TWA workers approve contract-reluctantly

Scan page 5

Icahn forced TWA flight attendants to make concessions in 1986.

SOCIALIST ACTION APRIL 1992 5 NEW YORK-On Jan. 31, after three and a half years of negotiations, a tentative agreement was reached at Trans World Airlines (TWA) between owner Carl Icahn and the leadership of District 142 of the International Association of Machinists (IAM), the union that represents half of TWA's 30,000 employees. The same day, the airline filed for bankruptcy.

The agreement removed the last obstacle to Icahn's "pre-packaged" Chapter 11 reorganization plan, designed to eliminate $1 billion in debt from his carrier. Previous agreements had been reached with the airline's creditors. TWA's position in the U.S. market has declined in recent years and annual losses of up to $300 million have been claimed, although Icahn milked the airline for years to pay for his investments elsewhere. • The contract will cover the years 19921994. It includes wage increases of five percent, five percent, and eight to 10 percent (based on job classification) over the three years covered. This contract does not keep pace with the cost of living nor make up for the fact that TWA employees have not seen a raise in wages for most of the past decade.

Furthermore, important concessions are also included in the package. The deductible for medical benefits for families will double, from $200 to $400, though the deductible for individuals will remain the same.

Retroactive payment of raises, which traditionally was counted from the date of the expiration of the previous contract, will cover only the beginning of the new contract. This not only causes each worker to lose out on thousands of dollars, but also creates a precedent whereby the company is given an incentive to drag out future contract negotiations in the knowledge that it (Gerry Fiori is a member of IAM Local 1056 in New York) won't have to pay for it with retroactive wage increases.

The most significant concession, however, will be the introduction of part-time workers (TWA has been the only major carrier without part-timers). These workers will constitute 10 percent of the workforce. They will start at a new pay rate which will be two-thirds that of the lowest paid full-timers and half that of the highest paid full-timers.

(The different pay rates are called A, B, and C Scale. It currently takes five years to move from B to A Scale. Under the new contract, it will take eight years to move from C to A Scale.)

Thus, a two-tier structure will become a three-tier structure, further dividing the workforce.

Pressure from the bureaucrats The contract was voted on in a series of ratification meetings held on Feb. 17-24. The union bureaucracy did all it could, both before and during these meetings, to ram the agreement through.

"Highlight" sheets were posted on union bulletin boards about two weeks before the vote. Five days before the vote, shop stewards, after holding an informational meeting for themselves, "explained" the contract to those workers who could find them and knew the right questions to ask.

At no time did more than a handful of employees ever get to see an actual copy of the contract.

At the ratification meetings themselves, the bureaucrats used scare tactics to get the membership to go along with them. They held out the specter of a freefall bankruptcy and eventual liquidation of the company if the contract wasn't voted up.

They declared themselves to be at the mercy of the bankruptcy court, which could impose its own solution if there was no new contract. They used the standard lie that a "no" vote meant a vote to strike rather than a vote to renegotiate. At the same time, they tried to paint the contract as non-concessionary and a great victory.

Here at JFK Airport, many workers spoke against the contract at the ratification meeting, citing the givebacks it contained and taking the, district leadership to task for not coming through with anything better after three years.

They were expressing the anger and frustration of the ranks who are seeing the degradation of their standards of living and job security before their eyes while their "leaders" only look out for themselves.

Some said it would be better to strike than to accept the slow destruction of what used to be a job that passed from generation to generation.

The majority sentiment, however, was one of resignation. Given the dismal state of the economy, most workers felt that they had no choice but to accept the contract-bad as it was—rather than risk losing their jobs. "It's either take the contract or go on the unemployment line, they said.

Lack of leadership

Some felt that nothing better could be gotten since the company was in bankruptcy and it was necessary to "sacrifice" to save it. Above all, no one had any confidence that the union leadership could lead a winning strike if it came to it.

The contract was finally ratified by the union membership. It still must gain the approval of the bankruptcy court in order to go into effect. When the court met on March 19, representatives of the pension guarantors group raised objections to the payment settlement between Icahn and the banks, citing the fact that pension funds were low. The court will now meet on April 3, where the IAM contract settlement will come up for approval.

The workers at TWA deserved better. The level of discontent was high and could have been translated into a serious fightback despite the negative pressures of the recession and TWA's bankruptcy.

What was lacking was an organized rank-and-file movement, like Teamsters for a Democratic Union or the Hell On Wheels/New Directions formations in the New York Transport Workers Union, that could have provided a credible alternative perspective and leadership to the membership.

To build such a force in the IAM will be a necessary task to combat and defeat such concessionary contracts in the future. - I