Site Admin

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 949
Location: Carmel, IN

http://www.airportbusiness.com....jsp?siteSection=1&id=7322

Site Admin

Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 2316
Location: Indianapolis, IN

Maybe this is part of some unknown codeshare agreement with AirTran

Ok I had to say it lol

AirTran Reporter

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 341
Location: Indianapolis

If NW FA's did strike, how would that affect NW's focus city here? If they had to "shut down" most of the IND schedule, how would AirTran react??

Site Admin

Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 2316
Location: Indianapolis, IN

If the FA's strike that will probably be the end of the focus city. OR.... it could mark an expansion of service here if they dump MEM because of it. But who knows. AirTran won't react because they don't have the equipment to. Unless they decided to eliminate all these small point to point routes and bring the equipment here which I doubt.

Site Admin

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 949
Location: Carmel, IN

I'm not sure how much any kind of strike would affect IND, since so many of those flights are operated by Pinnacle. So a FA strike would certainly have an impact, but I would assume the Pinnacle RJs would not be affected.

Also - wasn't NW hiring and training a lot of replacement FA's to have people trained just in case of a strike?

Member

Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 142
Location: IND

Flight Attendant strike:

I believe the judge is supposed to decide Wed. if the strike is legal or not.

History: NO union has struck an airline in bankruptcy. Why? No union wants to find out that it is illegal to strike. They want to use that "we can strike" point as leverage. The Union would have NO power in bankruptcy without the potential threat of a strike.

A strike is unlikely.

Site Admin

Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 2316
Location: Indianapolis, IN

The point is that the judge will have no choice in accepting is that you can't force people to work in this country. The airline will have a right to fire the FAs that don't report to work. But thats the extent of it. US slavery laws will prohibit a judge for forcing people under the premise of content of court to work. It would be illegal for the judge.

Site Admin

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 949
Location: Carmel, IN

Actually, that's not entirely true. There are many laws that allow a judge to require certain kinds of employees to work, because it's considered to harm the public interest if they're allowed to strike. Usually this is applied to police officers, firefighters, and such. And there are a lot of laws that dictate what must happen prior to a strike - notification, cooling-off period, mandatory arbitration and such. I believe much of this applies to many jobs in the transportation industry. IIRC, a few years ago, UA FA's union was fined a ginormous amount of money for staging a work slowdown where they refused to work any extra shifts and held a "sickout." And I also recall some union where the union leaders were actually charged with crimes related to this. There's also been teachers unions barred from striking under the same principles.

And of course, there's another job category where refusal to work actually results in criminal charges and imprisonment, and that's the military. If you refuse a direct order, even if it involves putting yourself in danger, you can face a court martial and possible time in the brig. Desertion can lead to imprisonment, and during wartime can result in summary execution by your commanding officer.

Member

Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 142
Location: IND

The judge ruled that it is not in his jurisdiction to stop a strike.

Personal opinion....

I doubt the flight attendants will "strike" Northwest in the traditional sense. AFA has mentioned CHAOS. I fully expect to see some delayed flights and flight attendants not showing up IF they do not end up negotiating with NW first.

I am hoping IND will not see too much of an impact.