Petition to eliminate railway labor act
#1
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2013
Position: The Parlor
Posts: 1,243
So what is the plan once the goal is met? Does the originator of this know what can of worms this could open? I sure don't, thus no signature. Why potentially contribute to something that could back fire?
#6
What, exactly, is the virtue of the cause?
There are problems with the RLA, however, you want to replace with what? How well connected is this group in DC (who ever it is leading the charge) that you can be sure voiding the RLA will result in something better for labor?
From the petition site:
My guess is the policy experts will respond with a predictable history lesson about why wildcat strikes are bad for the national transportation infrastructure. In the meantime, maybe those storming the castle should watch Schoolhouse Rock and review how a Bill becomes a Law.
There are problems with the RLA, however, you want to replace with what? How well connected is this group in DC (who ever it is leading the charge) that you can be sure voiding the RLA will result in something better for labor?
From the petition site:
If a petition gets enough support, White House staff will review it, ensure it’s sent to the appropriate policy experts, and issue an official response.
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 190
Disregard this stupid petition. It's the brainchild of some clueless IBT fools. The same brain trust that thought cancelling their ASAP program was a good idea while having a hissy fit over the majestic leader of the parade of fools getting fired.
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Position: Representing the REAL Delta
Posts: 857
Once again, you contribute absolutely nothing. You have never once made a valid argument. My guess is your real personality reflects your APC contributions to the T.
#9
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 93
This is a bad idea.
On the surface, it seems as if it would provide us immediate and strong leverage negotiating with the company on our amendable date because of the ability to strike. This is a true statement. However, there are many negative aspects of the NLRA. Here are some of them:
A company can divide labor into "appropriate" groups. What this could mean for us, is a base by base contract. SLC would have a contract, Seattle would have a contract, and Los Angeles would have a contract. They may not have the same expiration date and duration. The ability to whipsaw one base against another would be easy and expected. Decertification, like Boeing did against the IAM in South Carolina, would weaken and divide us.
The NLRA also has an exclusionary supervisory provision, meaning those employees in a supervisory position, do not belong to the union. Chief Pilots, Administrative Pilots, even Captains might be excluded from the union. Again, it would weaken and divide us.
Additionally, the NLRA has a provision that protects a corporation's secondary activities. This is defined in a manner that limits or prohibits a union from interfering with legitimate business agreements of the corporation outside the scope of activities directly related to the union member's job. What this would likely mean to us is the elimination of both domestic and international codeshare protections, and joint venture limitations. Again, this severely weakens our bargaining strength.
Lastly, there are many states that have Right to Work laws. Agency Shop provisions would not be enforceable in several states. While I have heard the argument that the best way to get your union to pay attention is to stop contributing money to them, this is a weak argument. If we allow the 5% of our professional life we disagree on to ruin the 95% we agree on, its long term affect is division, and eventually failure.
In summary, the NLRA is a path we do not want to take. Its path leads to division, and a fracturing of our power under the RLA. Unions do not grow stronger because they take a separate path, peel off members, divide base against base, or allow discord on a small part of their professional life ruin the large part they agree on. Conversely, they do grow stronger when they include more members, protect the weaker, and work through the disagreements.
On the surface, it seems as if it would provide us immediate and strong leverage negotiating with the company on our amendable date because of the ability to strike. This is a true statement. However, there are many negative aspects of the NLRA. Here are some of them:
A company can divide labor into "appropriate" groups. What this could mean for us, is a base by base contract. SLC would have a contract, Seattle would have a contract, and Los Angeles would have a contract. They may not have the same expiration date and duration. The ability to whipsaw one base against another would be easy and expected. Decertification, like Boeing did against the IAM in South Carolina, would weaken and divide us.
The NLRA also has an exclusionary supervisory provision, meaning those employees in a supervisory position, do not belong to the union. Chief Pilots, Administrative Pilots, even Captains might be excluded from the union. Again, it would weaken and divide us.
Additionally, the NLRA has a provision that protects a corporation's secondary activities. This is defined in a manner that limits or prohibits a union from interfering with legitimate business agreements of the corporation outside the scope of activities directly related to the union member's job. What this would likely mean to us is the elimination of both domestic and international codeshare protections, and joint venture limitations. Again, this severely weakens our bargaining strength.
Lastly, there are many states that have Right to Work laws. Agency Shop provisions would not be enforceable in several states. While I have heard the argument that the best way to get your union to pay attention is to stop contributing money to them, this is a weak argument. If we allow the 5% of our professional life we disagree on to ruin the 95% we agree on, its long term affect is division, and eventually failure.
In summary, the NLRA is a path we do not want to take. Its path leads to division, and a fracturing of our power under the RLA. Unions do not grow stronger because they take a separate path, peel off members, divide base against base, or allow discord on a small part of their professional life ruin the large part they agree on. Conversely, they do grow stronger when they include more members, protect the weaker, and work through the disagreements.
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Position: Just because the MEL says we can, doesn't mean we should
Posts: 324
To all the nay-sayers...go back to your management cubicle and continue to harass line pilots as to why there was a delay.
Let the rest of us that actually move the wheel try to bring some respectability and accountability back to the profession.
Let the rest of us that actually move the wheel try to bring some respectability and accountability back to the profession.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post