|
Originally Posted by thebat
(Post 15739826)
This is simply not true. Unions do NOTHING to benefit consumers regardless of their propaganda.
I can also recall several instances where the union shot down procedures imposed by management that would have curtailed service to the customer. Not that it's that way 100% of the time... SR
Originally Posted by michelle227
(Post 15740385)
My guess is that, as federal employees, TSA personnel lack the right to strike. Wonder if the union reminded them of a certain entity *cough* PATCO *cough* and how quickly their members found themselves having to seek employment when they tried to throw their weight around...
When the the PATCO rehiring ban was lifted only a small number of the strikers were interested in returning, and only after being reassured that FAA management had been overhauled. If ATC weren't such a non-portable skill I doubt that any of them would have come back. SR |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 15765349)
As reported by "eyecue" some screeners are making $67,000.00 yearly and as Marshal Lucky said that price is just "to damn high".
|
Originally Posted by srilm
(Post 15766650)
That could start a whole new debate. That strike was inevitable whether PATCO existed or not. I am not sure whether all government employees are prohibited from striking, or just the ones in "critical positions". Doesn't matter though, as TSA is surely prohibited from striking.
When the the PATCO rehiring ban was lifted only a small number of the strikers were interested in returning, and only after being reassured that FAA management had been overhauled. If ATC weren't such a non-portable skill I doubt that any of them would have come back. SR He ended up in the Navy as an E5 with very slow promotion opportunity. |
Originally Posted by srilm
(Post 15766650)
I am not sure whether all government employees are prohibited from striking, or just the ones in "critical positions". Doesn't matter though, as TSA is surely prohibited from striking.
One of the first things I signed was a three with oaths, the first being the oath of office, then another oath and the final being one promising to strike against the government. To quote http://www.federaldaily.com/labor/relations.htm#strikes Individuals who participate in a strike against the government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia may not accept or hold a position in the government of the United States (5 USC 7311). Such individuals are also not considered employees within the meaning of the Act, 5 USC 7103(a)(2)(B)(v). It is an unfair labor practice for a labor organization to “call, or participate in, a strike, work stoppage, or slowdown, or picketing of an agency in a labor-management dispute if such picketing interferes with an agency’s operations” or “to condone any activity described (above) by failing to take action to prevent or stop such activity,” (5 USC 7116(b)(7)(A) and (B)). Further, the Act by definition excludes labor organizations that engage in such activity from coverage and thus from acting as the exclusive representative of employees, (5 USC 7103(a)(4) (D)). The FLRA is given the power when it finds a labor organization that has either by omission or commission willfully and intentionally violated section 7116(b)(7) of the Act to “revoke the exclusive recognition status of the labor organization . . .” or “take any other appropriate disciplinary action,” (5 USC 7120(f)). A strike by employees against the government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia also constitutes a criminal violation (18 USC 1918). Any person found guilty of violating this section of the law is subject to a fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment of not more than a year and a day, or both. |
Originally Posted by LoganTSO
(Post 15768060)
One of the first things I signed was a three with oaths, the first being the oath of office, then another oath and the final being one promising to strike against the government.
|
Amendment by Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) to block TSA union as part of FAA Authorization bill. Lets hope this sticks.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/41410360 |
Originally Posted by Fisher1949
(Post 15798072)
Amendment by Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) to block TSA union as part of FAA Authorization bill. Lets hope this sticks.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/41410360 http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cf...ref=todaysnews |
Pistole Meeting Union Presidents Right Now
At this time TSA Admin Pistole is in a meeting with the presidents of the NTEU and AFGE. They are finalizing the details for national non-traditional collective bargaining of the TSA TSOs, that does not allow bargaining for security or pay.
In the next hour Pistole is expected to release a 21 page document detailing his decision to the TSA TSO's to vote to unionize ... which of course is pointless since the TSA has always stated unions would be allowed. |
Originally Posted by sefrischling
(Post 15802885)
... which of course is pointless since the TSA has always stated unions would be allowed.
We are a people of integrity who respect and care for others and protect the information we handle. We are a people who conduct ourselves in an honest, trustworthy and ethical manner at all times. |
Quote:
We are a people of integrity who respect and care for others and protect the information we handle. We are a people who conduct ourselves in an honest, trustworthy and ethical manner at all times. We are a people? Whee, the people. :p :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by sefrischling
(Post 15802885)
At this time TSA Admin Pistole is in a meeting with the presidents of the NTEU and AFGE. They are finalizing the details for national non-traditional collective bargaining of the TSA TSOs, that does not allow bargaining for security or pay.
In the next hour Pistole is expected to release a 21 page document detailing his decision to the TSA TSO's to vote to unionize ... which of course is pointless since the TSA has always stated unions would be allowed. Any rumblings on how Pistole will benefit by supporting unions for TSA? |
I think it is: We wee on the wee sheeple people.
Back on topic - if not for security and pay what is the point? Retention? |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 15803104)
Any rumblings on how Pistole will benefit by supporting unions for TSA?
Simply Envision Inevitable Unionization. |
Originally Posted by Fredd
(Post 15803163)
No I was not kidding. What's in it for Pistole? |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 15803228)
No I was not kidding.
What's in it for Pistole? |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:06 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.