Slaphappy

Yay for free association.

GogglesPisano

And freeloading. And “rugged individualists” undercutting union wages by cutting their own deals. I sincerely hope you’re not an airline pilot.

Slaphappy

Market forces did more to raise wages at the regional level that some crappy union ever did.

GogglesPisano

True. But what about the other end? Care to address the premium Netjets pilots make over their peers as referenced in a previous post?

How do you explain the pay at FDX/UPS/SWA and the Big Three?

kevbo

Free markets? Remember the American Eagle slogan, 80 for 80?

GogglesPisano

You've made my point. Pilots will jump over each other to secure a deal for themselves -- like flying an MD80 for $80/hr.

terminal

And majority rules in the workplace because that *was* what was set by law.

If it’s wrong then it’s wrong across the board. You can’t say it’s BS that a majority decides for everyone in one instance and then accept it in another.

METO Guido

Members can wear pins non dues paying non-members can't. Non-members can earn a spot on a non-members list. Non-members undergo recurrent checking like everyone else. Your individualism must be sufficiently "rugged" to shrug that off. SC decisions often balance protections of the individual against the will of a majority. They don't guarantee a pleasant work environment.

JohnBurke

Someone who does not pay union dues not hold membership is not beholden to follow the contract, as the contract exists between the company and the union.

Someone to whom the contract does not apply is not entitled to the protections or agreements afforded a participating party, and technically, the company may offer a non-ptotected employee something outside the scope of the contract. If a nonmember pilot believes he as not received the pay or conditions guaranteed by the contract, the employee has no basis to grieve under the contract, and is not entitled to representation.

The supreme court position, while presently outside the scope of airline operations, cuts both ways. An employee might not be required to join the union or pay dues, but the emoyee is neither protected nor benefitted by the contract or union. He's fair game to the company. That weakens the unions position, creates a double standatd, but may also pit more pressure on unions to do more than represent self interests.

galaxy flyer

John,

Hate to disagree, but all members of the bargaining unit must, by law, be represented by their bargaining agent. Just because someone decides not to join the union, they cannot work for terms outside the contract and the company cannot offer employment on terms different than the contract. Either would be an unfair practice.

GF