Bush has no plans to intervene at NWA.

[miles otoole]

i do not know the answer. Did W do anything about the Comair strike??

Nope- should have locked 'em out.

 

[xjcaptain]

When AMFA was negotiating in 2001 and had the upper hand, Bush said he would step in if there was a strike. In 2005 NWA management has the upper hand and wants an AMFA strike so Bush says he will not step in with a PEB.

It is pretty much whatever Steenland wants since Bush and Lorenzo are friends and most of NWA management are Ex texas air and ex eastern aka Lorenzo's boyz

You guys never fail to amaze me. If Bush were to step in you would be screaming to let the RLA work and let the workers use their legal self-help options. When he doesn't, it's a big conspiracy theory and he's just helping out his buddies.

So if I'm reading what you wrote properly, you would prefer that Bush would step in and force the union workers to continue to work with an expired contract, with absolutely no leverage against the company to negotiate. Is that right?...Or do you want him to let the process proceed to it's conclusion and either have a strike or a mutually agreed upon contract? Kinda caught up in your own doublespeak arn't you. Thank you for playing, please try again.

 

[sqwkvfr]

My point with that thread was its unbeliveable the arrogance of Mr. Bush to take a five week vacation when we're at war, gas prices are spiraling out of control and we have a serious immigration problem just to name a few. Bush's "vacation" is a slap in the face to every hard working American and soldier at war right now.

That's right, perhaps he should be working w/ congress to pass some new laws. Oh, that's right....congress is in recess.

Well, maybe he should be arguing in front of the Supreme Court for meaningful changes....oh, that's right....they're outta session.

Washington is basically closed down right now, people....and, quite frankly, I don't understand how anyone cannot see what a negative influence the trappings of Washington is on the people that get sent there to represent their districts or the country. Within a few months, "reform" candidates are "playing ball" with the best of 'em. The DC culture is very corrupting and oftentimes counterproductive to the good of the people that are actually out here in the rest of the country...you know, the "real world."

There's nothing that the President can do in Washington that he can't do in Texas at this time of year. Nothing.

I say that every DC politician shouldn't be allowed to spend more than 4 months a years in that town....let's face it, if they worked for those entire four months, they'd get 10 times the work done that they do now.

tired_pilot, your arguments are myopic and ridiculous...the immigration problems and gas prices are issues that have been building for decades....they're both political hot potatoes that have been passed on from administration to administration for a long time.

Do you really think that the President staying in Washington while congress and the SCOTUS is out of town is gonna do anything???....especially considering that DC Democrats have been obstructing any sort of meaningful reduced dependance steps at the beheast of a few extremist environmentalist groups?

...and reference the war: It's day-to-day ops are being run by military commanders and generals on the ground in the middle east....not the president. We've learned the foolishness of trying to let politicians run wars, and W isn't gonna repeat those mistakes. The man gets briefed every day on progress in the war on terrorism and just because he's in a different location doesn't make his conference calls, daily briefings, or face-to-face meetings any less effective. The president's job is to set policy, and his lieutenants carry out that policy in the way they see most effective. How is a change in scenery gonna effect the president's ability to set policy?

Do you understand now how the whole "vacation" issue is little more than superluous derision congered up by political opponents hoping that it'll resonate with the impaired?

 

[se1776]

President Bush got more important things to take care than look out for
a bunch of Rebellious people.

 

[hbrow15]

That's right, perhaps he should be working w/ congress to pass some new laws. Oh, that's right....congress is in recess.

Well, maybe he should be arguing in front of the Supreme Court for meaningful changes....oh, that's right....they're outta session.

Washington is basically closed down right now, people....and, quite frankly, I don't understand how anyone cannot see what a negative influence the trappings of Washington is on the people that get sent there to represent their districts or the country. Within a few months, "reform" candidates are "playing ball" with the best of 'em. The DC culture is very corrupting and oftentimes counterproductive to the good of the people that are actually out here in the rest of the country...you know, the "real world."

There's nothing that the President can do in Washington that he can't do in Texas at this time of year. Nothing.

I say that every DC politician shouldn't be allowed to spend more than 4 months a years in that town....let's face it, if they worked for those entire four months, they'd get 10 times the work done that they do now.

tired_pilot, your arguments are myopic and ridiculous...the immigration problems and gas prices are issues that have been building for decades....they're both political hot potatoes that have been passed on from administration to administration for a long time.

Do you really think that the President staying in Washington while congress and the SCOTUS is out of town is gonna do anything???....especially considering that DC Democrats have been obstructing any sort of meaningful reduced dependance steps at the beheast of a few extremist environmentalist groups?

...and reference the war: It's day-to-day ops are being run by military commanders and generals on the ground in the middle east....not the president. We've learned the foolishness of trying to let politicians run wars, and W isn't gonna repeat those mistakes. The man gets briefed every day on progress in the war on terrorism and just because he's in a different location doesn't make his conference calls, daily briefings, or face-to-face meetings any less effective. The president's job is to set policy, and his lieutenants carry out that policy in the way they see most effective. How is a change in scenery gonna effect the president's ability to set policy?

Do you understand now how the whole "vacation" issue is little more than superluous derision congered up by political opponents hoping that it'll resonate with the impaired?

great post!!

 

[hbrow15]

i do not know the answer. Did W do anything about the Comair strike??

I dont think W was president during the comair strike.

In 2005 NWA management has the upper hand and wants an AMFA strike so Bush says he will not step in with a PEB.

The problem with this theory is the only way management has the upper hand and wants a strike is if he knows the pilots wont honor the strike, the only way he knows is if he is told by the union. If that is the case the Mech's never had a chance. Sucks the only support the mech's recieved came from UPS.

 

[twobits]

G W Bush was the president during the Comiar strike in 2001.

 

[scabseeker]

You guys never fail to amaze me. If Bush were to step in you would be screaming to let the RLA work and let the workers use their legal self-help options. When he doesn't, it's a big conspiracy theory and he's just helping out his buddies.

So if I'm reading what you wrote properly, you would prefer that Bush would step in and force the union workers to continue to work with an expired contract, with absolutely no leverage against the company to negotiate. Is that right?...Or do you want him to let the process proceed to it's conclusion and either have a strike or a mutually agreed upon contract? Kinda caught up in your own doublespeak arn't you. Thank you for playing, please try again.

late response by me but here goes...

What I am saying is back in 2001 Bush said he would allow no strikes at a major airline to take place. This is because most strikes shut down airlines and hurt mangement.

Fast forward to 2005. NWA has replacement workers in place and wants to break AMFA. So in this case mangement wants the mechanics to go on strike ergo Bush goes against his vow to stop any strikes.

Labor doesn't always want to go on strike. At Eastern in 1991 the IAM actually wanted Bush 1 to step in with a PEB but Lorenzo didn't so Bush 1 stayed out of things. The same thing is happening here. I promise that if NWA management didn't have replacement workers lined up or the pilots walked, Bush would have stepped in to stop a strike ASAP.

And it's no conspiracy theory. Bush is a former CEO and will take the side of management over labor most of the time. I think that is wrong but I know that's just how he thinks.

Also, contracts don't expire they become amendable. And a PEB merely forces the workers back to work for 60 days while negotiations continue and after that congress sets the contract.

I guess you didn't pay attention back in late 2003/early 2004 when XJ was going through this?

 

[Lear70]

It's really very simple.

Bush would only intervene if he believed it would cause a disruption - he'd have to, despite his "business leanings", because of public outcry.

Northwest told him there'd be no disruption (or it would be very minor) because they had replacement workers lined up.

No interruption in public transportation + No public outcry = no Presidential intervention required. Pretty simple math.

Incidentally, I won't be feeling very sorry for the NWA pilots, flight attendants, or IAM employees when their turn at the chopping block comes. This shortsighted "They didn't do it our way back then so screw them now" is going to come back to haunt them for the rest of their (short-lived and under-paid) careers.

Regardless of your personal feelings, you should have supported the mechanics and thereby forced the company back to the bargaining table. The employee group's failure to band together now will cause their slow demise later.

And, for the record, AMFA's final offer was not "unreasonable". That alone SHOULD constitute requirement from the other unions to help.

The downside for the rest of us: we will suffer as well from a reduced bargaining standpoint, but there's nothing we can do from the sidelines.

The upside: one less application to fill out any time soon. NWA won't be hiring pilots for a decade once their scope gets destroyed in the next round.

 

[skykid]

It's really very simple.

Bush would only intervene if he believed it would cause a disruption - he'd have to, despite his "business leanings", because of public outcry.

Northwest told him there'd be no disruption (or it would be very minor) because they had replacement workers lined up.

No interruption in public transportation + No public outcry = no Presidential intervention required. Pretty simple math.

There you have it. Intervene in what? NWA's completion rate is somewhere well above 90%, isn't it?