Jump to content

TWU 555 and IAM 142


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#9
swamt

swamt

    Veteran

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 785 posts

View PostKev3188, on 10 February 2012 - 06:38 AM, said:

Are you honestly that out of touch that you don't know which unions/locals represent other groups on the WN property? It's early, so please tell me that I missed something here.

Are you kidding?  I know all the unions that represent our other workgroups. What I don't have memorized is the locals numbers (555 or 556 ect...) representing which group.  In other words; I know the TWU represents F/A's, and ramp, just didn't know which local number went with each corasponding group. I will say this, if you have all that by memory, then good for you.  I don't keep anything in my memory bank unless it effects me 24/7.

#10
JFK Fleet Service

JFK Fleet Service

    Veteran

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 533 posts
Look at the TWU/IAM arbitration between AA/TWA for an idea of what you may end up with.

Funny,reading these comments about stapling or reinterviewing and going on probation takes me back about 11 years to the AA/TWA fun and games.

No one will be happy with the arbitration results,take that to the bank.
Don't blame me, I voted NO.

#11
swamt

swamt

    Veteran

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 785 posts

View PostJFK Fleet Service, on 12 February 2012 - 04:35 AM, said:

Look at the TWU/IAM arbitration between AA/TWA for an idea of what you may end up with.

Funny,reading these comments about stapling or reinterviewing and going on probation takes me back about 11 years to the AA/TWA fun and games.

No one will be happy with the arbitration results,take that to the bank.

Can you enlighten us a little on the TWU/IAM arbitration. I do know that Tom (is it) Horn was on the board of negotiating for the IAM with alot of consessions in many many table talks.

#12
JFK Fleet Service

JFK Fleet Service

    Veteran

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 533 posts
It was a formula based on the ASM's of the two carriers on a station by station basis.IIRC if TWA was X percentage of the combined ASM's at a particular station they got 25% of their occupational seniority,if TWA had no presence or failed to meet the ASM percentage they got the closing date of the transaction ( 4/10/01) as a seniority date.

In STL they retained 100% seniority as obviously that was their only hub at the time.The decision resulted in numerous challenges and additional rulings.

Basically no one was happy.

TWA did get full credit for company seniority which is used for vacation bidding and pay purposes.
Don't blame me, I voted NO.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users