How a Union is formed.

[shon7]

I was looking over the Railway Labor Act (on the internet) and it seems there is very little management can do to prevent workers from forming a union once they get the adequate number of votes. Having said that -- what is hindering this at Jet Blue and the likes?

Can management include a "no unionization" clause or disrupt the process otherwise or would this be plan illegal?

 

[njcapt]

I was looking over the Railway Labor Act (on the internet) and it seems there is very little management can do to prevent workers from forming a union once they get the adequate number of votes. Having said that -- what is hindering this at Jet Blue and the likes?

Uhhhh, desire?

 

[81Horse]

shon7, have you got a dog in this hunt? You seem to be popping up in various threads for the purpose of expressing your (anti)union viewpoint -- so I'm just wondering, why the interest?

 

[KC-10 Driver]

what is hindering this at Jet Blue and the likes?

Uhhhh, desire?

njcapt hit the nail on the head. There is very little hindering it at JetBlue (in my estimation), other than the fact that there is no great overwhelming desire for a union at this point.

That may change some day. But for now, that's how it is.

 

[Falconjet]

.....
Fj

 

[Fins Up]

I'm pretty sure this was covered in other threads several times.

 

[Mesabi Miner]

The key is to carefully research the companies you think you might want to work for, talk to the employees, and get a feel for the quality of the management team. If the senior leaders in management are good people, they will recognize their employees, they will be honest and truthful with them, and they will see them not as 5.5 year (expensive) liabilities as is the case at Mesaba, but instead as 5.5 experienced assets. If management is on the side of their employees, why form a union? I know a management team like the above may only exist in fairy tales, but I still believe there are good managers out there.

 

[Occam's Razor]

I was looking over the Railway Labor Act (on the internet) and it seems there is very little management can do to prevent workers from forming a union once they get the adequate number of votes. Having said that -- what is hindering this at Jet Blue and the likes?

No need. The only reason pilots form unions is because they believe they can accomplish more collectively than they can individually. It's not a concept unique to piloting, aviation, or even in labor. The 13 colonies in America reached the same conclusion in 1775. Likewise NATO.

So far, the pilots at JetBlue seem to feel that they would not benefit from a union. If they go many more years without one they will be a noteworthy exception in the history of US airlines.

My theory (I'm not a JetBlue pilot, but I know several) is that JetBlue pilots fall into two categories regarding why they don't fell compelled to form a union:

1. They were hired by a company that doesn't have a union, and "so far, so good".
2. They came from another airline where the union couldn't prevent them from losing their job.

Since I'm an airline pilot, I'm entitled to spout my opinion on both of those basic reasons...and it's worth exactly what you're paying to read it.

1. The industry, economy, and my sex life are all (sigh), cyclical. The recent losses reported by JetBlue indicate that they are not immune to many of the factors that have hammered other US airlines. At some point, the bosses at JetBlue will need to raise revenue or cut costs. Since consumers don't screen flights with requests like, "Please list all flights in order of nicest pilots" or "Please show me the flights that have the coolest napkins", JetBlue is fighting for revenue based on the same preference-drivers as the rest of us: Price and Schedule. If they can't generate a revenue premium...they will have to cut costs to show a profit. The guys in the snazzy blue shirts are a "cost item" regardless of how many times Mr. Neeleman hugs them.

When he comes for their pay, the "Virginians" will start taking to the "Pennsylvanians" about collective efforts. To support this portion of my thesis I offer every other major airline in history.

Which brings me to...

2. Rather than blame a combination of: the economy, an anti-labor President, greedy managements, OPEC, Wal-Mart consumerism, and financial in-breeding (is there an airline G.E. doesn't throw money at?), pilots like to blame their union when things go poorly. Forget the accomplishments it took to get the profession to the point where we can lament the losses...we're part of the "What have you done for me TODAY?" era. We expect our unions (ALPA. APA, IBT, etc) to be titanium condoms that protect us from "management herpes", "economy HIV", and "government gonorrhea". When they can't, we get Crank up the Enola Gay!-angry and blame our unions.

The ex-patriate union pilot then go to JetBlue as either their best option or in the belief that JetBlue is somehow "different". It's true that not every daughter of a fat lady grows up to become a porker herself...but both history and last quarter's losses indicate that Miss JetBlue has been sneaking Snickers bars between meals.

If JetBlue swallows a grenade, it will be interesting to see who the pilots blame. Their benevolent management? The government? The unions at other airlines for "lowering the bar"? (If I was scientist I'd put radio collars around their necks to track their behavior.)

Can management include a "no unionization" clause or disrupt the process otherwise or would this be plan illegal?

No.

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

I have predicted that when the number of F/Os exceed the number of A-320 Captains a union would be considered. My reasoning is the upgrade would have slowed down enough to frustrate both the Airbus and Embraer F/Os. It will also coincide with a more mature company much bigger than now with a stable earnings stream.

But that is a few years into the future. The industry will be much different and the dominant carriers, perhaps mergers or partnerships of some current carriers, will cause them to want a union. If JetBlue partnered with a union carrier I would deem it a certainty. The sacrifice for high growth will not be necessary anymore but management will have to be "convinced" they need to increase wages.

I'll turn off the Crystal ball now. Its getting too warm.

 

[Wise Guy]

Great post Occam. Highly enjoyable.

 

[sandman2122]

At Jetblue I believe it's not a matter of IF, but WHEN.

and please no "yeah, well, when hell freezes over blah, blah, blah".

 

[81Horse]

Occam, simply brilliant.

 

[Bavarian Chef]

The 13 colonies unionized? Ha.

"So far, the pilots at JetBlue seem to feel that they would not benefit from a union. If they go many more years without one they will be a noteworthy exception in the history of US airlines."

And it's such a successful, unionized history...

"The ex-patriate union pilot then go to JetBlue as either their best option or in the belief that JetBlue is somehow "different"."

What is wrong with wanting to be a part of an airline that is different? What is wrong in believing that at JB, it can work?

"It's true that not every daughter of a fat lady grows up to become a porker herself...but both history and last quarter's losses indicate that Miss JetBlue has been sneaking Snickers bars between meals."

Pure pilot bravado. Any casual reader would infer from this statement that JB has had a history of annual or quarter losses.

"If JetBlue swallows a grenade, it will be interesting to see who the pilots blame. Their benevolent management? The government? The unions at other airlines for "lowering the bar"? (If I was scientist I'd put radio collars around their necks to track their behavior.)"

Yes, oh wise one, we must have someone to blame -- it's a pilot thing. I am putting the blame on Wayne Gretzky's wife. Too bad I don't have a union to convey that blame to the public.

 

[radarlove]

Be very careful taking the RLA at face value. A good book to read is "Confessions of a Union Buster", where a professional consultant who destroyed union organizing efforts for a living described his tactics.

Yes, it's againt the law for firing someone for organizing a union. But, if a company fires someone, the guy fired has to go round-and-round in court to get his job back. He will, probably get his job back, but not his costs to fight (there's no union yet to cover that).

Also, if you get fired and get another job while fighting to get your first back, you'll only get back pay that is the difference between the two jobs.

In the end, it's a lot cheaper for companies to fire the rabble-rousers, only to have to hire them back later, since the back-pay cost is a lot less than the cost of having a union on the property.

Also, it's not a sure thing. Both ALPA and the Teamsters require not just the minimum percentage in cards submitted, but some (undisclosed) higher ratio, like 70% or 80% before they'll take on a pilot group, so it's possible to have a "successful" card campaign, but to still not make the cut.

In-house unions sound like a good idea, but there's problems there, too. In-house unions have no money, no organization, no contract (not even the right to collect dues yet!) so it will likely take years to get the benefits of a big, operating organization like ALPA.

Even if ALPA sucks. At least the Teamsters suck harder.

 

[Occam's Razor]

The 13 colonies unionized? Ha.

Um...I was just reading the US Constitution, and it started off with, "We the People, in order to form a more perfect union..."

I think there's a copy of it on the internet somewhere if you'd like to read it for yourself.

I apologize if the "benefits of collective effort" analogy didn't make sense to you.

"So far, the pilots at JetBlue seem to feel that they would not benefit from a union. If they go many more years without one they will be a noteworthy exception in the history of US airlines."

And it's such a successful, unionized history...

Well, since every major airline has been unionized, and there seems to be more than one pilot interested in getting hired at a major airline, I gotta believe the "unionized history" of the majors is pretty good. I'm not sure that many ex-pat pilots from unionized carriers would have gone to JetBlue had the bottom not fallen out of the industry for the legacy carriers.

It did. They did. If your contention is that legacy carrier pilots would have been flocking to JetBlue to escape ALPA/APA/IBT/SWAPA/etc, then I think you should provide some evidence to support that thesis.

I also think the unions at the legacy carrers have "set the bar" for the profession over the years in terms of pay, work rules, and benefits. I don't think Mr. Neeleman used a dart board to set the rules at JetBlue. I think he evaluated the union-established rules at the legacy carriers, and calculated his from that reference.

"The ex-patriate union pilot then go to JetBlue as either their best option or in the belief that JetBlue is somehow "different".

What is wrong with wanting to be a part of an airline that is different? What is wrong in believing that at JB, it can work?

Not a thing!

I'm voicing some skepticism here, that's all. I'm using the history of the airline industry as my "grain of salt" when I read that JetBlue is "special" and "unique".

I don't think JetBlue very special or truly unique.

I think SWA is unique. They operate differently than any other major airline. They are also highly unionized. Somehow they manage to remain profitable despite their pilots having a collective voice.

"If JetBlue swallows a grenade, it will be interesting to see who the pilots blame. Their benevolent management? The government? The unions at other airlines for "lowering the bar"? (If I was scientist I'd put radio collars around their necks to track their behavior.)"

Yes, oh wise one, we must have someone to blame -- it's a pilot thing. I am putting the blame on Wayne Gretzky's wife. Too bad I don't have a union to convey that blame to the public.

I agree with you here. We do like to have someone, or something to blame. As pilots we are quite practiced in the Blame Game. We are interested in learning the "probable cause(s)" and the "contributing factors" when things go wrong. We don't want to repeat mistakes.

I think that's healthy.

JetBlue experienced losses in the last quarter, and probably for the year. We can blame those losses on: The government, OPEC, management, interest rates, consumers, or market forces.

If they continue JetBlue management will be faced with making some "adjustments". Some of those adjustments may impact JetBlue pilots. Will those adjustments reflect the collective priorities of the pilots...or the priorities of management?

At that point the Blame Game is pretty simple for you...since you won't have a union to blame.

 

[Uppercrust]

I'm pretty sure this was covered in other threads several times.

You might want to do some research on this subject. Your going to wish you had one in a few years.

 

[Bavarian Chef]

Hey Occam:​

As for the Constitution, thanks for the refresher, I have pledged to defend it many times in my military career. It is folly to think that the Framers were thinking along the lines of a union (as in collective labor) when they wrote the Constitution.

As for the Revolution, there were many who did not want to "collectively" fight the British. This country was on pretty shaky ground for quite a while. I just thought it was a funny analogy, thanks for the insulting humor. I can take it.

And as for the union issue, I think you are missing the point. I concede that unions have given the industry a foundation of solid work rules, safety standards and benefits; in fact, I never said they didn't. But what would a union do for us in the same manner that ALPA has done for DL/US/UA/NWA etc at this point in time? Would it help JB stay afloat? Would it make JB profitable? Would it keep the bottom third from getting furloughed during the tough times? Would it keep the entire list from choking down a pay cut? This could all happen with or without a union.

The way I look at it, if you are senior enough to be protected you will be. If you ain't, you won't. Unions work for all when the money flows. When the money flies, only the senior survive.

I have a friend who flies for a legacy who tells me their reserves are flying like gangbusters, yet they still have pilots on the street. If this is indeed true, why wouldn't a union step up and intervene? Why is not each member of that union worth fighting for? That, along with the recent spate of bankruptcies and ALPA's involvement with each, is how I view unions.

"Will those adjustments reflect the collective priorities of the pilots...or the priorities of management? At that point the Blame Game is pretty simple for you...since you won't have a union to blame."

Should I infer from this statement that every legacy pilot blames ALPA for their airline's demise? I never said I would blame a union or lack thereof for any of JB's mistakes. If JB swallows a grenade, it swallows a grenade. It's an airline, isn't it?

Which airline do you work for?

Edit: "I don't think JetBlue very special or truly unique."

Maybe you are correct. Maybe we are just like those legacy pilots that pay their dues and hope (maybe pray) that their airline's flavor of ALPA is "different."

 

[Dizel8]

Curious why so many people not employed by jetblue wants us to have a union?

Besides, if we were your ALPA brothers, you couldn't call us names and what fun would that be?

 

[Occam's Razor]

As for the Constitution, thanks for the refresher, I have pledged to defend it many times in my military career. It is folly to think that the Framers were thinking along the lines of a union (as in collective labor) when they wrote the Constitution.

Holy Coincidence! ME TOO! What are the odds two pilots writing on this Forum would've taken the exact same oath? Let's play the Lottery!

As for the Revolution, there were many who did not want to "collectively" fight the British. This country was on pretty shaky ground for quite a while. I just thought it was a funny analogy, thanks for the insulting humor. I can take it.

Good, because I meant it in a fraternal way. I was trying to use an analogy that clearly illustrated the benefit of acting collectively against a force that you are tied to...but might not have your best interests at heart.

And as for the union issue, I think you are missing the point. I concede that unions have given the industry a foundation of solid work rules, safety standards and benefits; in fact, I never said they didn't. But what would a union do for us in the same manner that ALPA has done for DL/US/UA/NWA etc at this point in time?

If we're going to use a snapshot to frame the discussion, then maybe we should use September 10, 2001 as our benchmark. I'd say the union airlines were doing pretty good at that moment. If we use September 10, 2015, perhaps we'll see the same thing. I mentioned the cyclical nature of the industry, right?

Would it help JB stay afloat? Would it make JB profitable? Would it keep the bottom third from getting furloughed during the tough times? Would it keep the entire list from choking down a pay cut? This could all happen with or without a union.

Correct! The key difference is that the rules that govern how I'm treated at my airline are codified, and when they are changed it is done with my consent, with a structure based on my (collective) priorities. At non-union carriers it's done with a memo.

The way I look at it, if you are senior enough to be protected you will be. If you ain't, you won't. Unions work for all when the money flows. When the money flies, only the senior survive.

Good point! Unions can't defy gravity. They aren't as powerful as the forces arrayed against us at times. The union at NWA paid the medical insurance premiums for furloughed NWA pilots for 3-years. At other ALPA carriers extended pass travel agreements were negotiated to help those that felt the impact of economic "physics". Even "when the money flies", the unions do what they can....but they cannot change the course of mighty rivers or bend steel with their bare hands.

I have a friend who flies for a legacy who tells me their reserves are flying like gangbusters, yet they still have pilots on the street. If this is indeed true, why wouldn't a union step up and intervene? Why is not each member of that union worth fighting for? That, along with the recent spate of bankruptcies and ALPA's involvement with each, is how I view unions.

Since I'm on Reserve at a legacy airline, I might be in a better position to comment on that than you. I fly more during holiday months than non-holiday months. I think that's normal. I think it might even be true at non-union airlines. Even in boom times, the "fly more during some months" rule existed. I understand it's that way at airlines represented by APA/SWAPA/IBT too. Is it different at JetBlue?

Should I infer from this statement that every legacy pilot blames ALPA for their airline's demise? I never said I would blame a union or lack thereof for any of JB's mistakes. If JB swallows a grenade, it swallows a grenade. It's an airline, isn't it?

Nah, every pilot doesn't blame ALPA. Some do. We tend to be a pragmatic sort...but some of us need a "messiah". Since some forces can't be overcome, those that view their union (APA/ALPA/SWAPA/IBT/etc) as penicillian or wolfbane are disappointed. You and I have both read some of their rants.

Maybe you are correct. Maybe we are just like those legacy pilots that pay their dues and hope (maybe pray) that their airline's flavor of ALPA is "different."

Hey, SWAF/O! What "flavor" is your ALPA?

Are you praying?