Paul A. Rahe · Dec 16, 2010 at 11:19am

Over at The Weekly Standard, Fred Barnes is pointing to the significance of another series of elections that the Obama administration has lost – these involving a concerted attempt to unionize the workforce of Delta Airlines.

As he points out, Obama’s appointees even changed the rules, stacking the deck in favor of the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA) and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM). Up to now, to organize a workplace a union had to secure the support in an election of a majority of its workers. In the recent elections, however, thanks to a new ruling by the National Mediation Board, they needed only to secure a majority among those who bothered to vote – which they did not get.

Next up. The airport screeners at the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). In this case, the Federal Labor Relations Authority will play the decisive role. It, too, is now dominated by Obama’s appointees. If you think the TSA is a mess now, consider just how much worse it could get.

Let's hope that the pertinent committee in the House of Representatives holds hearings next year.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Duane Oyen
Joined
May '10
Duane Oyen

I really enjoyed that when I read the article the other day because the organizers were the unions from Northwest Airlines, which merged with Delta.  NWA was essentially destroyed by its legacy unions (as were Eastern and United), there was a major election between rival mechanics groups (Teamsters vs. AFL-CIO) about every other year.  The militants are always on local TV telling us that the world will end if they don't get their raises- right at the same time as the parent company is in bankruptcy.  Reality bites.

My next door neighbor (Tom Brady's aunt) is a NW flight attendant, my cousin is a NW pilot, my niece is a NW gate agent, and her husband is a baggage handler.  Amazingly, we are all on speaking terms despite my anti-labor stance......

Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

I seem to recall that we were assured that TSA would not be subject to unionization at the time it was created. 

Rob Long
Kenneth: I seem to recall that we were assured that TSA would not be subject to unionization at the time it was created.  · Dec 16 at 3:25pm

Exactly right, Kenneth.  Here's John Fund from the WSJ:

After 9/11, Congress wisely decided to forbid TSA employees from coming under union work rules out of fear that it could compromise security. Imagine if every change in procedures had to be cleared with union shop stewards. While it is not easy to fire TSA personnel now, just think how difficult it will be to remove bad employees if they are covered by union job protection agreements.

But in 2007, the new Democratic Congress eliminated the ban on collective bargaining, and as soon as Barack Obama became president in 2009 his appointees began pushing unionization for TSA. 

This seems like a great political issue, no?  The only thing that could make the TSA and labor unions more unpopular is to somehow combine them.  

Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

Rob Long

Kenneth: I seem to recall that we were assured that TSA would not be subject to unionization at the time it was created.  · Dec 16 at 3:25pm

Exactly right, Kenneth.  Here's John Fund from the WSJ:

But in 2007, the new Democratic Congress eliminated the ban on collective bargaining, and as soon as Barack Obama became president in 2009 his appointees began pushing unionization for TSA. 

And I recall knowing right from the start that this is what would inevitably happen.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In