Since I have to type this article with only one hand (my right one was busted in a bicycle accident last week thanks to an automobile driver not paying attention and tossing me 11 feet into Wilshire Blvd. traffic), I'll be as brief as possible:

Is it just me, or does anyone else notice this aggressive AFA-CWA Marketing Campaign 2003 trying to get United flight attendants to cast a specific AFA-CWA vote?  I've also heard of my fellow flying partners receiving marketing hey-have-you-voted-yet phone calls to their personal home numbers.

Phone calls from the SCrew Desk or telemarketers are bad enough.  But AFA is not MCI or Verizon or that weirdo running around asking everyone if they can hear him.  Unless the AFA-CWA marketing campaign people want to pick up the tab for my Starbucks Latte like Ted would, I wonder if they should be using our personal addresses and telephone numbers for their voting pitches.

Thus the question of the hour is this: Has the AFA International offices released the United flight attendant information (read: telephone numbers and home addresses) to the Communication Workers of America (CWA) organization or whoever is doing the cold-calling and direct mail marketing?

Let me give you two examples of what I'm talking about:

Example #1: Mailbox Ads

Several days ago, I opened my mailbox (using my left hand now, thank you very much driver) and found a mailer addressed to me.

Somebody somewhere obtained my personal home address in order to send me the above mail advertisement.  This ad was obviously written, paid for, and sent specifically to encourage me to vote 'FOR' the AFA-CWA merger.  The smiling face on the card belongs to some F/A that flies for US Airways.  This was just as unnecessary to me as that glossy Uniform booklet United gave F/As awhile back.

(Just FYI, I am in a fairly crappy mood right now -- having had a fairly stressful month -- so if you don't dig my communication ranting or happen to be the person who provided my personal home address for this AFA-CWA marketing campaign, please go and play Tetris instead.  Otherwise, read on.)

Mailing campaigns cost money.  Printing smiling photos of US Airways flight attendants on lobbying postcards also costs money.  Or was I the only recipient of that message?  Now check out the next example:

Example #2: Ballot Ads

There is actually a lobbying message printed directly on the voting ballot itself:

Since Jumpseatnews has been in existence, we've poked a lot of fun (and perhaps made a few points along the way) at the sometimes weird communication that radiates from United management.  Yet, the AFA-CWA ballot wording presented to United flight attendants is every bit as unusual as anything I've ever read conceived from the halls of WHQ.

It appears that the organization is marketing a specific political point of view directly on the vote area of the ballot itself.

I don't recall AFA doing that the last time we voted.  Remember that thing called the Tentative Agreement?  They had worded the ballot either 'I vote FOR the Agreement' or 'I vote AGAINST the Agreement'.  Period.  You were supposed to have done your homework up to that point and cast a vote accordingly.

Imagine if the following ballot was presented to the voters in California:

I was going to include a funny photo of said Terminator here, but honestly, I find nothing amusing about this lobbying message on the ballot.  Quite honestly, I was taken aback to have read that ballot language.

Bonus Activity: AFA-CWA Website Domain Registrations

Just as I didn't care for United spending money in marketing a United/US Airways merger that they weren't sure would even happen, I was surprised to see that AFA officially registered the following Website domains over three weeks ago:

www.afa-cwa.com
www.afa-cwa.net
www.afa-cwa.org
www.afacwa.com
www.afacwa.net
www.afacwa.org

Don't believe me?  Visit the following website to check each domain: http://www.wwhois.com  (When you arrive at the search page, type in each web address listed above in the following format: 'afa-cwa.net' or 'afacwa.com'.  Do not type the 'www' before the address when running a search)

Once you arrive at the search results page, scroll down to see the following name of the registrant for each domain:

Association of Flight Attendants

Just FYI, registering a domain isn't exactly draining on the wallet.  The six addresses above appeared to have been registered with a company called 'Network Solutions' and were registered for a one-year term.  It's about $35.00 per name.  View Network Solutions' prices.  This totals a maximum of about $210.00 by my estimate.

Again, not really big bucks they were spending, but what the heck?  Who approved this?  Those website domains were registered on Nov 1, 2003, nearly three weeks ago.  We still have yet another week left for flight attendants to cast their votes and make the decision.   You know what I mean?  The votes are not yet counted for Heaven's sakes!  We're not AFA-CWA yet folks...  Would you say that perhaps they are being a bit eager?  What do you think?  Am I off-base on this one?

Occurs on Both Sides

To be fair here, the AFA-CWA marketing campaign is being brought to you by members from both sides of the issue.  There has been all kinds of newsletters coming from AFA leaders and/or other flight attendants that differ in opinion (a nice way of saying disagree as all hell) from other fellow AFA leaders and/or other flight attendants.

I'm sure people have received a lot of FOR or AGAINST e-mail messages from sources they didn't provide their e-mail address to.  As I said before, this campaign is happening on both sides.

Unethical or just part of a typical lobbying effort?  You decide...

Nevertheless, the ballot issue in Example #2 above still weighs in as a most concerning point for me.  Again, can a Union organization market a specific political point of view directly on the vote area of the ballot itself?  I have no idea whether that's legal or not.  I just find that there's something very wrong about doing that sort of thing.

The Problem With All Of This

Here's the #1 problem with all I've mentioned above: It clouds the issue at hand of whether or not AFA should merge with CWA.

I've done my share of reading about the CWA merger issue.  Some of the sources I've read are the LHR newsletter, the DCA Plane Truth newsletter, the AFA International Website information, the MEC Website information, the special letter from the MEC Officers, the CWA Website, the F/A Communication Center, and lastly, a special Local Council letter from the Council 12 President Ralph Barbosa.  Sorry, I unfortunately don't have an electronic copy of that last one.

After reading all those information sources, and others as well (sorry but my left hand is getting too darn tired to type this verbose drivel much longer), I was ready to make my decision and cast my vote. 

As I said before on an earlier post, this merger can have some very important ramifications for future flight attendant representation.  All flight attendants should at the very least set aside some time and review this important voting decision.  But review it on your own terms.  Be sure to read all the material carefully, talk to your flying partners, and make your own informed decision.

Whatever you decide, just don't forget to vote and blow the deadline: Dec 1, 1200 Noon EST.