goldentrout
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2001
- Posts
- 116
F18
Please define a level playing field.
To me, after reading the legislation, it seems that
1. Each side comes to the table with a final offer
2. Each side gets a member of the board, and has the right to concur on the other members of the board
3. The board must take into account the contracts of similar carriers (I don't see DAL or UAL poilots working for $20/hr). Otherwise, it could probably be successfully challenged in court per section 9
"JUDICIAL REVIEW- At the request of either party to the dispute, a final order of the Secretary under this subsection is subject to review by the court of appeals under section 46110 of this title. "
4. Each side has a grievance process through the secretary of transportation, or the court system
Sounds fair to me. I guess if it passes, we'll no longer be able to hold the company, all it's employees and customers hostage under the threat of financial ruin, and we'll have to resolve our disputes by negotation or in court.
This is what happens when unions start to abuse their power.
I think the union has way too much power. Basically, if we don't get what we want, we strike. The company is financially devastated, thousands of workers lose their jobs, the local economy, and possibly the national economy is severly damaged, and customers do not get the product they paid for.
That's way too much power for an employee group. Our union is no longer fighting for the "poor, overworked, underpaid laborer being exploited by the big, bad capitalists."
I think S1327 levels the playing field. Let's have some neutral arbritrators decide what's fair based on sound market economics...not the top part of the seniority list looking for "max pay to the last day."
Please define a level playing field.
To me, after reading the legislation, it seems that
1. Each side comes to the table with a final offer
2. Each side gets a member of the board, and has the right to concur on the other members of the board
3. The board must take into account the contracts of similar carriers (I don't see DAL or UAL poilots working for $20/hr). Otherwise, it could probably be successfully challenged in court per section 9
"JUDICIAL REVIEW- At the request of either party to the dispute, a final order of the Secretary under this subsection is subject to review by the court of appeals under section 46110 of this title. "
4. Each side has a grievance process through the secretary of transportation, or the court system
Sounds fair to me. I guess if it passes, we'll no longer be able to hold the company, all it's employees and customers hostage under the threat of financial ruin, and we'll have to resolve our disputes by negotation or in court.
This is what happens when unions start to abuse their power.
I think the union has way too much power. Basically, if we don't get what we want, we strike. The company is financially devastated, thousands of workers lose their jobs, the local economy, and possibly the national economy is severly damaged, and customers do not get the product they paid for.
That's way too much power for an employee group. Our union is no longer fighting for the "poor, overworked, underpaid laborer being exploited by the big, bad capitalists."
I think S1327 levels the playing field. Let's have some neutral arbritrators decide what's fair based on sound market economics...not the top part of the seniority list looking for "max pay to the last day."