2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[Bob Owens]

 
I get that getting people back to where they want to be is quite high on the list; making sure they actually get to stay there should be too...

Just like shifts, weekends and holidays, thats the nature of the business we chose. Nobody is forced to go, we have recall. Priority is Compensation, benefits and workrules. Not going to put aside what benefits 100% for the benefit of 10%. 

 

[MetalMover]

Rush rush rush, spoken like a true used car salesman. Cut a deal in a hurry so its a bad one. (cut a deal before they post $5billion in profits, before expectations rise!)

No need to rush, but with our luck and the TWU and/or the IAM, by the time they get to us, the economy may have tanked and profits hit. Having said this, I do not think there should be any rushing into bad agreements. But I fear there are those like NYer who believe if we run and sign an agreement NOW rather than later, we will be better off in the future.
 
Kinda Like Nancy Peloisi telling the Congress and the American public they're just gonna have to vote for Obamacare to see what's in it. 

 

[Tim Nelson]

If they did, we don't know about it.
 
When have you experienced silence to mean forward movement?

We are left with hope. At any rate, as long as our union has a plan, and that plan is to secure the best contract in the industry, then im fine with doing things right and taking our time. We already have the stews to look at to see how arbitration could end up.

Priority should be to secure more work in the hubs (fortify them) and grandfather out stations.

 

[700UW]

Just like shifts, weekends and holidays, thats the nature of the business we chose. Nobody is forced to go, we have recall. Priority is Compensation, benefits and workrules. Not going to put aside what benefits 100% for the benefit of 10%.

That is the most anti-union and anti-worker statement I have seen.

"An injury to one , is an injury to all."

You are not a unionist, you are just about Bob.

No wonder why do there are issues with the TWU as they have people like you in power.

 

[WeAAsles]

We are left with hope. At any rate, as long as our union has a plan, and that plan is to secure the best contract in the industry, then im fine with doing things right and taking our time. We already have the stews to look at to see how arbitration could end up.

Priority should be to secure more work in the hubs (fortify them) and grandfather out stations.

Right now at some level the "Preferential Hiring" is accomplishing the task of getting some people back to their former stations. No most of the individuals are not back to Full Time even if that is what they had in their former stations anyway. Because of the "No System Flush" with or without a JCBA they are still going to have to wait until there is an opening back to their stations in their former status if that's what they want.

Since NYer has been saying that it's his belief (depending on what the restaffing agreement is) that the Station staffing percentage will fall somewhere between what we have and what you have now, that could wind up causing even more members to become commuters rather than less? Depending of course on what our negotiators agree to or not?

Taking a Football analogy. When we get the ball yes I want to get to the finish line as quickly as possible. But running in a straight line may not be the best way to get there since the opponents are out to try and tackle us. Pivot, shift, then run, goal.

 

[NYer]

On that comment I agree 100%. It's too bad that the Association didn't file 9 months earlier than they did or else it may have been us who were toasting to a JCBA rather than the FA's. Or at the very least maybe at the same time? C'est La Vie on that one I guess.

I'm sure that we also all find it frustrating to be waiting for that decision from the NMB since we can't even begin negotiating with the company until they make their determination.

 
You can negotiate, if you choose.

 

[NYer]

Rush rush rush, spoken like a true used car salesman. Cut a deal in a hurry so its a bad one. (cut a deal before they post $5billion in profits, before expectations rise!)

 
Rush? Expecting the two unions to sit together and PREPARE for upcoming negotiations is rushing in your book? Quite the opposite, taking the time to prepare today only makes negotiations that much more fluid with less chances of mistakes or omission from being made. The best way to get ready for something is to prepare.
 
Sitting around and waiting really isn't doing much other than wasting time, but then again you're against the Association so the more we sit around the better. Those Members on the street, commuting or working without their seniority don't seem to matter that much for those against the Association. 
 
Cut a deal before expectations rise? That very funny coming from someone that has been building expectations for the past 12 years. If after all that time you're not ready, then it might never come. (or is that the point)

 

[NYer]

No need to rush, but with our luck and the TWU and/or the IAM, by the time they get to us, the economy may have tanked and profits hit. Having said this, I do not think there should be any rushing into bad agreements. But I fear there are those like NYer who believe if we run and sign an agreement NOW rather than later, we will be better off in the future.
 
Kinda Like Nancy Peloisi telling the Congress and the American public they're just gonna have to vote for Obamacare to see what's in it. 

 
I guess I need to use Google Translate. I've never said we need to rush into an agreement. I've said we need to start the process of getting prepared to negotiate for an agreement. The NMB will make their determination, a vote will take place and after all that is done we should be ready to begin negotiations.
 
A Conservative comparing our contract negotiations to Obamacare, go figure.

 

[NYer]

Right now at some level the "Preferential Hiring" is accomplishing the task of getting some people back to their former stations. No most of the individuals are not back to Full Time even if that is what they had in their former stations anyway. Because of the "No System Flush" with or without a JCBA they are still going to have to wait until there is an opening back to their stations in their former status if that's what they want.

Since NYer has been saying that it's his belief (depending on what the restaffing agreement is) that the Station staffing percentage will fall somewhere between what we have and what you have now, that could wind up causing even more members to become commuters rather than less? Depending of course on what our negotiators agree to or not?

Taking a Football analogy. When we get the ball yes I want to get to the finish line as quickly as possible. But running in a straight line may not be the best way to get there since the opponents are out to try and tackle us. Pivot, shift, then run, goal.

 
And in order to pivot, shift, then run, goal....don't you prepare for several days before the game is even played.

 

[WeAAsles]

 
You can negotiate, if you choose.

Yes they can but doing that does run the risk of exasperating one minor problem. Many members already believe that they had and have zero say on the association. Doing what you say could pretty much confirm that in people's minds? It may be more prudent to let the NMB make their ruling on the association and if we are to vote ultimately to move it forward, both camps can sell what their ideas are for it's benefits, if they BOTH wrap their minds around it wholeheartedly.  I'd personally like to see them garner a little excitement towards the partnership myself.

I'd bet the company already has their economic framework prepared for what they are willing to offer our work-group and aren't going to procrastinate too much in that area? Our guys job is mostly going to be considering how to put that puzzle together with only a few areas that they may disagree on that they prefer over something else. (People can have a dissenting vote against their particular party though sometimes) We are going to be all in this TOGETHER.

Yes the company wants the synergies. They would "Like" to have that done before SOC. The main emphasis though IMO is to prove to Wall Street and the banks that they have a better idea for business than how UAL did their merger. As I've said before Parker has something to prove since the industry basically laughed at him for so many years. In business that stings and is not easily forgotten.

You said you think this could take years because of politics and irrational leaders? I disagree.

 

 

[WeAAsles]

 
And in order to pivot, shift, then run, goal....don't you prepare for several days before the game is even played.

They'll have their several days while we vote on the association if that's what comes back from the NMB.

BTW NYer I hope you didn't sell your stock. I said it would hit $60 by the end of the year and you said $40. Well we were both wrong it seems. It looks like it's ending up somewhere in the middle.

Seems like a lot of times things end up somewhere right there in the middle don't they?

 

[WeAAsles]

Oh and I wish some people would stop touting up how fast we could go into a downturn now that the American economy has finally started to go on the upturn. Yes barring any substantial act of terrorism or "Real" Global pandemic, it's not coming anytime soon and oil prices for AA right now are phenomenal. Great Crystal ball Parker has for not hedging fuel. Or was that Kirby?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-economy-grew-fast-5-133648403.html

 

[NYer]

Yes they can but doing that does run the risk of exasperating one minor problem. Many members already believe that they had and have zero say on the association. Doing what you say could pretty much confirm that in people's minds? It may be more prudent to let the NMB make their ruling on the association and if we are to vote ultimately to move it forward, both camps can sell what their ideas are for it's benefits, if they BOTH wrap their minds around it wholeheartedly.  I'd personally like to see them garner a little excitement towards the partnership myself.

I'd bet the company already has their economic framework prepared for what they are willing to offer our work-group and aren't going to procrastinate too much in that area? Our guys job is mostly going to be considering how to put that puzzle together with only a few areas that they may disagree on that they prefer over something else. (People can have a dissenting vote against their particular party though sometimes) We are going to be all in this TOGETHER.

Yes the company wants the synergies. They would "Like" to have that done before SOC. The main emphasis though IMO is to prove to Wall Street and the banks that they have a better idea for business than how UAL did their merger. As I've said before Parker has something to prove since the industry basically laughed at him for so many years. In business that stings and is not easily forgotten.

You said you think this could take years because of politics and irrational leaders? I disagree.

 

 
If that's the case, then maybe the two parties should stop talking about the Seniority Integration and we should put any talks about those famous three points on the side burner until the Association is voted on and ratified. If we should do as you say then we should cut off ALL work and meetings being conducted in the name of the Association. Agreed?
 
There are more than just "a few areas," we're talking about changing every single article in the CBA. One group over another will see a change in every article of the contract. That is a monumental task to be achieved and it can only be done successfully if both groups are working towards that goal. At the moment, the TWU does not have that singular goal in line and they have been very vocal in their opposition to the Association.
 
Those issues conspire to create a gridlock in the negotiations process that will be stretched beyond boundaries that are necessary. That's not even considering if there is a wrench throw into the whole process by some unforeseen situation that can turn the Roaring 20's into the Great Depression. It can happen in an instant.

 

[WeAAsles]

If that's the case, then maybe the two parties should stop talking about the Seniority Integration and we should put any talks about those famous three points on the side burner until the Association is voted on and ratified. If we should do as you say then we should cut off ALL work and meetings being conducted in the name of the Association. Agreed?
 
There are more than just "a few areas," we're talking about changing every single article in the CBA. One group over another will see a change in every article of the contract. That is a monumental task to be achieved and it can only be done successfully if both groups are working towards that goal. At the moment, the TWU does not have that singular goal in line and they have been very vocal in their opposition to the Association.
 
Those issues conspire to create a gridlock in the negotiations process that will be stretched beyond boundaries that are necessary. That's not even considering if there is a wrench throw into the whole process by some unforeseen situation that can turn the Roaring 20's into the Great Depression. It can happen in an instant.

Well if you've read the news today there just may be a little item that's going to support your call tremendously.

I just may need to eat a little crow? Hopefully I can get some gravy to go with that.

 

[NYer]

Well if you've read the news today there just may be a little item that's going to support your call tremendously.

I just may need to eat a little crow? Hopefully I can get some gravy to go with that.

 
You could never expect to receive a raise outside of the collective bargaining process and in many aspects the 4% raise is an unprecedented move, but it does illustrate how things can change from day to the next. This will undoubtedly increase the pressure on getting a JCBA, but it could also seem to put a little fire on the issue of getting a JCBA for which we have not even started to bet prepared for.
 
This could create exactly what we didn't need and it is a Membership that will demand results and will get more and more inpatient when they're expectations aren't met. Now they have a tangible number they can turn to as they calculate how much money they can lose on a day to day basis.
 
Can we please now get everyone together and start getting prepared for negotiations as a unit.