BY MALIK MIAH & RICH LESNIK
SAN FRANCISCO — George W. Bush campaigned for president on two broad themes: "compassionate conservatism" and against "big government" interfering in the lives of the American people. Workers in the airline industry are learning first hand what these false proclamations really mean.
Bush is neither "compassionate" nor concerned about the lives of working people. He represents big business, including the big airlines, and big government, which he's using against airline workers.
Open contracts affect tens of thousands of airline workers, most at the four largest carriers. NorthWest Airlines (NWA) mechanics, cleaners and custodians have been without a contract for four and a half years, and are currently being held in limbo by Bush's Presidential Emergency Board (PEB). American Airlines flight attendants have been in negotiations for three and a half years. Delta pilots have been in negotiations for more than 18 months and are under the National Mediation Board (NMB), which has suggested binding arbitration.
United Airlines mechanics, cleaners, ramp and stores service workers, customer service and reservation agents have been without a new contract since last July. United Flight Attendants have been conducting a war of words with UA management over mid-term wage adjustments in their 10-year contract. American Airlines mechanics' contract opened up late last fall. Workers at United, Delta, NWA and American are under federal court restraining orders not to "slow down" or cause other disruptions in service.
Pilots at Comair, a regional airline owned by Delta, walked out March 26, and are currently battling a management which eliminated all work rules, and wants to maintain starting pilot salaries of under $20,000. Though Bush hasn't yet intervened, he could do so at any moment.
The source of airline workers anger and frustration is the record profits all the majors made over the last seven years after major worker concessions in the 1980s and early '90s. Because of the Railway Labor Act (RLA) the airline bosses have been able to drag out contract negotiations until a downturn in the economy. Now they cry poor, ignoring years of record profits and frozen or stagnating wages. Workers responded by scrupulously following work and safety rules and Federal Aviation Administration and Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations, and declining to work voluntary overtime. The bosses countered with court action, even enlisting some unions' help in quelling worker unrest.
Pilots at United Airlines elected a more militant leadership before negotiations in December 1999. They carried out an effective "work to rule" and no-overtime campaign, helping an already chaotic mismanaged schedule become unmanageable. They finally forced management to grant them everything they'd sought, leading other pilots' unions to fight for the same.
At NWA two years ago mechanics and cleaners voted out the International Association of Machinists (IAM) union in favour of an independent union, the Airline Mechanics Fraternal Association (AMFA). Immediately negotiations took on a more militant, open and democratic character. Weekly and often daily updates on details of the negotiations were distributed widely to the membership, and negotiating sessions were open to AMFA member observers every day. This solidified rank and file support for the union negotiators, and put more pressure on management to respond openly to union demands. The National Mediation Board finally declared an impasse, and the union prepared to strike on midnight, March 10.
Bush issues executive order
On March 9 President Bush issued an executive order (EO) preventing mechanics, custodians and cleaners at NorthWest Airlines from going on strike. The EO established a Presidential Emergency Board (PEB) of three members which will submit a report to the president in 30 days with a recommendation to settle a contract that's been open for more than four and a half years. If either the airline or AMFA rejects the panel's recommendation, the president's EO prevents a strike for another 30 days.
After that, workers could strike, and the company could lock them out. Equally likely, however, would be congressional intervention, imposing a "settlement" crafted by the government's management-friendly representatives. (Bush's Secretary of Labor is a recent member of NWA's board of directors.)
The last time a president intervened in an airline dispute was 1997 when Bill Clinton stopped the pilots at American Airlines from going on strike. That was the first time a PEB was used in an airline conflict since the early 1960s. The use of PEBs and Congressional intervention have been more common in the rail industry where the unions were somewhat more militant and rail transportation of commodities is greater, thus impacting on the economy quickly. Commercial airlines, on the other hand, primarily move passengers.
Bush's intervention is political and aimed at sending a message to organised labour's top leaders and working people as a whole. Nevertheless, Bush justified his preemptive intervention by claiming he was protecting the flying public. "It's important for our economy", he stated, "but more important, it's important for the hard working people of America to make sure air service is not disrupted". Bush added later that he would not allow any airline strikes this year.
By taking this action, Bush has short-circuited airline workers right to collective bargaining, placing the balance of power in the hands of management and their government representatives.
Bush's attack on airline workers brought a sharp response from AMFA nationally and at NWA. "The government is running interference for the company", said O.V. Delle-Femine, AMFA's national director. "The president is taking sides."
AMFA initiated a public protest at the White House on March 12 and airports across the country. Another informational picket is being planned by a coalition of airline mechanics and others for April 13. These actions are being organised by ad hoc groups of rank and file workers, without participation of the union leaderships other than AMFA. They have attracted hundreds of pilots, flight attendants, mechanics, ramp and customer service workers.
The only official IAM-sponsored activities during negotiations have been a Thanksgiving holiday (November 23) leafleting at San Francisco airport and a rally at the airport in February by mechanics. Also planned is a March 28 rally by ramp workers at the airport.
The national IAM leadership recently withdrew its verbal support of UA's acquisition of USAirways, citing management's refusal to guarantee job security. Notable, however, is the previous action of the IAM's representative on the UA board of directors, John Peterpaul, who voted for the acquisition in June 2000, against the wishes of the pilots' union. A no vote would have vetoed the deal.
Troubling developments
The AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations) condemned the executive order at NorthWest, but recent developments are very troubling. The international office of the teamsters' union has been pressuring Teamsters Local 2000 (representing NWA flight attendants) to "tone down" its support for AMFA. When asked to "put it in writing" by the local's secretary-treasurer, Teamsters airline division director Ray Benning declined.
Joe Uehlein, director of strategic campaigns for the AFL-CIO, said AMFA doesn't deserve assistance from AFL-CIO affiliates. And in Minneapolis, NWA's major hub and AMFA's largest NWA local, Central Labor Council president Dick Johnson issued a statement March 7 to all AFL-CIO affiliates that said, "We should not be offering any assistance to AFMA". Local 2000 secretary Bob Krabbe said, "How arrogant can you possibly be to say you are all about labour, but only if you are with the AFL-CIO? The enemy here is not the other labour unions, it is NorthWest management."
Steve MacFarlane, president of AMFA Local 33 in Minneapolis, said that other local unions at NorthWest appear willing to help. "It's more of an AFL-CIO edict", he said. (All above quotes taken from March 30 Minneapolis Star-Tribune.)
The IAM national leadership was less critical of Bush. Robert Roach, general vice-president of transportation for the IAM said after the order was issued: "I don't think we want to interpret for the president what he means and lock him into a position. Let's let things play out." In a March 14 letter, Roach sent to the New York Times (printed March 17), he added: "Strikes by airline unions are rare; they can occur only after every step of an exhaustive bargaining process is completed... The threat of concurrent strikes in the airline industry is not probable." Yet Roach gives no word of solidarity with NorthWest mechanics. This soft-pedalling approach is merely the latest example of the trajectory the IAM has been following for most of the last decade.
United is the largest airline in the world. The IAM contracts covering mechanics, ramp and stores, customer service and reservations agents expired July 12, 2000. This previous contract was the famous "ESOP" (Employee Stock Ownership Plan) agreement, a major concessionary agreement which exchanged stock for over 20% cut in pay, loss of paid lunch and a wage freeze (at 1989 levels) for six years. Under labour laws specific to the airlines and railways, the contract "becomes amendable". Working under the status quo, workers are prevented from striking until the government gives the okay.
During the previously mentioned pilots' contract fight, the IAM colluded with management in disciplining its own members who attempted to organise on-the-job solidarity with the pilots. When more than 100 mechanics were locked out in Los Angeles for organising an alleged "sick out", the union branded them "outsiders", and threatened that workers could lose their jobs if they followed suit. This set the tone for what has become a long, frustrating negotiation for an IAM contract.
In the San Francisco Bay Area, the IAM leadership has expressed no solidarity with the mechanics at NWA. In fact, the IAM leadership claims AMFA is not really a union, referring to it as "the association". The district president for United mechanics sent a letter to all IAM members in March attacking AMFA for the situation at NorthWest, blaming AMFA's open bargaining strategy for the impasse and charging its supporters at United with disrupting the UA negotiating process. There was neither criticism of Bush's intervention at NWA, nor a word of solidarity with the workers at NWA.
On the other hand, the Teamsters-organised flight attendants at NWA have expressed strong support for their co-workers organised by AMFA and pledged their solidarity.
Solidarity is key
Opponents of labour recognise that mechanics and cleaners at NorthWest are on the front lines for all airline workers. That's why AMFA is called a "rogue" union by some and "outsiders" by the IAM officials who oppose any disruption of the peaceful negotiation practice under the RLA. The only effective way for airline workers to fight back is to use tactics that win the public to their side, then take action to let the airline know they mean business.
The approach of AMFA of open negotiations and membership control of the union is the main reason the bosses and their government are targeting AMFA first. If the most militant union can be set back or defeated, it would send a message to all airline workers.
The AFL-CIO affiliates led by the IAM leadership have supported partnerships with the employers over the last decade. Now that the chickens are coming home to roost, they are scurrying to get a deal at United. Meanwhile, AMFA is conducting a campaign to unseat the IAM at United, garnering increasing support due to the sharp contrast at NWA to the IAM's lackluster negotiation strategy at UA.
In this context, many workers at other airlines are following the battle at NWA closely. The mechanics at the fourth largest airline have a new union, and they are setting the standard for all airline workers. Regardless of one's stance regarding IAM vs. AMFA, it is vital that airline workers support the NWA mechanics. They are the current target of government attack, and the result of this battle will likely set the pattern for the rest of us. A government-imposed settlement, which is a distinct likelihood, would be a terrible blow to US airline workers.
The IAM leaders constantly bleat about UA management's unfriendly stance, then warn their own membership to go along with the bosses' dictates. They forget that like the fable where a scorpion stings a charitable frog, the company is just doing what is in its nature. Likewise with Bush.
What remains to be seen is whether the IAM will be able to provide the leadership necessary to fight back, or if it'll need to give way to a more effective rank-and-file alternative.
[Malik Miah and Rich Lesnik work as mechanics for United Airlines in San Francisco and are members of IAM local 1781.]