And we are paying DEARLY for it.ograc said:
Is the company contractually obligated to bring the work in house in new stations? Or only contractually obligated to entertain a cost advantage bid, by the TWU, verse a third party vendor? If the latter is the case... good luck with that. Agreeing to compete with vendor's bids is no way to gain new or lost represented work. Shame on any labor organization that agrees to such terms. Additional shame to the members who ratify any such TA!
Bottom line is don't make that mistake. You can't beat a vendor's price.... PERIOD!!
Yeah. AE (along with DGS) is doing a lot of our work in smaller stations. Probably will get a couple of more once the last 27 stations will be announced at the beginning of next year. (Probably Feb.) I know AE got about 4-5 in the last two rounds, like BUF and CMH. But a few low ball outfits have been getting more of the work. It's sad, I'll tell you. I know that DGS is doing work in some of the LOA #6 cities, and must go. But I don't know if AE is involved in any of those cities either. Whatever the case, they must go. And fast. Our people will need homes soon when the ax falls.DFWFSC said:In years past, AE was wholly owned by AMR and it was one just one carrier for the purpose of TWU staffing. Now there are multiple carriers providing feed, and some cities have AE/Envoy flights operated by 2 or 3 different airlines...etc. So, Im not sure how the AE/TWU CBA addresses that issue. I know at LAX a lot of AE/Envoy flying was transferred to SkyWest and Mesa and soon Republic and the AE TWU kept all the work so far. Your right, nobody can compete with vendors most of the time. However, United has been giving a lot of outsource work to regular AE/Envoy employees vs. Eagle Ground Handling or other no benefit vendors.