Originally Posted by adamj023
Loads of strikes all the time at airlines.
Really?

When was the last time a U.S. airline's operations were disrupted because of a strike by its employees?
Bear96 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.