2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[700UW]

Well its apparent the only one with an agenda is PSA.

 

[psa8979]

The Members will decide if there is an NMB election for the THE IAMTWU ASSOCIATION not posters/ readers of AF. The fact is why would any Member vote NO to VOID their current CBA, de-certification, and be non-union ? Putting the cart before the horse , talking about JCN , polling , fishing, and using strange alias's (weAAsles ) signals to this Senior Active Member an AGENDA ! Does that cut to the chase enough ROA ? Time for a beer ? I'm done for now and will wait until SUN. while actually working FS to read AF posts. Even those from the TN HATERS TEAM. Then respond . Maybe ? YAHOO !

 

[charlie Brown]

This site is a huge info page for our membership. So many read that don't post. While I think it's a great idea like Ograc says to discuss the differences of the two contracts, IMO it's also great to have the debates. This also educates the membership and lets them see different sides and opinions. Usually and as far as I can tell, they have always made the right decisions when it comes time to vote for things. Let's not object to debate. Whether it's Nelson or whoever, we should welcome that as long as we are confident in the side that we support. I think this is what the membership likes to read and what attracts many to this site. Just my 2cents

 

[ograc]

This site is a huge info page for our membership. So many read that don't post. While I think it's a great idea like Ograc says to discuss the differences of the two contracts, IMO it's also great to have the debates. This also educates the membership and lets them see different sides and opinions. Usually and as far as I can tell, they have always made the right decisions when it comes time to vote for things. Let's not object to debate. Whether it's Nelson or whoever, we should welcome that as long as we are confident in the side that we support. I think this is what the membership likes to read and what attracts many to this site. Just my 2cents

 
CB,
I fully support debate and discussion of our collective futures. I do not support personal character attacks on this forum. It tends to distract from the issues at hand. My point is... the last three pages on this forum have been hijacked with one poster's meritless insinuations. Some posters want to muddy the waters on this forum to the extent the membership viewing gets tired of it and simply chooses to not view the content. Anyone posting on this forum is free to express their opinions on what needs to be addressed in JCBA negotiations. Those who choose to use this forum to create divisive posts, by questioning others' character, should be viewed as being divisive. For the sake of the members viewing this forum can we please get back to meaningful dialogue.    
 

 

[charlie Brown]

CB,
I fully support debate and discussion of our collective futures. I do not support personal character attacks on this forum. It tends to distract from the issues at hand. My point is... the last three pages on this forum have been hijacked with one poster's meritless insinuations. Some posters want to muddy the waters on this forum to the extent the membership viewing gets tired of it and simply chooses to not view the content. Anyone posting on this forum is free to express their opinions on what needs to be addressed in JCBA negotiations. Those who choose to use this forum to create divisive posts, by questioning others' character, should be viewed as being divisive. For the sake of the members viewing this forum can we please get back to meaningful dialogue.

Ograc
I agree with you for the most part. But what I was really trying to say, even the ones that try and attack someone's character, especially when they want to be a leader of the membership, it allows all those who read to see who they really are. I think this forum was one of the main tools in the last election that the membership used to educate one another and decide who they were voting for. That's a good thing IMO. But I agree! Let's move forward in discussing the JCBA.

 

[WeAAsles]

Sure AA . Why not . If you think it will change reality of what's coming for ALL ! of US at AAL . Remember this about IAMAW /Airline Division. Follow the Locals at HUBS , you will be thrown under the bus , and the $. Research that ! AA/TWU Brother from MIA . Good luck with your agenda.

Ok I think maybe I can see why in this posting that you have some apprehension of me contributing here? You're in a small station and you have no love for people who work in hubs. You just saw that SAN was one of the cities that was closed during our BK and us the members were the one's who ultimately voted for that to happen.

What you really don't seem to understand I guess is that the choice was not one we either wanted or was easy to make. The only other option to those stations closing would have been to accept pay cuts. Now I was and am fortunate that I can take a cut if I had to but most others out there cannot and would not have accepted it. The reality that people in small stations don't always accept is that it's a majority rule and the majority of members are now in hub cities.

I think you're fearful of what's going to happen during the JCBA talks and what may eventually come to a vote? Many members who care do not want to lose any more small stations. That is not just on the IAM side but on the TWU side as well. People from small stations are our friends and have been working side by side with us for many years. One of my best buds is a guy from MEM that I've gone on a few trips with.

No one can say what is going to happen in the next round of negotiations and the reality is that whatever comes out has to be both sellable and passable to the majority no matter who likes that or not. Our closures and the closures at UAL are not going to make the job easy. There may be a price to be paid and I personally don't care if you like or trust me but I'm willing to pay a price if it keeps people home.
 

 

[charlie Brown]

I can tell everyone as of right now, we don't have a date to start negotiating for the JCBA. The negotiating team still has to be picked, and then we will have to do a system wide survey for everyone to address their concerns. But hopefully things will start moving this next week.

 

[blue collar]

Just curious.
Is the non-rev flying a company offered benefit or a contractually offered benefit? And if the Union has any control of it?
My conversation wasn't asking about which policy was going to prevail, even though your contract says boarding must be seniority based. Or AA's policy of time of Check-In (aka FC/FS)
 
All I am asking is how does the company has anything to do with this? And will it be in some sort of litigation while the company sits on the sidelines?. Even though it is part of the overall compensation, I thought that management can control it or modify it.

As far as I know it's dictated by company policy- although some CBAs have language regarding boarding. The grievances may be filed, but that doesn't mean that the company will automatically lose and you'll keep DOH for free travel. The company could implement a $50 or $100 per flight fee, and I would think that the whole DOH argument becomes moot. Not for nothing, I've worked at places with both methods and I prefer FCFS- you actually have some more control whether you make the flight or not. You won't be waiting at the airport for hours just to have someone with more seniority walk right up and take that last seat.
I remember a grievance when I was there about our medical costs - the IAM thought it was an easy win because the company didn't change the medical cost chart at the end of the book, it was only through 2008. The unions position was that the company couldn't alter what our payments were, essentially that they were frozen at 2008 payments, and the company won because it was a company policy. We'll see what happens with this

 

[T5towbar]

As far as I know it's dictated by company policy- although some CBAs have language regarding boarding. The grievances may be filed, but that doesn't mean that the company will automatically lose and you'll keep DOH for free travel. The company could implement a $50 or $100 per flight fee, and I would think that the whole DOH argument becomes moot. Not for nothing, I've worked at places with both methods and I prefer FCFS- you actually have some more control whether you make the flight or not. You won't be waiting at the airport for hours just to have someone with more seniority walk right up and take that last seat.
I remember a grievance when I was there about our medical costs - the IAM thought it was an easy win because the company didn't change the medical cost chart at the end of the book, it was only through 2008. The unions position was that the company couldn't alter what our payments were, essentially that they were frozen at 2008 payments, and the company won because it was a company policy. We'll see what happens with this

That's what I was asking, because if the benefit was offered to one workgroup, the union(s) would make sure that the benefit is contractually offered to their workgroup as well. I know that in our IAM contract, if the company offers the benefit to management or another workgroup, it must be offered to us as well. But the union had no input on fees and boarding policy. (both of us had DOH for boarding, so that point was moot. Just the retirees got screwed)
 
But the company can modify and make changes like adding and raising fees and charges without input. 

 

[UnitedWeStand]

I can tell everyone as of right now, we don't have a date to start negotiating for the JCBA. The negotiating team still has to be picked, and then we will have to do a system wide survey for everyone to address their concerns. But hopefully things will start moving this next week.

 
That's good news
 
Question to you as a District rep;
Did DL141 file a grievance on the new boarding policy?

 

[charlie Brown]

That's good news
 
Question to you as a District rep;
Did DL141 file a grievance on the new boarding policy?

Yes we did. I'm pretty sure all unions on the property have. I believe the customer service group has the first date for arbitration. I would assume that case will set precedent for all the other grievances.

 

[P. REZ]

Yes we did. I'm pretty sure all unions on the property have. I believe the customer service group has the first date for arbitration. I would assume that case will set precedent for all the other grievances.

FA's have already arbitrated and are awaiting a decision, Pax service has November arbitration scheduled.
 
P. Rez

 

[freedom]

I can tell everyone as of right now, we don't have a date to start negotiating for the JCBA. The negotiating team still has to be picked, and then we will have to do a system wide survey for everyone to address their concerns. But hopefully things will start moving this next week.

I hope you and Prez are on the next committee. ..I really feel that both of you care deeply about scope and for me that's important. .

 

[WeAAsles]

I hope you and Prez are on the next committee. ..I really feel that both of you care deeply about scope and for me that's important. .

Freedom my guess would be you are speaking about the station staffing language of "SCOPE" People mention scope all the time but are rarely specific as to what aspect of it they are interested in? "SCOPE" speaks for many different aspects of our job functions and the work the company is contractually obligated to have us perform. That needs to be considered in the conversation.

 

[charlie Brown]

I hope you and Prez are on the next committee. ..I really feel that both of you care deeply about scope and for me that's important. .

Freedom
It will be up to President Delaney on who all is on the next team. But being on the last one, I can tell you we went off the surveys that the membership filled out as to what was important. The membership needs to participate in the next survey and let the negotiating team know what the issues are. I'm sure scope will or at least should be right at the top of that list. IMO it should be number 1. But that will be up to the membership to voice their opinion.