IBT 357 (futile) Strike Vote at RAH
10-23-2011 | 11:00 PM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,075
Likes: 0
While the union is required to represent them in issues related to collective bargaining, association fee payers do not have the privilege of voting in union elections or on referendums. If, as F9Driver says, all but 13 Frontier guys are association fee payers, that means only those 13 can vote on the strike referendum and only those 13 can vote in the upcoming Executive Board elections. That's too bad.
Electing a Frontier guy to the governing board of 357 could go a long way towards ending this little war and allying the pilots against the common enemy. Unfortunately, through their choice to abstain from membership they have lost a considerable voting bloc in the E-Board election. There are those who will say that no F9 guy would have had a chance to be elected anyway, however 600+/- votes could make a difference, particularly since the voter turnout is historically low in the elections.
It probably doesn't matter in any case. From the readings here and elsewhere, Casey Jones is at the switch.
Electing a Frontier guy to the governing board of 357 could go a long way towards ending this little war and allying the pilots against the common enemy. Unfortunately, through their choice to abstain from membership they have lost a considerable voting bloc in the E-Board election. There are those who will say that no F9 guy would have had a chance to be elected anyway, however 600+/- votes could make a difference, particularly since the voter turnout is historically low in the elections.
It probably doesn't matter in any case. From the readings here and elsewhere, Casey Jones is at the switch.
Last edited by Hetman; 10-24-2011 at 02:44 AM.
10-24-2011 | 06:41 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
From: B-73N FO
While the union is required to represent them in issues related to collective bargaining, association fee payers do not have the privilege of voting in union elections or on referendums. If, as F9Driver says, all but 13 Frontier guys are association fee payers, that means only those 13 can vote on the strike referendum and only those 13 can vote in the upcoming Executive Board elections. That's too bad.
Electing a Frontier guy to the governing board of 357 could go a long way towards ending this little war and allying the pilots against the common enemy. Unfortunately, through their choice to abstain from membership they have lost a considerable voting bloc in the E-Board election. There are those who will say that no F9 guy would have had a chance to be elected anyway, however 600+/- votes could make a difference, particularly since the voter turnout is historically low in the elections.
It probably doesn't matter in any case. From the readings here and elsewhere, Casey Jones is at the switch.
Electing a Frontier guy to the governing board of 357 could go a long way towards ending this little war and allying the pilots against the common enemy. Unfortunately, through their choice to abstain from membership they have lost a considerable voting bloc in the E-Board election. There are those who will say that no F9 guy would have had a chance to be elected anyway, however 600+/- votes could make a difference, particularly since the voter turnout is historically low in the elections.
It probably doesn't matter in any case. From the readings here and elsewhere, Casey Jones is at the switch.
10-24-2011 | 10:05 AM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
I publicly stated on here, and stand by it..If the F9 guys wanted representation on the EBoard...and they got behind a candidate for it, I would have voted for him to be on the board...step 1 is that they need to join the Union they want to be represented in though, and they failed in mass to do that. Thus, they have no spot on the new EBoard. I don't feel sorry in the least for them not having anyone on the EBoard as they failed to make an effort to get one on there.
10-25-2011 | 08:15 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
From: Captain 121
Association fee payers are still part of the bargaining unit (seniority list), and as such the bargaining agent (Local 357) is still required to represent them. As such, the F9 pilots do have the standing to file a suit alleging a breach of DFR. Whether such a suit would have merit will be up to the judge, but it can be filed.
10-25-2011 | 07:34 PM
#35
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Get a clue!! No F9 pilot wants to be represented by the IBT. (Or were you suggesting they need to join FAPA, ... or maybe ALPA... that is... the union they want to be represented in...??)
10-26-2011 | 06:25 AM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
so what you are saying is that they had an opportunity to join but didn't? So now they can just S TFU and realize they are too late and a dollar short... another missed opportunity to have a hand in their future but wasted it.... guess they aren't so awesome over there at F9.
10-26-2011 | 07:00 AM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
From: Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start.....
10-26-2011 | 07:00 AM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 879
Likes: 0
I, and most of my counterparts, don't see my employer as the "enemy".
On the other hand, I have IBT trying to destroy my career and seniority.
The IBT believes that the needs of the majority (native RAH pilots) are more important than the needs of the minority (Frontier pilots). Unfortunately, they wanted to "represent" all 3000 RAH pilots, and that is now their "duty". They are not meeting their legal requirement.
About $4,600,000 for me, less negotiated settlements and lawyers fees.
Last edited by FAULTPUSH; 10-26-2011 at 07:13 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
