Delta F/A e-mail Newsletter #6
afa THINK ITS SUPPORTERS HAVE SHOTPUTS FOR BRAINS?
Nancy C. Lenk, afa’s
Director of Organizing sent out an e-mail to pro-afa F/As in which she informed
them that Delta “…has a right to search [your bags and your car] for
stolen items, drugs and alcohol” and warned them “Do not carry items
that are not legitimate for you to have in your possession at work.” What in the world does she think of these F/As?!
It follows that she thinks these F/As aren’t intelligent enough to
realize they shouldn’t have stolen property, drugs, or alcohol in their
possession at work. Note: she did not express concern about F/As stealing,
doing drugs, etc., just about their getting caught - gotta protect potential
afa votes, you know. This reinforces what we’ve been saying about the afa all
along, namely that it doesn’t give a rodent’s rear about F/As, it just
covets their money.
This just in:
just turned in an afa DAL F/A for soliciting union cards, passing out afa
propaganda, and dissing the senior management.
I respect everyone’s free speech privileges, but the problem was that
she was doing it during my crew briefing and she was coordinator!
she broadcast the whole incident on the DAL/FA website describing how Delta gave
her a Formal Warning Letter in her file for discussing afa during work. What she failed to mention was that she was in the leadership
position and was conducting the crew briefing at the same time!
This gross breach of ethics was bad enough, but to deliberately omit
material facts to make her look like a martyr to her cronies shows what kind of
people the afa is made of.”
TAKES ON twu
Robert Hunter, who claims to
be a sympathetic US Airways F/A (more on this later) responded to Greg Love’s
letters knocking the afa and trying to generate support for the twu.
Here are some of his comments – followed
by ours [in brackets like these]:
are, it is true, big differences between how the two unions work. Without
getting into absolute specifics about where money goes, let’s begin with
the philosophy between the two.” [In other words, he cannot refute Love’s charge that the afa
will not commit to returning any dues money whatsoever to local control so
he changes the subject]|
which was created by AFA has proven to be a tremendously powerful tool in
negotiations and has virtually rendered the ‘OLD FASHIONED STRIKE’
obsolete.” [The only part of CHAOS that the afa created was its name.
Unions have been employing wildcat strikes for decades.
If CHAOS is so powerful, why did the afa capitulate in its recent
negotiations with US Airways when it had NMB approval to strike? The answer,
as pointed out in Vicious Truths # 56, is US Airways management
spelled the death knell for CHAOS by announcing that it would shut down
completely if agreement was not reached by the strike deadline. To repeat
what we said in Vicious Truths #58: “…the afa does not have a
strike fund and its net worth after going $800,000 in the hole last year
, is just $2.3 million. That’s
about what US Airways F/As earn in three days!
The afa had been planning to assess working F/As to reimburse those
who strike, but there aren’t going to be any working US Airways F/As if
the afa strikes!” Under
the circumstances, the afa threw in the towel and settled for “…a 5%
signing bonus - an amount insufficient to reimburse F/As for the dues they
had to pay during the four years they went without a contract - and 11% in
raises over the next 5 years. Since
US Airways F/As hadn’t had an increase in four years, the settlement is
actually for nine years. Over that period, F/As’ increases will average
less than 1.8% per year.” The negotiations were a huge success, however,
for the afa which stands to rake in $42 million in dues during its term. ]|
believes that by pooling our moneys we as F/A’s [sic] from many air carriers can hire the
best when it comes to supporting our efforts locally, at each carrier, as
well as nationally. AFA
hires and retains the best labor lawyers as full time staff.
The same for negotiators.” [Best
labor lawyers? In 1999, the
afa’s last LM-2 report, showed that the afa had a grand total of nine
attorneys on its staff, including general counsel David Borer. Five of them
were paid less than $60,000 and, consequently, less than many Delta F/As.
Only Borer was paid over $100,000.
Sorry Mr. Hunter, but “best labor lawyers” earn multiples
of Mr. Borer’s salary. So do
top notch negotiators. Insofar as the negotiators are concerned, the afa’s
LM-2 lists three – and they are all paid less than $90,000. Speaking of retaining
negotiators, the only one around long enough to have been on the afa’s
negotiating team at United in 1993, was Roberte Francis and he was so highly
regarded that he was listed as a “Labor Relations Associate.” Even more
significant than pay, of course, is performance.
The afa’s negotiating debacles at US Airways and United offer
thunderous repudiation of Hunter’s claim that the afa hires the best
were years behind where we are now and WE’RE NOT EVEN THERE YET!”
[Yet another admission that
is music to our ears].|
has been getting stronger over the years…” [The
afa’s membership grew in recent years because the airline business was
booming and new F/As at union carriers were forced to join.
Nonetheless, the afa’s financial clout hasn’t grown appreciably. Its
$2.3 million net worth is pitiful for a national union.
In contrast, the twu Hunter is vilifying has a net worth of over $40
million. Further, if “growing stronger” means
becoming more effective, the afa’s recent negotiation failures certainly
throughout the years have almost always yielded benefits that were greater
than the amount of the yearly dues! [Almost always?
What about the four years US Airways F/As went without a contract and
the first four years of the current United agreement which froze wage
ranges? It’s more accurate to say that
afa members’ gains have often been insufficient to
reimburse them for their dues.]. |
this and previous e-mails, Robert Hunter does not identify himself as an afa
official and tries to come across as simply an afa member who is concerned
about Delta F/As. Something he said, however, calls that into question.
“Would you be willing to vote for a contract that didn’t make
paying the $39.00 well worth it? Do
you think we realize that?” [He
means “Don’t you think we realize that?” but that is immaterial. The “we” in this statement is material. It
identifies him as someone in the afa ranks, and not just as a concerned
fellow F/A. He must have
thought he’d come across better if not identifiable as someone with an axe