2015 AMT Discussion

[700UW]

700UW, on 21 Mar 2016 - 07:28 AM, said:

Learn how to post

 

[cltrat]

hate to tell you 700 but on fleet side at LUS an agent who accepts lead bids on his company time including ahead of  an agent who has been a lead for years if he;s senior in company time.
 
sorry guys back to your regular AMT thread

 

[700UW]

hate to tell you 700 but on fleet side at LUS an agent who accepts lead bids on his company time including ahead of  an agent who has been a lead for years if he;s senior in company time.
 
sorry guys back to your regular AMT thread

Hate to tell to you mechanic and related has been doing it their way since 1949, you organized in 95 and got your first CBA in 99.

You have ONE premium position as a lead, mechanic and related have upgrades from utility to stores, utility too mechanic or stores to mechanic. Also you have lead mechanic, inspector, lead inspector, Ground Communication Techs, Lead GCT, and MOC.

Ramp is Apple to oranges compared to M&R.

 

[Ground Interrupt]

I have 36 years, IAM and TWU time. My question is IAM gives Leads a separate seniority time from the time they bid there first Lead position but if they revert back to an AMT position do they they stop accuring time?
The argument some are using here is the Lead time at USair should be what's used for seniority purposes but it seems that if you just bid it to get lead time then go back to an AMT position you have'nt really been a lead for all the time your seniority shows. Correct me if I am wrong...

 

[700UW]

No you continue your lead time if you go back to basic.

You have to do a stability period when you bid lead, I don't remember how long it is, last time it was nine months, not sure how long it is now, will check when I get home.

 

[1AA]

Hate to tell to you mechanic and related has been doing it their way since 1949, you organized in 95 and got your first CBA in 99.
You have ONE premium position as a lead, mechanic and related have upgrades from utility to stores, utility too mechanic or stores to mechanic. Also you have lead mechanic, inspector, lead inspector, Ground Communication Techs, Lead GCT, and MOC.
Ramp is Apple to oranges compared to M&R.

That's right you said it OUR WAY. Not your way. Hell you never where represented by the TWU and criticize our way of doing things. You really have shown how much you hate the TWU and the AMT'S with your post. How sad.

 

[cltrat]

That's right you said it OUR WAY. Not your way. Hell you never where represented by the TWU and criticize our way of doing things. You really have shown how much you hate the TWU and the AMT'S with your post. How sad.

he certainly contradicted himself on what he thought was right

 

[swamt]

See, here again I disagree.  I guess because I have always done it that way.
 
But it's not "taking seniority" from anyone.  It's a Premium position with more pay.  You never lose your AMT time, or have anything added to it.  You have to build "tenure" in your premium position just like a teacher.
 
In your example, think of it this way:
 
Say I had 5 years as City Councilman,  5 years as Mayor, 5 years as Governor, then I got elected as President.  Would I have 15 years as President the first day I was elected?
 
It just doesn't work that way. 
 
I really can not conceive how people at both Southwest and American can believe that an LAA AMT with 30 years as an AMT and one day on the job as a Lead, can displace a  25 year AMT from LUS with 25 years as a Lead.
 
With us, a Utility is a Utility, in their own classification and seniority date.  An AMT, including Auto Shop, and Plant Maintenance, also including Welding, Paint Shop and so on, is an AMT with their own seniority date.  The Premium positions, including MOC, Lead, Inspection entail three more separate seniority dates in each  separate department.
 
It called union seniority and it has to be earned, not given to someone by a company interview brown nose process.

As I expected. I do not blame you for disagreeing.  Anyone on the LUS side will not agree with it as you guys are use to the way it has been for decades upon decades.  The major point here is it is done 2 completely different ways at LAA and LUS.  The integration of both union members from both sides by this asso that was forced upon you guys, it will have to go one way or the other. Or, maybe just maybe there could be possible movement and/or changes upon both sides, BUT, I highly doubt it.  The LAA numbers outweigh the LUS numbers by at least 25-35%, I think.  If this is so, do you think any of the AA'ers are willing to go with the IAM's way at LUS?  And think about this, this is only one of the many, many different ways these two unions were doing items within the two different contracts. Lead testing is another. Inspector testing might be another. And I am sure there some more that others have posted.  To be very honest with you I do see why it works the two different ways at both carriers and understand why.  The only thing I have been trying to point out is that it can only happen one way or the other it cannot be both, and, the question is, which way will this asso. try to go?  My opinion is they will first try to go the IAM way since they are the first group in charge.  I don't see a contract passing if it is brought out to the members for a vote if this is the case due to the sheer numbers at LAA out numbering the numbers at LUS.  There would have to be some sort of grandfathered clause, or some kind of hybrid sysstem that makes changes for both sides. What that might consist of I have no idea, and don't know if something like that would still be successful.  The final outcome could and very well may be that it is one way or the other.  With all that said it will be a rather huge deal for the side that it changes for.  And guess what?  For the folks that never read the full contract offer and only see the dollar signs and added vac and perks will simply overlook this major seniority issue until they see their own name listed below others on the seniority list, freak out, scream to the high heavens over it, and come to find out, if they would have read all contract changes word for word that they would have never voted for it in the first place.  Again Real tired, not trying to argue which way is best as both sides have had it the same way for decades, but I really do think it will change for one side or the other, which way it is addressed we await to see.  Good luck to you, and your fellow mechanics. You may want to start looking at other items within each contract to see just what other big changes might be coming down the pipe with this new asso will be bringing to the members that no one had a say so about.  Plain and simple the TWU and IAM forced this asso on you guys because they simply knew just exactly how the vote would have went if the members were to decide.

 

[swamt]

No you continue your lead time if you go back to basic.

You have to do a stability period when you bid lead, I don't remember how long it is, last time it was nine months, not sure how long it is now, will check when I get home.

Now why is it you "continue" your lead time when you bid back to basic mechanic, but you can't "continue" your mechanic to the lead position?  What a double standard.  In this case I would think the lead time stops if bidding back to basic classification, that is just not right.

 

[Ground Interrupt]

Real tired, question. How can you tell exactly how much time a Lead actually has as a lead if that person keeps accuring time even if he reverts back to an AMT position at some point after he took a Lead position? Your example as a 25 year Lead at LUS with 25 years seniority would not seem to be true in all cases.

 

[700UW]

Once again you have to make it about me.

How can someone who has NEVER worked a day in the premium position?

 

[700UW]

Now why is it you "continue" your lead time when you bid back to basic mechanic, but you can't "continue" your mechanic to the lead position?  What a double standard.  In this case I would think the lead time stops if bidding back to basic classification, that is just not right.

You do continue you basic seniority while working as a lead.

When you clock in your lead time starts your seniority as lead.

Your basic time is not your lead seniority.

 

[700UW]

Real tired, question. How can you tell exactly how much time a Lead actually has as a lead if that person keeps accuring time even if he reverts back to an AMT position at some point after he took a Lead position? Your example as a 25 year Lead at LUS with 25 years seniority would not seem to be true in all cases.

You have a lead date which is when you first clock in, been keeping track of it since 1949, it's not difficult.

 

[Ground Interrupt]

Ok so a LUS lead can start as an AMT say 30 years ago and become a lead 1 year later. That gives him 29 years Lead seniority. But after one year he goes back to AMT for 28 years. So how does that make him any different than a LAA AMT that starts 30 years ago and becomes a Lead 1 year ago. They both have been a Lead for only one year but the LUS Lead gets 29 years seniority Lead time? The IAM way would only give the LAA Lead 1 year seniority. See where I am coming from now?

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

Now why is it you "continue" your lead time when you bid back to basic mechanic, but you can't "continue" your mechanic to the lead position?  What a double standard.  In this case I would think the lead time stops if bidding back to basic classification, that is just not right.

The lead time would stop if "bidding" back into a mechanic position. In order to keep your lead time, you would have to exercise your seniority to the fullest extent at your point in order to keep it. If you voluntarily bid back to or bumped a mechanic when you still had a lead junior to you, you would forfeit your seniority.

This is the exact same way it was at NWA/Republic, etc.