Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

AirTran pilots considering switching unions

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
The Kleiner and Pilarski study is a joke of a "scientific" study. There was no significant sample size. The two unions you mention, both blue-collar unions in California, were the only unions observed for this "study." No conclusions can be drawn from such a limited sample size. To get any real data, a wide-scale study would be needed.

The truth is, recalls and turnover are usually a bad thing. You need experience in office, not starry-eyed newbies that don't have a clue what they're doing. You should find elected leaders that do a good job, and keep them for the long haul.
The truth is the Union with the higher turnover rate achieved better benefits for its membership. In theory, the "European Model" which, as you described subscribes to stability for Union leadership to gain the necessary wisdom and knowledge for negotiating with the company, would appeal to conventional wisdom. In theory the "American Model" of high leadership turnover would be more volotile and less productive for the membership. Theory doesn't always work well in practice.
 
You need experience in office, not starry-eyed newbies that don't have a clue what they're doing. You should find elected leaders that do a good job, and keep them for the long haul.
What if that runs on the contrary to the will of the membership? Is it a democracy anymore?
 
The truth is the Union with the higher turnover rate achieved better benefits for its membership.

Cause and effect. With such a small sample size (only two locals), you have no way of knowing whether the turnover was the cause of the better results. In fact, it's highly unlikely that it was.
 
What if that runs on the contrary to the will of the membership? Is it a democracy anymore?

It's not an either/or proposition. You can find experienced union leaders that also follow the will of the membership.
 
We "recall" our POTUS every four to eight years. The difference is the orderly transition of power.

Same with union elections.

The problem with recall is its a reactive crises management method of dealing with problems.

It is not proactive, progressive, inclusive, collaborative, forward thinking, out of the box thinking and win/win.

Recall most often is a reflection of poor participatory members. Often they have poor situational awareness and come in half cocked ready for recall.

Is a recall justified? Maybe. But with only about 1/3 of pilots even bothering to vote and 5% of pilots participating in LEC meetings... is it safe to say that someone is not really connected and in tune with what is going on?

Can 1/3 of a group determine if a candidate has a better than average chance of not being recalled?

Rather than motivating your union officers with the fear of recall, why not empower them with participation, guidance, support, direction and clarity of expectations?

Because what recall actually does is the work for the companies "labor relations" consultants and lawyers. For example, Ford and Harrison lawyers take three and four day weekends when pilots run recalls.

It just makes the company giddy when they see a disorganized pilot group pulling the plug and trying to hastily reconnect it before the lights go out....
 
I have been in ALPA and the Teamsters in the past. ALPA is hands down a better union for pilots. All the Teamsters did was take our money and sell us out. With the Teamsters our business agent was a NWA FA. I remember that our Teamster's reps spent a lot of time at meetings and conferences in Vegas.
 
I have been in ALPA and the Teamsters in the past. ALPA is hands down a better union for pilots. All the Teamsters did was take our money and sell us out. With the Teamsters our business agent was a NWA FA. I remember that our Teamster's reps spent a lot of time at meetings and conferences in Vegas.

My experience was similar. My Teamster agent was a Pepsi truck driver who frequently had closed door meetings with the airline DO, specifically excluding our elected President. I worked at two airlines that had in-house Unions, including AirTran. Two with ALPA. ALPA, while far from perfect, would be a much better choice than the Teamsters or remaining with the NPA.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top