Union Pacific railroad has a locomotive painted up in a (first) George Bush paint scheme.

NWAFA, are you planning to add anything other than PR to this duscussion?

Delta regulations are such that employees can only wear pins authorized by the company and Delta has not authorized any pin indicating rejection of the union.
OTOH, by law employees can wear a pin with the union name on it.

Are you planning on adding anything more that contempt and badgering?

As far as I know, your are not employed by Delta, so why do you care so much that you badger someone who has already decided not to discuss the issue with you, and has stated so?

A reminder:

NWAFA: "With all due respect, I really don't see the point in debating a union point of view. I think the majority here pretty much have the same mindset as it pertains to labor."

Give it up.

you do understand the PMDL FA's didn't have a contract right? This means DL didn't have to give them raises either.....regardless if it was planned for "years before"

NWAFA and the other NWA FA's here can tell you I'm anti-union however that is my personal opinion and quite frankly doesn't count for S**T in this debate because I'm a pax not a member of management or the FA ranks...the only time my opinion matters is when either one of those two parties starts messing with the product and service I receive and thankfully except for a few minor situations (chaos anyone?) I've found the NWA FA's to be of equal service to their non-union DL sisters and brothers...as long as this stays the same who are we to care?

So without interference from the company - what about the interference from the union?

Wow - surprise, surprise, surprise - a UNION supports a pro-UNION rule change?

It just doesn't make sense. You have the standard, if you want to change it you need to get 50% + 1 of the entire employee base to change it. That's fair.

we know the unions and union supportes spread this propaganda to their minions and drones. it's nothing new. this article is absolutely pointless.

it all boils down to this, to the vast majority of us on this site: how will it affect travel?

what happens when the first big hang-up occurs in negotiations? FAs start bickering about it in the cabin, comments become public, customers get tired of hearing it, then the strike ultimately occurs - affecting everyone. Eventually, the govt gets involved.

Do you think most of the executives at Delta are indoctrinated into "big business"?

Individual employees supporting families are entrenched in jobs. Individuals supporting families have next to no ability to negotiate with multi-billon dollar corporations. Unionization gives power to normal people.

Do corporations have to have their say 100% of the time for some people on this board to be happy?

(FTR, I am a business owner, I am not part of a union).

But the question is whether that context has changed. The contract may have been imposed by the court, but the underlying economics behind that contract remain, and will only get worse. I'm not really anti-union, but you also can't get blood from a stone, and if the unions genuinely have the long-term interests of their members at heart, then they should really be trying to work with management to ensure that their contracts are reasonable, given the current economic environment, and flexible enough to adapt to changing situations.

To date, I have seen little evidence that the former NW employees are willing to do what it takes to secure their long-term future. They think they are doing that by unionizing, but if they don't help ensure the long-term future of the company, then that contract won't be worth the paper it was printed on. Given what happened when they helped force NW into bankruptcy, you would think that they should have learned their lesson. Let's see if they did.

Just like, in Congress, you need 50% + 1 of all members to pass a bill.

Just like, in elections, you need 50% + 1 of all registered voters to elect a mayor or governor... or to pass a referendum.

Oh wait... if 2 Senators vote yes on a bill, 1 votes no, and 97 abstain, the bill apparently passes the Senate.

And for referendums and public elections, they only count votes of those who cast them?

What a strange concept, that you only count votes that are cast!

AFA and IAM can take a hike!

What's lost on me is how anyone thinks simply not voting should carry the same weight as actually filling out the ballot and explicitly casting a "no" vote.

Counting all non-votes as "no" leaves no room for those who simply haven't made up their mind, are on the fence, or for whatever reason wish to reserve their right to abstain from declaring an opinion.

Imagine, just for a moment, if we were to implement the old union voting rules in our U.S. Presidential elections. In the U.S., (unfortunately) we're doing pretty good if we can get a 60% voter turnout every four years. That means that 40% of the eligible voters aren't even casting a ballot. What if we were to assign their "votes" to a specific candidate automatically (perhaps the incumbent for purposes of discussion?). Suddenly whichever candidate we assign those votes to has a huge benefit and only needs to garner a small percentage of the people who actually vote in order to win the election. See how crazy that is to assign so much weight and value to a "non-vote"? Everyone who wins a first term would be essentially guaranteed a second term (I can hear the conservatives/Republicans squirming in their seats). It would be incredibly difficult to vote out someone after their first term, just like with the previous union rules, it's incredibly difficult to vote in a union.

Why should it be any different here? Because something 75 years old says so? It was wrong 75 years ago and is wrong today. If you want your voice heard and your opinion counted, then vote. If you don't, or don't care, then don't vote, and don't be counted. That's how "real" elections that affect us all work, whether it's electing someone to office or passing legislation.

It doesn't surprise me that the business community (Delta) and the anti-union folks here are outraged at this change as previously, there was a good amount of people they could automatically count on as a "no" vote for the union, which would satisfy their own personal beliefs.

Yes. As evidenced by my previous posts. However, NWAFA has shown they have no interest in discussion, just posting hyperbole and PR .........

A reminder that NWAFA has gone out of their way to spew negative information & hyperbole but has failed to provide anything substantive to the argument. This is my biggest issue with union organizers, they love to spread hate but never seem to be able to back it up @:-)
So as far as your message to "Give it up" why don't you go ahead and read before you blow something off. Maybe you & NWAFA have something in common. A lack of respect for a discussion.