2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[ograc]

That is incorrect.
Two different unions can begin joint talks prior to a nmb single carrier determination. And from a LUS perspective, we would be in less of a hurry i would think although part time issues need serious addressing along with a 3 pprong retirement and choice.

 
Incorrect? Not so fast there Brother! You're right Tim. Two different unions can begin joint talks prior to nmb singe carrier determination. The difference here is the two different unions have agreed to co represent. They have agreed to be recognized, going forward, as "The Association". The Association needs to be recognized by the NMB as the Collective Bargaining Representative of the combined Fleet Group going forward. This recognition will most likely require an election ordered by the NMB. To insinuate the TWU and the IAM can begin joint talks prior to a nmb carrier determination, in this case, is somewhat misleading. Welcome Back!
 

 

[ograc]

 

 
The Alliance never made sense to me, although I understand its intentions to avoid a fight between labor groups.  Why would the TWU who is the much larger group agree to lose its Membership to some 3rd group in an "alliance", not to mention, picking-up a sizable number IAM members?  If it isn't a loss of Membership for either IAM or TWU, then we are having support the Administrative overhead of both organizations, in addition, to whatever additional expenses having this alliance?

Jester read the Alliance agreement. There is very little to almost no overhead except for maybe the light bill and lunches served at those meetings.
 
I think eventually you are going to see some grand compromise where the mechanics are traded to the IAM in exchange with the TWU for fleet service... assuming the mechanics can figure out their own internal union problems.  I think the grumbling is beginning to foment to the top, and more it will be heard.

I don't think this will happen and if it did it would be a screaming shame. It would send a message to people who support the ideology behind the alliance that no, the two organizations cannot learn to work together and play nice with each other. Corporations and their pocket politicians would be laughing their collective assses off at all of us.

 

The alliance agreement was suggested and endorsed by the AFLCIO and it's President. The IAM and the TWU are expected to get it done. It's time different labor organizations, especially those within the AFLCIO, start working together for the betterment of those represented. This alliance agreement represents an effort to do this. I believe it will be accomplished. If accomplished; I view it as a positive step forward for both represented groups. Let's move forward on a combined front!

 

[Tim Nelson]

 
Incorrect? Not so fast there Brother! You're right Tim. Two different unions can begin joint talks prior to nmb singe carrier determination. The difference here is the two different unions have agreed to co represent. They have agreed to be recognized, going forward, as "The Association". The Association needs to be recognized by the NMB as the Collective Bargaining Representative of the combined Fleet Group going forward. This recognition will most likely require an election ordered by the NMB. To insinuate the TWU and the IAM can begin joint talks prior to a nmb carrier determination, in this case, is somewhat misleading. Welcome Back!
 

Don't ask a question next time if you don't like the correct answer. I simply answered your question, and the answer was that you were incorrect in thinking that it couldn 't  be done.  I didn't insinuate or suggest anything.  Yes, the two unions could have asked the company to go into joint talks.  I also believe that the NC said it would, 30 days after ratification as well.  I have said that I don't know why it is waiting, that's anyone's guess.  I think it was because of the AMFA thing with the MX but as I said, that may not be it.   Maybe it makes good sense for the Association to 'make secure' prior to joint talks as Prez said.  But something changed based on earlier comments.  I'm not saying things changed for bad or good, and maybe it makes great sense to wait. Dunno.    
 
I thought you asked an honest question, next time I will pass on answering your questions since you call my straightforward answer misleading.

 

[freedom]

If we did have to choose between one union or the other I think jester brings up an important point ...which union has the lower costs ...

When I go shopping I don't buy the brand name if I can get the store brand at a cheaper rate ..

 

[WeAAsles]

If we did have to choose between one union or the other I think jester brings up an important point ...which union has the lower costs ...

When I go shopping I don't buy the brand name if I can get the store brand at a cheaper rate ..

Freedom if you're talking about who's dues are lower this is the absolute worst reason to choose one union over another. That's the comments I hear all the time from people who want to go against union representation, "I don't want to pay dues"

Compared to my non union counterparts who hump bags all over the US I get over a 100% per year return on my investment. Looking at the BLS reports our non union counterparts make about on average $24,000 per year with no benefits. When you add benefits into the mix we get topped out somewhere in the range of $60,000 per year.

Whatever you pay to your union for dues if you put those figures into the equation, we pay a very small price for those returns.

 

[BLUTO]

If we did have to choose between one union or the other I think jester brings up an important point ...which union has the lower costs ...

When I go shopping I don't buy the brand name if I can get the store brand at a cheaper rate ..

HY MARVIN>
GO 2 WRK 4
WALMRT>
SAVE 100%
ON YER DUEZ!

 

[Harry Callahan]

Freedom say what you want about the union, but Bluto is right. Try working with out one.
 
Harry

 

[737823]

HY MARVIN>
GO 2 WRK 4
WALMRT>
SAVE 100%
ON YER DUEZ!

I THOUGHT U DL KEEP
TELLIN EVERY1 2 NT
SHOP @ WALMART.

Josh

 

[Jester]

Whatever you pay to your union for dues if you put those figures into the equation, we pay a very small price for those returns.

 
WeAAsles,
 
And let me say that I wasn't doing a cost comparison as to choose a union (if it gets to that point).  I will say that I have been reasonably happy with the PHX representives as the Management "brain trust" are always doing something of little sense.
 
For example, bad enough it is taking 4 months to remodel a bathroom in one of our locker rooms and outside port-a-potties as the alternative.  However, the latest from above was to force a third of the work force out of their lockers in that same area under construction as that area was to be re-modeled, and it could take up to a month to complete that, as well.  However, there was no consideration that there wasn't enough open lockers in the other areas.  After a few failed attempts and written notices, Management has backed off its plans due, I think, in large part to our union representives explaining the plan to be unacceptable.
 
Besides the increase pay and benefits, I think my dues are well worth the represention they afford the Membership when Management is being stupid.

 

[737823]

Freedom if you're talking about who's dues are lower this is the absolute worst reason to choose one union over another. That's the comments I hear all the time from people who want to go against union representation, "I don't want to pay dues"
Compared to my non union counterparts who hump bags all over the US I get over a 100% per year return on my investment. Looking at the BLS reports our non union counterparts make about on average $24,000 per year with no benefits. When you add benefits into the mix we get topped out somewhere in the range of $60,000 per year.
Whatever you pay to your union for dues if you put those figures into the equation, we pay a very small price for those returns.

You guys top out at 60k WITH BENEFITS. Yet leading strategy consulting firms and bulge bracket investment banks are hiring college graduates and starting them at $75k (plus annual bonus up to 100%).

Josh

 

[cltrat]

You guys top out at 60k WITH BENEFITS. Yet leading strategy consulting firms and bulge bracket investment banks are hiring college graduates and starting them at $75k (plus annual bonus up to 100%).

Josh

and a rookie out of college in the NFL gets a minimum 420,000 cause he can play football what's your point?

 

[737823]

and a rookie out of college in the NFL gets a minimum 420,000 cause he can play football what's your point?

That's it's not because of the union you have the benefits and wages you have it's a function of the market.

Josh

 

[700UW]

That's it's not because of the union you have the benefits and wages you have it's a function of the market.

Josh

Use Grammar much?

 

[ograc]

Don't ask a question next time if you don't like the correct answer. I simply answered your question, and the answer was that you were incorrect in thinking that it couldn 't  be done.  I didn't insinuate or suggest anything.  Yes, the two unions could have asked the company to go into joint talks.  I also believe that the NC said it would, 30 days after ratification as well.  I have said that I don't know why it is waiting, that's anyone's guess.  I think it was because of the AMFA thing with the MX but as I said, that may not be it.   Maybe it makes good sense for the Association to 'make secure' prior to joint talks as Prez said.  But something changed based on earlier comments.  I'm not saying things changed for bad or good, and maybe it makes great sense to wait. Dunno.    
 
I thought you asked an honest question, next time I will pass on answering your questions since you call my straightforward answer misleading.

Don't recall asking a question at all Tim. My point was, with the co representation agreement in place between the IAM and the TWU the next step will most likely be a representation election ordered by the NMB. Based on the results of any such election; the Association (the co representation by the IAM and the TWU of the merged workforces) will be the collective bargaining representative of the respective groups going forward or not. Your insinuation that different unions can begin JCBA negotiations prior to a single carrier status ruling by the NMB is indeed true; but does not pertain to our situation. By definition; a half truth. With a co representation agreement in place between the IAM and the TWU in this case I don't see separate negotiations happening. The delay, IMO... can be attributed to the NMB's ruling on the recognition of the "Association" as the combined workforces' collective bargaining representative. Prior to the NMB making such a ruling it will most likely order an election. Let's not try to spin this delay into something that it isn't. Straightforward answer? Really?     

 

 

[Tim Nelson]

Don't recall asking a question at all Tim. My point was, with the co representation agreement in place between the IAM and the TWU the next step will most likely be a representation election ordered by the NMB. Based on the results of any such election; the Association (the co representation by the IAM and the TWU of the merged workforces) will be the collective bargaining representative of the respective groups going forward or not. Your insinuation that different unions can begin JCBA negotiations prior to a single carrier status ruling by the NMB is indeed true; but does not pertain to our situation. By definition; a half truth. With a co representation agreement in place between the IAM and the TWU in this case I don't see separate negotiations happening. The delay, IMO... can be attributed to the NMB's ruling on the recognition of the "Association" as the combined workforces' collective bargaining representative. Prior to the NMB making such a ruling it will most likely order an election. Let's not try to spin this delay into something that it isn't. Straightforward answer? Really?

there, i like that better. I can live with "most likely". When u originally said "must" that was simply misleading..