S P R I N G 2 010W W W. I A M141. O R G

Negotiations: Fast approaching money issues

Official Publication of District 141, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers

Editor-in-Chief – Rich DelaneyExecutive Editor – Dave AtkinsonManaging Editor – Mike Mancini

District 141 Communication Director – Mike ManciniDistrict 141 Communication Coordinator – Dave LehiveLayout & Design – Mike Mancini

Send Address Changes To: District Lodge 141, P.O. Box 1149, Redwood City, CA 94064-1149 Main Phone: (847) 640-2222

Web address http://www.iam141.org

CONTENTSSPRING 2010

4. Navigating the Railway Labor Act A schematic drawing of how this law affects our lives

5. PresidentWhy’s it taking so long? The answer itself is long.

6. Secretary-TreasurerAirline alliances promise the moon and stars. What have they delivered in their thirteen years?

7. A tale of two QSP’sJob security is the main story, but putting differences aside is what’s behind the story — by Greg Brown

8. The un-pretty business of Delta Air LinesWhy, and how, there may be hope for the future

9. Organizing Corporate hitmen would prefer you don’t read this story.

Union airlines outrank nonunion airlines.

10. NominationsWho nominated whom for District office, and from where

11. GrievancesCompany hacks expect workers to endure unreasonable commutes. How one grievance ended their free ride.

13. HistoryThe Molly Maguires — A covert movement, defined by grit and violence. Were the “Mollies” dirty and visionary?

14. RememberListing of retired Members; Obituaries; plus Travel Tip — Dogs fly free in cabin

email Updates iam141.org/join

Receive notification of web site updates.

PROCESSNominating your leaders

Every two years a democratic process takes place, enabling District 141 Members to nominate District 141 Officers at local lodge meetings. In 2010, fourteen elected positions are open, each with a four year term. February was the month of an open call for nomination of one Vice President West, two Vice Presi-dents at-Large, one Trustee, and ten Assistant General Chairs.

District 141 bylaws call for nomination and election of officers every two years. The officer’s four year terms are stag-gered, meaning that an entirely new team of officers can only be elected over two election cycles, or two years.

When more than one person is nominated for a single po-sition, the local lodge conducts a runoff election. Candidates receiving four or more endorsements from locals across the district will advance to the election in June.

S P R I N G 2 0 1 0

IAM141.ORG Messenger 2

3 SPRING 2010 IAM141.ORG

MEMBER SPOT‘Forty plus success story’

Author, Ph.D., ramp service agent, and subject of a CNN news documentary, “Forty Plus Success Story” — Joseph A. Wil-liams is one guy with many hats.

Williams, who is now age 72, began working for US Air-ways when it was America West. He started on the ramp, in Las Vegas, at the tender young age of 65. At the time, he held an MBA in Organizational Behavior.

While working on the ramp, Williams was completing his doctorate in Applied Management & Decision Science. At the same time, he was penning his new book, “Who Do You See in the Mirror?” — now available at borders.com and amazon.com.

The book is an introspective look at positive change in the workplace. It guides readers to find their most responsible self, and to model that for others.

Williams’ corporate, academic, and union labor experi-ences bring a unique perspective to this book. Before join-ing US Airways on the ramp as an hourly employee, Williams clocked in thirty years of corporate experience on the execu-tive side, working for two Fortune 500 companies.

Williams says his time on the ramp has helped him under-stand operations from a non-management, union viewpoint.

‘I felt my time rewarding, working with Union people ...

they are caring people.’ Williams was among those recently furloughed by his

company. “I can’t hold the union responsible for the company layoff,” Williams says. “I had a great experience as a Union Member. I felt my time rewarding, working with Union peo-ple. They are caring people, always looking out for others.”

“Who Do You See in the Mirror?” seeks to change irrespon-sible behavior in the workplace to responsible behavior. The book cites current examples of corporate irresponsibility by the likes of Enron, Bernie Madoff, and others. Behaviors exhib-ited by irresponsible employees, like tardiness, breaking rules, and blaming others for their own actions are often triggered, says the book, “by upbringing, fear, greed, lack of trust.”

Critics have called “Who Do You See in the Mirror?” an inspiring look at specific ways to be part of a shift toward responsible behavior.”

IAM141.ORG Messenger 4

Parties exchange Section 6 Notices

Parties reach AgreementEither or both parties request NMB mediation or NMB invokes Public Interest Mediation

NMB determines further mediation will not help the parties reach agreement and proffers voluntary-but-binding arbitration to the parties

If the bargaining conferences are terminated by one of the parties and neither the parties nor the NMB invokes mediation within ten days, the parties may exercise Self Help.

Parties negotiate without NMB participation (known as Direct Negotiations)

Parties reach Agreement

Both parties agree to binding arbitration Either party or both decline binding Arbitration

Arbitration Board convenes, holds a hearing, and is-sues a Binding Decision

Parties are released from mediation by the Board and a 30-day cooling-off (status-quo) period begins

Parties reach Agreement

If a Presidential Emergency Board (PEB) is not created in a particular Section 9a or Section 10 dispute situation, the parties may exercise Self Help when the 30-day cooling-off period expires.

Under Section 10 of the RLA, if a dispute substantially threatens essential transportation in any section of the coun-try, the NMB notifies the President who may establish a Presidential Emergency Board (PEB). If so created, the PEB has 30 days in which to investigate the dispute and report to the President during which the status-quo remains in effect. The parties may choose to accept the recommendations of the PEB, negotiate their own agreement, or, after 30 days from the issuance of the PEB report to the President exercise Self Help, unless Congress takes action.

Under Section 9a of the RLA, which applies only to certain publicly funded and operated commuter railroads, if the President does not establish a Section 10 PEB, either party to a dispute, or the Governor of any affected state, may request the President to establish up to two (2) Presidential Emergency Boards (PEBs) including a mandatory NMB hearing. Absent agreement, these procedures would delay Self Help for 240 days from the date of creation of the first PEB, unless Congress takes action.

The RLA ProcessCollective Bargaining Process un-der the Railway Labor Act (RLA)

5 SPRING 2010 IAM141.ORG

PRESIDENTWhat’s taking so long?

Members ask me this question several times a day regard-ing United negotiations. When talks began on April 7, 2009, there was optimism that a new contract could be formed — one that finally moved everyone past bankruptcy and conces-sion. Our Negotiating Team feels such a contract can still be bargained, but realize the energy of a speedy agreement is dissipating.

Several factors contribute to the length of negotiations. Some are built in to the process itself, under the Railway La-bor Act (RLA). Others are created by outside forces.

By its nature, negotiations under the RLA are time consuming. The law is wired with a primary goal of avoiding interruption to the operation. While the RLA does outline the process for negotiations, it puts no time limit on reaching agreement. That’s an intentional part of the law. No deadline is what limits or avoids business disruption.

On its surface, the RLA seems to encourage voluntary settlement by mutual agreement. In reality, it creates road-blocks. A key component of the RLA is the requirement that once negotiated, a contract never expires. Instead, it becomes amendable at certain points in time. This not only takes pressure off negotiating teams to reach agreement or seek self help (strike) within a short time frame, it also reduces the urgency to reach an agreement.

Companies rely on the RLA to slow things down, and avoid increasing their costs. Seventy-five percent of non-RLA contracts are settled within one month of their expiration. Compare that to just over ten percent of airline contracts that reach agreement in the same amount of time. The average airline negotiations runs 1.3 years beyond the amendable date. Major airlines, including United, take even longer.

An essential factor in United negotiations is the ten-year period since Members had the opportunity for input into the subjects being negotiated. Not since 1999 have Members been in a position to submit contract proposals.

With that in mind, our Negotiating Team determined that few restrictions would be placed on the proposals we exchanged with United. While District 141 has conducted two Member surveys to determine the priority issues, we have not ignored or forgotten proposals. While not every proposal has the priority of wage increases, each one is taken seriously.

The assignment of a Federal Mediator also contributes to the length of negotiations. Under the RLA, mediation is a required step, and a mediator, Ms. Terri Brown, is already par-ticipating in our talks. The upside is we will not lose time in the future, should both sides stop making progress on our own. At that point, her services become crucial. The downside is there is no set time limit under mediation. The mediation board it-self determines when the next step in the procedure will start.

To understand that point, look at American Airlines. The Transportation Workers Union has been in direct talks with American since November 2007. They have also been in mediated talks for over one year. They just recently requested a release from mediation and the setting of a strike date, in order to bring their negotiations to a conclusion. As of the writing of this story, the National Mediation Board still had not granted their request.

Due to the reliance on bankruptcy over the past several years, instead of negotiation, the backlog of unresolved labor contracts in the airline industry is at historic numbers. This is not just a United Airlines issue, although United is feeling the effects of having every labor group in their company con-currently in negotiations, and each seeking a return of lost benefits. The backlog is as widespread as the industry itself, touching not only domestic carriers, but foreign airlines as well. More than seventy labor agreements are currently in the mediation process, under the NMB. Strikes have been taking place throughout Europe, as workers for as Luftansa, British Airways, and air traffic controllers in France all seek contract improvements.

When there are this many open contracts, the power and responsibility of the NMB becomes more apparent. NMB has control of the timing of negotiations, and they are very much aware of potential for disruption of air service in the United States. The impact of unions’ militancy and Members’ willing-ness to use the ultimate weapon of strike upon the overall economy plays also is considered by the Board when deciding to move negotiations through the process.

Within United, we have also been addressing the chang-ing operation. United’s decision to ground the entire 737 fleet, with the resulting shift to UAX flying, and the operation-al shift from full-time employment to part-time in stations, most notably DEN, has required that negotiations continually adjust. Those corporate decisions, which affect Members so significantly, cause the focus to shift from “normal” topics of wages and benefits.

Still more outside forces affect the speed of negotiations. The U.S. economy, on the brink of collapse when negotiations first began, always plays a role. Oil prices and global markets get the attention of the company, while rising unemployment and health care debates are closely watched by unions. The status of other contract negotiations within the industry is also scrutinized. Recent IAM successes at Hawaiian Airlines and Southwest Airlines have shown that the era of concession has past. Current proposals in American Airlines negotiations may very well influence our own talks, and must be evaluated.

As you can see, there is no short answer.

While much remains unknown, regarding other airline contracts, government involvement, and economic condi-tions, one thing is certain — the Members of your Negotiating Team will not take one day longer than necessary to reach the agreement you and the other Members of District 141, both active and retired, can support and ratify. We thank you for your continuing encouragement and backing during this crucial time in our Union’s history.

IAM141.ORG Messenger 6

The business phenomenon of global air-line alliances began nobly enough, back in 1997, wrapped in the American flag, aloft with visions of a benevolent global economy, full of promise that the free market place would do its thing, and nobody, including you, me, or the United States government, had to worry about anything.

Then followed the dot.com implosion, 9-11, the off-shoring of an estimated 15 million U.S. jobs, the real estate

bust, and (surprise, surprise) a global financial meltdown. To be fair, the airline alliances never set out to be custodians of

the working class economy. Yet they are players in the economy, big players. So how are they doing?

The Star Alliance has swollen to twenty-six carriers (Adria Airlines, Air Canada, Air China, Air New Zealand, All Nippon Airways, Asian Airlines, Austrian, Blue1, BMI, Brussels Airline, Continental

Airlines, Croatia Airlines, Egypt Air, LOT–Polish Air-lines, Lufthansa, SAS–Scandinavian Airlines, Shang-

hai Airlines, Singapore Air, South African Airways, Span Air, Swiss, TAP–Air Portugal, Thai Airlines, Turkish Airlines,

United, and US Airways).

Global air travelers love the red rugs, shared clubs, and employees who gloat over their status. Even average Joes welcome the convenience of through-checked luggage,

although interline baggage agreements are decades-old. But the alliance marketing con-cept is new, and it’s working. The Star Alliance is growing faster than any other air alliance,

employing more than 450,000 workers at 1,070 airports in 175 Nations. It generates total an-nual revenue in excess of $171 billion.

The Star Alliance began, humbly enough, as a network of code sharing agreements. Today, this behemoth schedules and prices flights in a way that eliminates competition between part-ners, while increasing competition with other airline alliances. The Star Alliance has its own web site and offers seamless travel service around the world. The cost savings come from eliminating duplicative management processes and contracting out work to Star Alliance partners.

The Star Alliance is also focused on its domestic partners — United, US Airways and Conti-nental. The Alliance is resetting the domestic flight schedule for US Airways by pulling US Airways flights out of Las Vegas. United grounded its 737 fleet to reduce capacity.

The U.S. Government negotiated almost one hundred open sky agreements with other na-tions, paving the way to antitrust immunity. Alliances love immunity. Immunity allows alliances to set prices, share market data, and coordinate flight schedules. Welcome to the future.

The last five U.S. Presidents have agreed to immunity grants. The Justice Department re-sponded by trying to block those grants, but was overruled by the Transportation Depart-

ment. So we have more open skies, less government meddling, fewer airlines in real competi-tion, happier elite fliers, and a lot of unemployed people. Are the political choices we made over the past fifteen years worth the outcome?

TREASURERGlobal alliances: the incredible

airline shrinking machines

A I R L I N E A L I A N C E S | L E S S C O M P E T I T I O N , F E W E R J O B S

7 SPRING 2010 IAM141.ORG

EDUCATIONQSP, a quality standards program, quite simply put

In early 1999, San Francisco Airport Director John Martin approached Shelley Kessler, Executive Secretary, San Mateo Labor Council, and Airport Coalition member, with a problem.

Martin had found airport screeners sleeping in stair-wells, on airport property. Upon deeper investigation, Martin discovered the workers could not afford to drive home. Many worked double shifts, held two or more jobs, commuted long distances to work, earned only 25¢ cents an hour above mini-mum wage, lacked health care, and had no vacation time.

Not surprisingly, seniority was low, and turnover was high. The screeners had a frantic turnover rate, estimated at 90 percent.

Martin was worried that the flying public’s security was being jeopardized. Bad executive decisions by contractor companies were contributing to employee fatigue, stress, and health issues. Lack of experience on the job compounded Martin’s concerns. As for employees, the choice was simple. Keep quiet, or quit. Many quit.

San Francisco’s Airport Labor Coalition stepped in. They commissioned a study from the Institute of Industrial Rela-tions, at University Of California–Berkeley.

From this, the Quality Standards Program, QSP, was born. The program passed the airport commission in late 1999, and was incorporated into the leases of airport tenants.

What that means is that QSP became applicable to em-ployees who held security-related jobs. “Security-related” was defined as anyone with access to an airplane, or with access to the outdoor area where airplanes were parked.

The significance is that job security increased. Union em-ployees became less threatened by outsourcing. Here’s why.

QSP works by setting a minimum wage, a minimum health care program, minimum benefits, a minimum num-ber of paid holidays and unpaid days off (without discipline), minimum safety standards, minimum training standards, and minimum equipment maintenance standards.

It was a start.By 2004, the Airport Labor Coalition had commissioned

another study to measure QSP success.

QSP was working. SFO security test results were up. The turnover rate had dropped to normal. Workforce stability and skill level were measurably improved.

Employers were able to retain direct control over work, which was performed by more experienced employees.

But not everyone was happy. Contractors had lost much of their ability to take away work from union employees.

Before QSP, contractors could freely eliminate health care and drastically pare down wages. After QSP, the cost of outsourc-ing sometimes became higher than keeping work in house.

Loopholes in the original QSP were irresistible to executives.

QSP needed fine tuning, and sharper teeth.

In 2009, the Airport Labor Coalition, working again with Martin and with the airport, revised QSP. The Airport Com-mission approved QSP revisions in August 2009, which took effect this April 1, 2010.

Chief among those revisions was removing the ability of contract companies to audit themselves for compliance. Instead, audits are now conducted by the QSP director.

The revisions went further.

Because airport security-related jobs require fingerprint-ing, background checks, and Homeland Security clearance, while most jobs do not, the minimum wage rose, and it was indexed to Bay Area cost of living.

QSP employers must now provide twelve paid holidays. Employers are also required to allow ten unpaid days off per year, without discipline.

All QSP covered employees must be provided with health care within thirty days of hire.

A non-retaliation protection policy also applies to employ-ees. Complaints from employees are heard by the QSP direc-tor who investigates and processes violations, and ensures compliance. Noncompliant companies may be subject to a fine, and liable for back pay.

No other major airport, except San Francisco, has a com-prehensive QSP. Several have minimum wages, and airports like Denver and Los Angeles have expressed some interest in QSP. But so far, SFO remains the only airport with QSP.

One is not acceptable — and shouldn’t be.

Learn more at http://flysfo.com/web/page/about/organiza-tion/rules/index.html, or call Shelley Kessler at (650) 572-8848.

What QSP does is vital. What QSP is may be the more pro-found message. Both Shelley Kessler and contributing writer Greg Brown, District 141 Trustee, and long time lobbyist for QSP, believe that QSP is essentially a matter of cooperation. More than twenty-eight AFL-CIO and non-AFL-CIO unions within the Airport Labor Coalition have put individual issues aside. They concentrated instead on the benefit of QSP to the airport, the airlines, the unions, and of utmost importance — employees.

architectural detail — ceiling, international terminal

IAM141.ORG Messenger 8

DELTA AIR LINESThe un-pretty reality, and how the future actually holds promise

Companies love to talk about personal responsibility for just about everything they can think of, including holding onto your job.

That’s nice. Except companies leave out a few details. In most states, you are an “at will” employee, unless you have a union contract. “At will” means you work at the will of the company, — not yours. Upset a supervisor today, last week, last year? You may be gone tomorrow. Nice, simple. Compa-nies love it. And they’re willing to pay big bucks to convince you that “at will” is where it’s at.

Here’s the reality. With few exceptions, a company has the right to terminate your employment, for any reason — or for no reason at all. You are not entitled to notice and you are not promised an appeal. Your seniority means squat. How can that be?

It’s the law.

Fortunately, U.S. law also recognizes an employee’s right to join a union. Although union membership has declined dramatically over time, along with real wages in the United States among the working class, there are signs of hope.

One bright spot is that the National Labor Relations Board is proposing a rules change to an antiquated provision. If passed, employees would be able to choose representation with a simple yes-no majority. That’s a start. But it takes leg work to get employees educated, and change is difficult.

District 141 on the Delta trail in support of District 143

Last week, District 141 sent six district organizers to do house calls at the homes of Delta employees.

The reception was outstanding. Most of the Delta em-ployees were glad to see us, and were looking forward to the election.

“We had an opportunity to talk to Delta employees about the IAM, and also to set straight all the dopey lies that their management were telling them,” says Tim Nelson, District 141 Director or Organizing.

“Calling on employees at their homes is seriously under-rated,” Nelson says. “It allows us to talk to employees in an environment where their boss isn’t trying to intimidate them.”

Nelson led the team of Ibraheim Abdulrahim, Johnny Nielsen, Billy Kline, Dave Lehive, and Wes Fredrickson in visit-ing about 250 homes during the Delta blitz. In April, District 141 began a continuous presence in Atlanta. The goal is to as-sist and support District 143 in its campaign to organize Delta Air Lines, once and for all.

On the streetovernightregardless of senioritywithout causein most states

That’s what a union contract prevents.

That’s why organizing Delta matters.

9 SPRING 2010 IAM141.ORG

ORGANIZINGUnion airlines rank higher

Corporate executives tell their nonunion employees that productivity will suffer if they join a union.

The facts tell a different story.

Better Rank Airline Workforce composition Represented by Union

1. Hawaiian Union Passenger Service & Ramp Workers (IAM) 4

2. Southwest Union Passenger Service Workers (IAM) 4

3. Alaska Union Passenger Service & Ramp Workers (IAM) 4

4. United Union Passenger Service & Ramp Workers (IAM) 4

5. US Airways Union Ramp Workers (IAM) 4

6. Northwest Union Passenger Service & Ramp Workers (IAM) 4

7. Continental non-contract employees NO

8. Delta non-contract employees NO

9. Frontier non-contract employees NO

10. JetBlue non-contract employees NO

11. Air Tran non contract employees NO

Worse Year 2009 On-Time results for the major airlines nonunion

Corporate drones want you to believe the opposite

Corporate executives tell their non-union employees that productivity will suffer if they join a union. That claim is false.

In the airline industry, productivity is measured by on-time performance. The Department of Transportation re-leased the on-time rankings for 2009, and not surprisingly, all the unionized fleet and passenger service airlines were ahead of all the nonunion airlines.

None of this means nonunion workers don’t have

pride in their jobs. They do.

Rather, the bad showing is the result of bad executive choices.

The 2009 ratings aren’t a fluke. Improved productivity, thanks to unions, has been proven by business studies from top universities.†

In plain talk, here are the benefits of a union work force, to the company as well as to the economy.

■ Increased Productivity ■ Increased Competitiveness ■ Superior product or service delivery and quality ■ Better Training ■ Lower Turnover ■ Improved health and safety

Industry experts say the poor results for nonunion work-ers are a reflection of chronic understaffing, high stress, and high turnover at the nonunion carriers. These are problems with choices that executives make, not problems with unions or with Members who belong to a union.

† According to Professor Harley Shaiken, of the Univer-sity of California-Berkeley, Unions are associated with higher productivity, lower employee turnover, improved workplace communication, and a better-trained workforce.

A recent survey of 73 independent studies on Unions and productivity says, “...the available evidence points to a posi-tive and statistically significant association between Unions and productivity in the U.S.”

Brown and Medoff, a Harvard study, agrees, saying, “...unionized establishments are about twenty-two percent more productive than those that are not.”

IAM141.ORG Messenger 10

NOMINATIONSLocal lodge tabulationIn accordance with Article VII, Section 6(f) of District 141 Bylaws, the following is a tabulation of the nominations for District 141 Officers:

Nominee BOOK # Local Lodge Local Lodge Endorsements

Vice-President West

Sandra Gardner CA024038 1886-DEN

75, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1044, 1287, 1322,1351,1445, 1487, 1725, 1726, 1731, 1776, 1781, 1782, 1826, 1833, 1885, 1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2765 (32)

Derek Knox BU004483 1781-SFO

141, 731, 1635, 1759, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2559, 2665, 2909 (11)

Two Vice-Presidents at Large (four-year term)

Rance Holmes WW059788 141-DTW

75, 141, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1287, 1322, 1445, 1487, 1635, 1725, 1726, 1731,1776, 1781,1782, 1826, 1833, 1885, 1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2559, 2665, 2765 (34)

Gil Simmons CA016035 1776-PHL

75, 141, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018,1287, 1322, 1445, 1487, 1725, 1726, 1731,1776, 1781, 1782, 1826, 1833,1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2559, 2665, 2765 (32)

Robyn Eulo CA022530 1487-ORD

141,731, 1044, 1351, 1635, 1759, 1885, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2909 (12)

Jonetta Beverly CA034435 2665-ATL

731, 1044, 1351, 1635, 1759, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2665, 2909 (11)

Trustee (four-year term)

Troy Rivera BS073834 1781-SFO

75, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1287, 1322,1445, 1487, 1725, 1726, 1731, 1776, 1781, 1782, 1826, 1833, 1885, 1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2665, 2765 (31)

Peter Hammarquist BY90543 2508-MCO

141,731, 1044, 1351, 1635, 1759, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2559, 2909 (12)

Ten Assistant General Chairpersons (Four-year term)

Daniel Lebron BT051517 1781-SFO

75, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1287, 1322, 1351,1445, 1487, 1725, 1726, 1731,1759, 1776,1781,1782, 1826, 1833, 1885, 1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2559, 2665, 2765 (34)

Richard Chu BA040340 1322-JFK

75, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1044, 1287, 1322,1445, 1487, 1725, 1726, 1731, 1759, 1776,1781, 1782, 1826, 1833, 1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2559, 2665, 2765 (33)

Sandra Olmos CA014907 1979-HNL

75, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1287, 1322, 1445, 1487, 1725, 1726, 1731, 1776,1781, 1782, 1826, 1833, 1885, 1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2665, 2765 (31)

Continued ... Ten Assistant General Chairpersons Joseph Bartz BR051806 1487-ORD75, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1287, 1322, 1445, 1487, 1725, 1726, 1731, 1776,1781, 1782, 1826, 1833, 1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2665, 2765 (30)Rose Bradycohen CA026461 1322-JFK75, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1287, 1322, 1445, 1487, 1725, 1726, 1731, 1776,1782, 1826, 1833, 1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2559, 2665, 2765 (30)Michael Crowell BY027831 1725-CLT75, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1287, 1322, 1445, 1487, 1725, 1726, 1731, 1776,1781, 1782, 1826, 1833, 1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2665, 2765 (30)Michael Hughes BX021469 1044-PIT75, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1044, 1287, 1322, 1445, 1487, 1725, 1726, 1731, 1776,1781, 1782, 1826, 1833, 1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2765 (30)Michael Quartuccio TT058168 1487-ORD75, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1287, 1322,1445, 1487, 1725, 1726, 1731, 1776,1781, 1782, 1826, 1833, 1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2665, 2765 (30)Robert Worthman BA040228 1886-DEN75, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1287, 1322, 1445, 1487, 1725, 1726, 1731, 1776,1782, 1826, 1833, 1885, 1886, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2665, 2765 (30)Michael Fairbanks BX021652 1725-CLT75, 368, 561, 845, 846, 914, 949, 1018, 1287, 1322, 1445,1487, 1725, 1726, 1731, 1776,1781, 1782, 1826, 1833, 1904, 1932, 1979, 2210, 2294, 2319, 2508, 2665, 2765 (29)Miriam Seewald OU035775 1886-DEN141,731, 1044, 1351,1635, 1759,1781, 1885, 1886, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2559, 2909 (15)Arthur Jackson BP091457 1781-SFO141,731, 1044, 1351, 1635, 1759, 1781, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2559, 2665, 2909 (14)Robert Kraves BJ091457 1487-ORD141,731, 1044, 1351, 1635, 1759, 1885, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2559, 2909 (13)Richard Pascarella BT078772 1759-IAD141,731, 1044, 1351, 1635, 1759, 1885, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2559, 2909 (13)Mark Wingard BX021524 1044-PIT141,731, 1044, 1351, 1635, 1759, 1885, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2559, 2909 (13)Karen Asuncion BL010412 1487-ORD141,731, 1044, 1351, 1635, 1759, 1885, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2909 (12)Daniel Zuger BX052464 846-BWI141,731, 1044, 1351, 1635, 1759, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2559, 2909 (12)Dale Cancienne CA050847 1905-MSY141,731, 1635, 1759, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2559, 2909 (10)Kevin Frederickson OU035793 2765-SAN141,731, 1905, 2198, 2208, 2444, 2909 (7)Jeffrey Rusk BU014065 725-CLT 731, 1044, 1635, 1905, 2444 (5)Veronica Stevenson AU052945 1886-DEN 1351, 1635, 2198, 2208, 2909 (5)

11 SPRING 2010 IAM141.ORG

GRIEVANCESWhen should companies pay for an excessively long commute?

US Airways Fleet Service workers in Phoenix can punch in before security, thanks to the successful outcome of a District 141 grievance against US Airways, settled in January 2010.

Prior to the grievance, US Airways executives believed they could hold Phoenix Members responsible for delays caused by clogged and understaffed security lines, if it resulted in the Member being late in reaching their assigned duty location. In many cases, airline workers were assigned to remote areas of the airport, requiring an excessive commute across company property.

After settling the grievance successfully, Members in Phoenix no longer have to worry about an overly long “com-mute within a commute.”

Nick Handlow, District 141 Assistant General Chair, explains, “The grievance was withdrawn when the company compared policy in both hub and focus cities, including Philadelphia, Charlotte, Las Vegas, and Washington–DCA. Members in each of those cities had the right to clock in, with-out going through security.”

Companies are getting a free ride

Handlow says, “My argument to the company was based on bias against US Airways Members in Phoenix, and also on past practice in other locations. The company agreed.”

Airline workers typically park in remote employee lots. Just getting to the front door of the airport may require riding a bus, train, moving sidewalks, walking, or a combination of all four. At Denver International Airport, a typical ride from

employee parking to Denver’s main terminal entrance may take forty minutes on a snow day. Employees don’t get paid for the trek.

Until the grievance settlement in Phoenix, US Airways used to get a free ride, when it comes to using employee’s time. Most airline workers don’t work at the front door, and face many obstacles, such as TSA screening, trams, and side-walks, to get to their work station.

Precedence exists for company-paid travel time to work. It relates to whether the commute time across company prop-erty is excessive. Oil rig workers, and highly unionized port authority workers, are typically paid for their long journeys across company property. So why is an airline worker, whose daily commute may not exactly involve a ferry boat or heli-copter, singled out for no pay?

General consensus among human resource hyperventi-laters is, “No travel pay, period. (Unless you’re an executive).” HR drones base their argument on the U.S. Department of Labor’s ‘Fair Labor Standards Act’ (FLSA) that is ambiguous about travel time.

The Department of Labor (www.dol.gov) web site says, “Time spent traveling during normal work hours is considered compensable work time.”

FLSA goes on to say, however, that time spent in home-to-work travel generally is not “hours worked” and, therefore, does not have to be paid.

So at what point are we “at work”? By establishing that we are at work once we have commuted from our car to the main terminal, even if we work at a remote location within the terminal, the District 141 grievance settlement is a positive step in the right direction for workers.

How this affects Members beyond those locations with pre-security check in remains uncertain. The road forward for Members who still face an excessive, unpaid commute may in-volve the grievance process. It also may involve the legislative process, influenced by our choice of elected officials who are pro-worker versus pro-company.

Too far?

Work here

Park here

REMEMBERRecent retireesUnited Airlines

Alzner Joseph ORDCG 10 Yrs 2 MosAndaya Vivencio L. SFOCG 13 Yrs 2 MosAnderson Theresa M. MCOOZ 32 Yrs 5 MosAndrews James R. DENCG 35 Yrs 7 MosAntonio Elmer S. LAXCG 19 Yrs 9 MosAustin Patricia A. DENTK 21 Yrs 0 MosBales Katherine E. DENCG 21 Yrs 1 MosBarros Carlton D. SANCG 23 Yrs 5 MosBebeck Colleen HNLRR 23 Yrs 6 MosBell Deborrah H. DTWRR 11 Yrs10 MosBlanchard Ronald F. SMFCG 41 Yrs 8 MosBlount Gary IADCS 33 Yrs 6 MosBontkowski Elena CHIRR 14 Yrs 7 MosBorden Franklin W. IAHOZ 17 Yrs 6 MosBoth Jr Richard John DENTK 31 Yrs 0 MosBova Susan M. SEAOZ 33 Yrs 7 MosBrinkmeyer Cheryl V. STLOZ 26 Yrs 6 MosBrunetti Vito ORDCG 23 Yrs 7 MosBussey Uphold Lana G. ONTOZ 40 Yrs 9 MosCahill Michael J. ORDCG 34 Yrs 6 MosCallies Mary DENCG 11 Yrs 4 MosCampenni Kathleen A. IADCS 10 Yrs 3 MosCarroll Debra A. IADCG 23 Yrs 2 MosCerball Carlos F. IADCS 18 Yrs 1 MosChow Kahala A. KOAOZ 32 Yrs 9 MosChung Heather H. HNLCS 19 Yrs11 MosCiunci Donna L. PVDOZ 25 Yrs 6 MosCollard Anne E. LHRCS 18 Yrs 6 MosCollins Thomas E. ORDCG 42 Yrs10 MosCooper Sam E. IADCS 36 Yrs 9 MosCorporon Marc A. RNOOZ 35 Yrs 4 MosCostanza Richard J. STLOZ 35 Yrs 6 MosDamazo Jose T. ORDCS 10 Yrs 2 MosDaniels Nella L . EWRCS 37 Yrs 8 MosDarby Min-Chueh DENTK 17 Yrs 8 MosDavid Oscar P. SFOLN 22 Yrs 8 MosDavis Wayne E. INDIQ 23 Yrs 5 MosDean Starris HNLRR 19 Yrs 2 MosDelmastro Timothy ORDCG 10 Yrs 4 MosDerse Linda DCACS 11 Yrs 3 MosDong Steve L. W. TPECS 23 Yrs 2 MosDroz Elba L. PHXOZ 11 Yrs 4 MosDrutis Sheryl D. CHIRR 12 Yrs 4 MosDyer Sharkey LAXCG 10 Yrs 3 MosEdulan Rodney A. CHIRR 32 Yrs 8 MosEidson Larry K . SEACG 22 Yrs 8 MosEvers Everette Reena D. ONTOZ 30 Yrs 8 MosFairweather Eric G. MHTOZ 15 Yrs 4 MosFavero Anna M. SEACG 18 Yrs 7 MosFiebelkorn Terry L . ORDCG 36 Yrs 5 Mos

Field Elisabeth F. IADCS 20 Yrs 3 MosFlanagan James V. ORDCG 47 Yrs 7 MosForbes Antonio SANCS 12 Yrs 8 MosFoster Steven M. MHTOZ 25 Yrs 6 MosFreysinger Karin ORDCS 19 Yrs 9 MosGamble Joseph M. LASOZ 19 Yrs 7 MosGates Lori L . DENCS 15 Yrs 2 MosGillespie Eulaine M. DTWRR 31 Yrs 4 Mos -GolebiewskGreene Pamela S. DENCS 30 Yrs 3 MosGross Robert MSPCS 10 Yrs 2 MosHarper James J. PHLCS 35 Yrs 2 MosHart Paul DENCG 20 Yrs11 MosHartman Thomas E. SFOMB 31 Yrs 4 MosHaynes Ginette MHTOZ 23 Yrs 7 MosHerman Debra K CHIRR 10 Yrs11 MosHoffman Paul G. LAXCG 33 Yrs 5 MosHuffman Paul STLOZ 11 Yrs11 MosHumady Henry S. DCACG 21 Yrs 0 MosHunt Delyanira SFOMR 13 Yrs 6 MosHutchinson Douglas E. DENTK 17 Yrs 2 MosHutton Deloris P. JAXOZ 25 Yrs 6 MosJelen Thomas J. ORDCG 31 Yrs 8 MosJohnson Gilliland O. IADCG 22 Yrs 9 MosJoyce Page Katheleen A. MHTOZ 20 Yrs 8 MosJulian Judy L. CHIRR 14 Yrs11 MosKao Michael C. K . TPEFF 23 Yrs 2 MosKayl Mary Anne IADCS 10 Yrs11 MosKetter Robert G. MCOCG 42 Yrs 5 MosKhan Jalil A. SFOSO 23 Yrs 5 MosLambiase Nicholas DENCG 33 Yrs 8 MosLauderdale Leslie S. IADCS 19 Yrs 3 MosLawrence David E. DENTK 14 Yrs 6 MosLebsock Richard A. LAXCG 22 Yrs 5 MosLee Charles E. IAHOZ 17 Yrs 6 MosLook Lester Y. SFOJZ 25 Yrs 7 MosMangawang Roland G. DCACS 10 Yrs 2 MosMarchel Bernadette M. DTWRR 10 Yrs 2 MosMarrs Susanna M M. SFOCS 13 Yrs 6 MosMatias Nora U. SFOIP 11 Yrs 2 MosMcDougal Margaret R . DENTK 10 Yrs 2 MosMcMaster Ann L. DENTK 20 Yrs 8 MosMeehan Gladys E. ORDCS 18 Yrs 0 MosMiller Allan L. FSDOZ 25 Yrs 3 MosMiller David L. DTWCS 31 Yrs 6 MosMonson Richard L. SLCCG 47 Yrs 9 MosMontelongo Margo SANCS 10 Yrs 2 MosNakano Yuncha LAXCS 12 Yrs 2 MosNanoz Ambrosio L. DCACG 16 Yrs 6 MosNelson Clint C. SLCCG 43 Yrs 3 MosNeumeyer Tom B. MDTOZ 34 Yrs 6 MosNijhawan Anju IADOZ 10 Yrs 2 MosNovak Frank A. STLOZ 23 Yrs 4 MosO’Dette Dennis E. SMFCG 40 Yrs 8 MosPacheco Jose F. DENCG 10 Yrs 6 MosParisi Teresa M. ONTOZ 36 Yrs 5 MosParker Brenda E. DTWRR 13 Yrs 0 Mos

United retirees, continued on page 14

IAM141.ORG Messenger 12

13 SPRING 2010 IAM141.ORG

LABOR HISTORYAs many Americans celebrate Saint Patrick’s Day by

breaking out their greenest shirt, enjoying a Guinness, and downing their yearly intake of corned beef and cabbage, it is easy to understand that many also forget about the impact that the Irish and Irish immigrants have had on American his-tory. From their initial immigration to their important work on the American railroads and beyond, during a time when the Irish and their culture are lauded for one shamrock-filled day, it lends itself perfectly to explore their important impact on the American labor landscape.

The Irish began to immigrate to the United States in moderate numbers even before the American Revolution, but hundreds of thousands more began to migrate after the Great Potato Famine in Ireland in the mid-1840s which left families destitute and looking for any work possible. Most of the Irish settled in industrial cities and many, including chil-dren, labored at backbreaking jobs and lived in overcrowded tenements. In times where education was rare, available jobs were laborious and dangerous, and worker exploitation ran rampant, it became imperative for the Irish workers to begin to collaborate to make their lives bearable.

Enter the Molly Maguires. Often considered quite contro-versial, the Molly Maguires were a raucous, secret group of Irish coal miners that originated in Pennsylvania coal country. Around the 1860s, as their treatment worsened and their Welsh and English miner counterparts began to organize, Irish miners wanted to break free from their oppressive owners and bosses with fervor. The Mollies were an almost inevi-table result of the clash between the hugely wealthy, hugely authoritative industrial giants and the very men whose day to day labor supported their success. First attempts tried to include all miners in unions, regardless of ethnicity. Since other ethnic groups were often better treated than the Irish by management, these early attempts failed as infighting and disputes broke out between the groups culminating in the violent era around 1863-1867. The Mollies often murdered and maltreated mine owners and bosses throughout Penn-sylvania. And albeit violent and controversial, the Mollies and their message became the means by which the Irish miners could somehow tangibly carry out their outrage against cruel working conditions. Members of the Mollies were eventually caught and tried, however an organizing seed was planted and their influence began to spread.

Terence Vincent Powderly, a son of Irish immigrants from Pennsylvania also began to transform the Irish’s influence on America. Powderly is known for leading the Knights of Labor, or “KoL,” a labor union whose goal was to organize all workers, skilled and unskilled, into one large union united for workers’ rights and economic and social reform. Pow-derly worked for the railroad by the age of thirteen and later became a union machinist. From 1879 until 1893, he was very successful in organizing workers from across the country and by 1886, estimates for “KoL” membership ranged from

700,000 to 1 million members, including 10,000 women and 50,000 African Americans.

Powderly, along with many other labor leaders at the time, argued that immigrants took jobs away from native-born Americans and drove down wages, especially during the construction of the American railroad. Although not a huge advocate of striking, his skillful organizing amidst the cruel conditions of the American railroads, where a huge percent-age of Irish and second generation Irish workers were em-ployed, lead to the success of the Great Southwestern Strike of 1885. Many “KoL” members eventually joined the newly formed American Federation of Labor (AFL) which promoted a more-focused skilled union over the all-inclusive union con-cept of the “KoL”. Powderly was eventually inducted into the U.S. Department of Labor Hall of Fame in January 2000.

From Powderly, to the Molly Maguires, to Mother Jones, another hugely influential labor figure who was born in Ireland, it is hard not to see the impact that the Irish have had on the American labor landscape. Irish immigrants who im-migrated to America to seek a better life for their families had hardships just as any group of immigrants or workers has had, and with their strong position of unity and organization, they demanded change. So as one raises their glass to cheers Saint Patrick, raise a glass to the Irish worker as well. Your job may be different today without them.

Now considered a classic of American cinema, the Molly Maguires movie was a box house bust. It scorns big busi-

ness, and glaringly criticizes social injustice

IAM141.ORG Messenger 14

Pavich Wanda ORDCS 14 Yrs 5 MosPep e T homas DENCG 34 Yr s11 MosPerkey D ennis W. ORD CS 42 Yr s 1 MosPeter s Way ne D. L A XCG 13 Yr s 1 MosPinson V ick ie L . T ULOZ 31 Yr s 9 MosPor ter Oscar SFO CG 11 Yr s 5 MosPoul ivaat i Aloha ANCOZ 12 Yr s 6 MosProx Mar t in J . MH TOZ 33 Yr s 0 MosQuigley D eb orah A . HNLCS 31 Yr s 5 MosRamirez Mar ia E . IAD CS 10 Yr s 7 MosRamthun G ar y DEN TK 9 Yr s 7 MosRiccardo Mar y El len ORD CS 31 Yr s 4 MosRice M elane e D. L A SOZ 31 Yr s 5 MosRichards Ben B . ORD CG 22 Yr s 8 MosRiggs James P. L A XCG 17 Yr s 9 MosRob er t s James BWICG 11 Yr s 5 MosRo co W il l iam Z . L A SOZ 14 Yr s 9 MosRom Mildre d T. HNLRR 11 Yr s11 MosRowe Stephen W. C VGOZ 32 Yr s 0 MosRubino John J . DEN TK 15 Yr s 5 MosSantos Ro ger R . SFO CG 19 Yr s 1 MosSantoyo K aren E . MSPCS 25 Yr s 2 MosSar ino W il f re do P. HNLRR 10 Yr s11 MosSchneider Cl i f ford D. ORD CG 35 Yr s 7 MosSchneider Sharon L . DENOZ 11 Yr s 9 MosSchumaker D onald H . AT LCG 4 0 Yr s10 MosStark s Darr y l A . S T LOZ 24 Yr s 1 MosStearns Patr ic ia A . MH TOZ 25 Yr s 7 MosStein My ron L . DEN TK 6 Yr s 2 MosSwigar t Mar v in G . DENCG 15 Yr s 1 MosTapp Cher y l A . SJCOZ 23 Yr s 0 MosTovar Jr H e c tor D. T ULOZ 21 Yr s 3 MosTrejo Mar ia IAD CS 11 Yr s 9 MosTs ai L i ly L . HNLRR 11 Yr s 7 MosVan M eter W i l l iam C . DEN TK 12 Yr s 7 MosV lahos Cathy ORD CS 22 Yr s 1 MosW ilson Le onard B . DEN TK 41 Yr s10 MosWray Michelene M . BT VOZ 23 Yr s11 MosYau Sus an Y. SFO CS 18 Yr s 3 MosYo ger s t J im M . S T LOZ 23 Yr s 5 MosYoung Janice Y. DENCS 32 Yr s 6 Mos

US Airways Retirees

P a t a l a n o J o h n A J r 16 - N o v -2 0 0 9 C h a s e K e i t h P 2 3 - N o v -2 0 0 9 D i m i c k D a l e A 2 8 - N o v -2 0 0 9 L o u s h i l D o n a l d A n t h o n y 3 0 - N o v -2 0 0 9 W y b e r g K e v i n J o h n 0 3 - D e c-2 0 0 9 C r i p e W a y n e C 21- D e c-2 0 0 9 K r a m m F e r d i n a n d M y r o n 31- D e c-2 0 0 9 C r a m e r R o b e r t J 31- D e c-2 0 0 9 S h a f f e r D e n n i s L e e 31- D e c-2 0 0 9 J a k u b e t z R i c h a r d J a m e s 31- D e c-2 0 0 9 M o o r e M i k e 31- D e c-2 0 0 9 B e n t l e y M i c h a e l L 31- D e c-2 0 0 9

V a s q u e z G e o r g e R a m o n 15 -J a n -2 010 Fa r r e l l M i c h a e l K e v i n 17-J a n -2 010 Fa u c h e r R i c h a r d 2 3 -J a n -2 010 K e e n a n G l e n d a K 31-J a n -2 010 C a r v a l h o L e a n d r o L 31-J a n -2 010 P e r e z D a v i d 0 9 - F e b -2 010 C h a v e z L u i z 14 - F e b -2 010 M a h o n e y M i c h a e l H 14 - F e b -2 010 D o r s e y W i l l i a m E d w a r d 15 - F e b -2 010 C o n l i n T h o m a s F 16 - F e b -2 010 M e y e r s R i c h a r d E u g e n e 2 7- F e b -2 010

ObituariesUnited Airlines obituaries

Abate Raymond J. retiree SFOCS 08/15/09Alama Elizabeth M. retiree HNLMK 11/01/09Arellano Ignacio retiree SFOPV 07/22/09Bailey Robert T. retiree SFOCE 08/09/09Barber Martha C. retiree MIAOZ 11/17/09Blanco Fernando retiree LGAMK 10/20/09Blomstedt Leonard N. retiree SFOCE 11/02/09Bolten Norma L. retiree IADRR 10/05/09Bosetti Elwyn H. retiree PITOO 11/02/09Brennan Patrick J. CLECG 09/20/09Bruce John ORDCG 10/15/09Burger Lily M. retiree DTWRR 09/09/09Carroll Thomas J. retiree PHXOZ 12/28/09Chapman William D. retiree SFOJL 10/20/09Conley Beverly Y. retiree SEAHH 10/07/09Constante Jr Peter retiree PITCG 10/20/09Contento Frank L. retiree IADRR 12/21/09Crawford William J. retiree BOIOZ 09/23/09Cross Ronald P. retiree SANCS 09/05/09Cruz Nedy Y. retiree SFOJL 10/05/09Daniel Franklin L. retiree LAXCG 12/20/09Devereaux Michael L. LAXCG 12/26/09Di Felice Vincent F. retiree DCAFF 12/29/09Di Gregorio Carmen V. retiree LAXFF 10/15/09Dooley John M. retiree LAXJL 10/10/09Dos Santos Ivanildo X ORDCS 09/16/09Du Vall William G. retiree PITTR 09/10/09Eppard Lawrence B. retiree IADJL 11/25/09Farthing William O. retiree ATLRR 12/31/09Ferry John J. retiree MEMOZ 12/17/09Frank Edward J. BDLOZ 09/06/09Frasco Jean T. retiree LAXTO 09/28/09Furtado Diane E. EWRSS 09/22/09Gardina Kasmer J. retiree CLECG 12/21/09Geiser Timothy S. DENCG 09/23/09Gettmann William S. retiree SEAJL 07/31/09Glen Alan W. retiree ORDGQ 11/02/09Grant Charles E. retiree MCOCG 12/09/09Groves Kenneth S. retiree JFKFF 09/30/09Guzman Jr Rodolfo J. retiree ORDFF 11/13/09Hammond Thomas G. retiree SFOCG 09/13/09Hastings Robert C. retiree DENTK 12/07/09

Recent retireesUnited Retirees, continued from page 12

15 SPRING 2010 IAM141.ORG

Hatton Jr James W. retiree SFOMP 11/06/09Hayes Donald E. retiree SEAFF 12/16/09Heatherly Orville T. retiree ATLCG 10/28/09Hocking Jr Frank B. retiree SMFOZ 11/16/09Hom Gloria I. retiree RALRR 11/29/09Hunt Booker T. retiree BOSCG 09/27/09Hunter Shelton retiree SFOJJ 10/04/09Ikeda Walter K. retiree HNLCG 12/24/09Jaegle Daniel R. retiree DENCG 12/16/09Jobelius Judith N. retiree CHIRR 11/14/09Johnson Dalgita-Soki ORDCG 12/31/09Jones Fred D. retiree BDLFF 10/04/09Jordan Fred E. retiree ORFOZ 11/23/09Kanak Ralph F. retiree ORDJJ 11/03/09Kappel Sr Marshall A. retiree ORDHK 10/14/09Kelly Eugene F. retiree LAXCG 12/30/09Kman Donald P. retiree ORDCG 11/13/09Koehn Marvin A. retiree ORDJJ 09/16/09Kokoszka Linda A. EWRFF 12/25/09Kress Donald W. retiree EWRHH 11/23/09Laborde Jeff M. LAXCG 12/17/09Lambert Edward retiree PBIOZ 12/18/09Lathrom Elmer D. retiree HNLRR 09/28/09Liekis Dorothy M. retiree ORDMK 10/09/09Littlefield Mary L. retiree LASOZ 12/10/09Lockyer Gladys H. retiree CHIRR 09/18/09Lubawy Richard G. retiree ORDJJ 10/14/09Marin John retiree SFOCG 06/10/09Mathews Glen R. DENCG 10/12/09Matthews Jerry L. retiree LAXCS 09/17/09Mercado Jose O. SFOLN 11/05/09Michaelson Stanley W. retiree EWRCG 09/12/09Miller Charles E. retiree DENCS 09/18/09Milner Lorenzo retiree ORDCG 11/04/09Moyle James P. retiree DENFF 10/05/09Nigra Angeline L. retiree DTWRR 12/26/09Nobles Linwood C. retiree BWICG 11/20/09Paulie Cecelia W. retiree IADRR 12/08/09Peck Mary R. retiree DENTK 09/30/09Pegg Donald R. retiree LAXHH 10/09/09Peters Martin M. retiree EWRCG 12/24/09Podzamsky Paul R. retiree ORDFF 09/10/09Pongracz Susan DTWRR 09/20/09Quast John DENCG 09/30/09Riggs Thomas B. retiree DENMK 10/11/09Rigler Steven J. CLEMK 11/08/09Rotunno Frank retiree JFKFF 12/16/09Rushing Leon retiree MDWCG 11/05/09Sarich Patricia J. CHIRR 10/07/09Schwarz Karl F. retiree DENHH 12/26/09Scott Sally retiree NYCRR 10/18/09Seegel Ellen P. retiree JFKMK 09/07/09Sheeran Francis X. retiree PVDOZ 09/17/09Simmons Jr Charles E. retiree DENTR 11/04/09Stabulis Daniel E. retiree PHLFF 12/19/09Starr Wendell W. retiree SFOFF 10/05/09Strauss Florence O. retiree DTWMK 11/21/09

Strobehn Peter D. PDXMK 09/16/09Stroh Lana G. retiree LAXFF 11/13/09Swank Eugene R. retiree PDXMK 12/16/09Sweeney Charles P. retiree LAXCS 11/13/09Thornell Ann M. retiree BOSFF 12/20/09Venable Norman L. retiree EWRCG 12/31/09Verdone Jerry J. retiree SFOFF 11/02/09Victoria Thelma R. retiree LAXFR 11/30/09Von Gonten Eugene A retiree IADCS 09/22/09Waldron Corinne M. retiree FWAOZ 10/19/09Walker Lloyd R. retiree DENCG 10/28/09Weifenbach William H. retiree PITCG 11/21/09Whalen Robert G. retiree PDXCG 09/09/09Wilcox Frank L. retiree SEAFO 12/15/09Wilkins Alexander retiree LAXFF 11/20/09Wilson Vernon L. retiree DENCG 10/11/09

US Airways Obituaries

Nardick Anne 19-Dec-2009 Chiappetta Joseph 25-Dec-2009 Wyche Fred A 12-Jan-2010 Colombo Anthony 22-Feb-2010

Travel tip – dogs fly free in cabinDid you know Fido can now fly free on United Airlines?

Under an enhancement to the United Travel Policy for non-rev-enue space-available (NRSA) pleasure travel, effective Decem-ber 1, 2009, Employees, Retirees and our Travel Eligibles can fly with our pets in the cabin to domestic locations, without paying a fee. Please note that companions are not eligible for this travel program.

Bylaw noteProposed changes to District Lodge 141 By-Laws have

both failed by less than one percent.

If dogs could fly

INSIDE

What’s taking so long with United?

SFO’s floor on contract wages How it may impact you

RLA flow chart More complicated than a transcon on Southwest

What bosses prefer you don’t knowUnion airlines outperform nonunion; Reasons may surprise you

M E S S E N G E RS P R I N G 2 0 1 0

USPS

000-993

MAILING LABEL

ADDRESS ONE

ADDRESS TWO

CITY, STATE, ZIP

At what point is a commute unreasonable? A D is t r ic t 141 g r i ev ance i n Ph o eni x may lay s o m e g r o u n d wo r k . — Sto r y, Pag e 11