2015 Fleet Service Discussion

[T5towbar]

 

Ok but isn't it true that the pre merger Co Fleet workers had no Union from 1983 to 2010 and because of that had no contract of which to work from when the IBT was voted in. Then whatever they were able to negotiate from NOTHING was passed over to the IAM to try and work with.

So since there was no protection language or very limited language UAL already had the ability to close multiple stations and I'm very sure made the negotiators keenly aware of that. 

Plus from what I understand the first TA had better protection language but less money. That was voted down because people wanted more money over jobs and stations.

Tell me if any of us had been on that negotiating committee what we could have done better?

Now in regards to us here at the merged AA, we both already have contracts that do have pretty good language for us to maintain work and stations. That's because at least for us here at the AA side we never lost our Union and have had the TWU in place since the 1940's. And you guys on the US side gained the place holder for stations to be maintained until we have a JCBA which was huge. 

So UAL and AA are very different stories.

Let's clear up one point why we are in this mess:
Why did the IAM rush to file for single carrier without getting some improvements for the sUA members? They were in one of the longest bankruptcies in aviation history, and their pensions were robbed. Please explain that. The sUA members deserved better. They should have got something for them before going into joint talks. Then we could have went to the table with a better hand. Hell, your deal proves that point!!
Don't blame that on the IBT. The IAM gambled and lost big because they killed the sUA talks by filing and saw that large set of new duespayers which was sCO ATW which were unrepresented.
There was no way that the company was going to decimate TWO of their largest hubs with thousands of members. Not going with a year and a half or two years into the merger. That would have been a PR nightmare. That was the bluff. And they were behind the 8 ball before they got to the table.
As lousy as our deal was, the IBT saved 7 stations before the election. Granted, a lot of our members weren't union supporters, and not knowledgeable 

 

[WeAAsles]

 

 


Ok but isn't it true that the pre merger Co Fleet workers had no Union from 1983 to 2010 and because of that had no contract of which to work from when the IBT was voted in. Then whatever they were able to negotiate from NOTHING was passed over to the IAM to try and work with.

So since there was no protection language or very limited language UAL already had the ability to close multiple stations and I'm very sure made the negotiators keenly aware of that. 

Plus from what I understand the first TA had better protection language but less money. That was voted down because people wanted more money over jobs and stations.

Tell me if any of us had been on that negotiating committee what we could have done better?

Now in regards to us here at the merged AA, we both already have contracts that do have pretty good language for us to maintain work and stations. That's because at least for us here at the AA side we never lost our Union and have had the TWU in place since the 1940's. And you guys on the US side gained the place holder for stations to be maintained until we have a JCBA which was huge. 

So UAL and AA are very different stories.

Let's clear up one point why we are in this mess:
Why did the IAM rush to file for single carrier without getting some improvements for the sUA members? They were in one of the longest bankruptcies in aviation history, and their pensions were robbed. Please explain that. The sUA members deserved better. They should have got something for them before going into joint talks. Then we could have went to the table with a better hand. Hell, your deal proves that point!!
Don't blame that on the IBT. The IAM gambled and lost big because they killed the sUA talks by filing and saw that large set of new duespayers which was sCO ATW which were unrepresented.
There was no way that the company was going to decimate TWO of their largest hubs with thousands of members. Not going with a year and a half or two years into the merger. That would have been a PR nightmare. That was the bluff. And they were behind the 8 ball before they got to the table.
As lousy as our deal was, the IBT saved 7 stations before the election. Granted, a lot of our members weren't union supporters, and not knowledgeable 

 




Not blaming the IBT at all. They were handed nothing by a group that chose not to organize for 27 years after their Union was thrown out before the 1113 part of the BK code was enacted.

They probably filed to block out the IBT from being able to get enough cards in time for a showing of interest? That's why.

We on the other hand agreed to an association under advisement of the AFL/CIO otherwise the TWU more than likely would have done the same thing?

The IBT left the AFL/CIO so they have no qualms about how or where they get or try to keep members.

 

[WeAAsles]

The former Co group probably should have chose the IAM rather than the IBT but I think they chose the IBT to try and look after their interests over their future UAL merger partners? It was probably a scenario where they thought the larger group would gobble them up and spit them out otherwise?

Had they went with the IAM from the get go they may have not filed for SCS and maintained their Section 6 leverage over feeling maybe the need to make sure they secured the entire group over the IBT's possible momentum to get cards over time?

At least that's my thought?

 

[john john]

Ok but isn't it true that the pre merger Co Fleet workers had no Union from 1983 to 2010 and because of that had no contract of which to work from when the IBT was voted in. Then whatever they were able to negotiate from NOTHING was passed over to the IAM to try and work with.

So since there was no protection language or very limited language UAL already had the ability to close multiple stations and I'm very sure made the negotiators keenly aware of that. 

Plus from what I understand the first TA had better protection language but less money. That was voted down because people wanted more money over jobs and stations.

Tell me if any of us had been on that negotiating committee what we could have done better?

Now in regards to us here at the merged AA, we both already have contracts that do have pretty good language for us to maintain work and stations. That's because at least for us here at the AA side we never lost our Union and have had the TWU in place since the 1940's. And you guys on the US side gained the place holder for stations to be maintained until we have a JCBA which was huge. 

So UAL and AA are very different stories.

T5towbar can expand on this very well.

And USAirways had no union in fleet service or passenger service form the 1940’s to 1999 and how does their contract compare to UA ?
So either pre and post contract huge outsourcing was to occur at UA

 

[700UW]

Wrong Pre-US before the Piedmont merger, US was unionized at BOS, BUF, PIT and PHL, it was voted out after the merger.
 
US FSA unionized in 1995, voted down one TA then ratified their first CBA in 1999.

 

[WeAAsles]

And USAirways had no union in fleet service or passenger service form the 1940’s to 1999 and how does their contract compare to UA ?
So either pre and post contract huge outsourcing was to occur at UA

The most massive scourge of outsourcing fleet work didn't start to happen until after Sept 11. Instead of outsourcing through concessions and bankruptcies we took hit's on our pay and benefits but maintained much of the work. Having a Union in place in 1999 was much different then getting one in the year 2010.

 

[john john]

Having a Union in place in 1999 was much different then getting one in the year 2010.

You need a history lesson

 

[T5towbar]

Not blaming the IBT at all. They were handed nothing by a group that chose not to organize for 27 years after their Union was thrown out before the 1113 part of the BK code was enacted.

They probably filed to block out the IBT from being able to get enough cards in time for a showing of interest? That's why.

We on the other hand agreed to an association under advisement of the AFL/CIO otherwise the TWU more than likely would have done the same thing?

The IBT left the AFL/CIO so they have no qualms about how or where they get or try to keep members.

 
But that is the crux of the question.
The IAM knew the merger was going to happen and the company stonewalled talks. But that would have been the perfect time to get something for them (sUA), at least pay parity. They weren't getting their retro until joint talks. But you have to try to get something for them before going into joint. This is what I'm saying.
 
About the IAM: They could have organized us before the IBT. During that time, they did not try to even organize and if they did, they would have won. But this union could not multitask. They were in the middle of a bad Boeing strike AND was concerned about organizing Delta (via their NW members). If they would have taken time out of their busy schedule, they could have won an easy election without spending a lot of resources. A lot of us on the sCO Ramp was ready for a union after multiple tries. We came to them (IAM) because we already couldn't get TWU (lost by under 100 voters). So the IAM was the logical choice, since there was going to be a merger and talking to some UA people. When the cuts came in 2005, we took the brunt of them, and did not receive back what we lost. Other unionized workgroups got theirs back. So the IAM didn't try, and since our MX was IBT, they came in and filled the void. 

 

[WeAAsles]

You need a history lesson

I am beyond cool with with being given a History lesson. I'm always learning as I go along and would love to read what you have to say and then the dialogue that comes after that.

 

[WeAAsles]

 
About the IAM: They could have organized us before the IBT. During that time, they did not try to even organize and if they did, they would have won. But this union could not multitask. They were in the middle of a bad Boeing strike AND was concerned about organizing Delta (via their NW members). If they would have taken time out of their busy schedule, they could have won an easy election without spending a lot of resources. A lot of us on the sCO Ramp was ready for a union after multiple tries. We came to them (IAM) because we already couldn't get TWU (lost by under 100 voters). So the IAM was the logical choice, since there was going to be a merger and talking to some UA people. When the cuts came in 2005, we took the brunt of them, and did not receive back what we lost. Other unionized workgroups got theirs back. So the IAM didn't try, and since our MX was IBT, they came in and filled the void. 

Had the IAM tried to organize you in the past? If they had and it was a failure multiple times I can understand why they wouldn't have wanted to maybe in their minds wasted the time, money and effort again?

The CWA if the merger hadn't happened was done with the AA agents. They spent a fortune trying to organize them and I was told they weren't going to try again after the loss. The only reason they did of course was due to the merger and because they were obligated since they represented the US agents already.

The issue is how many times should a labor organization try to have an organizing drive if it keeps failing?

Fingers very much crossed for Delta FA's and Ramp.

"In Addition"

T5 I honestly think had your group chose to organize 10 years earlier no matter how good Continental management was treating you, you wouldn't be in the situation you guys are in today? Who should get the blame for that?

People always seem to have a hard time reading the tea leaves for the future though, or they just don't care. 

 

[T5towbar]

Had the IAM tried to organize you in the past? If they had and it was a failure multiple times I can understand why they wouldn't have wanted to maybe in their minds wasted the time, money and effort again?
The CWA if the merger hadn't happened was done with the AA agents. They spent a fortune trying to organize them and I was told they weren't going to try again after the loss. The only reason they did of course was due to the merger and because they were obligated since they represented the US agents already.
The issue is how many times should a labor organization try to have an organizing drive if it keeps failing?
Fingers very much crossed for Delta FA's and Ramp."In Addition"
T5 I honestly think had your group chose to organize 10 years earlier no matter how good Continental management was treating you, you wouldn't be in the situation you guys are in today? Who should get the blame for that?
People always seem to have a hard time reading the tea leaves for the future though, or they just don't care.

No. I't wasn't multiple times with the IAM.
Ironically after the failed TWU drive, the IAM approached us for an organizing drive. They could have easily won. But at that time all efforts went into the DL drive. We were put on hold and the IBT came and swooped in and won the election easily.

Funny how thing is they are still working to try to organize DL.............

 

[WeAAsles]

No. I't wasn't multiple times with the IAM.
Ironically after the failed TWU drive, the IAM approached us for an organizing drive. They could have easily won. But at that time all efforts went into the DL drive. We were put on hold and the IBT came and swooped in and won the election easily.
Funny how thing is they are still working to try to organize DL.............

No. I't wasn't multiple times with the IAM.
Ironically after the failed TWU drive, the IAM approached us for an organizing drive. They could have easily won. But at that time all efforts went into the DL drive. We were put on hold and the IBT came and swooped in and won the election easily.
Funny how thing is they are still working to try to organize DL.............

Had they ever tried for you guys and how long ago was that?

BTW it is very expensive to do an organizing drive and I think the IAM is going to be successful with the FA'S and they gained alot of traction on fleet with what happened to Kip Hedges.

 

[cltrat]

No. I't wasn't multiple times with the IAM.
Ironically after the failed TWU drive, the IAM approached us for an organizing drive. They could have easily won. But at that time all efforts went into the DL drive. We were put on hold and the IBT came and swooped in and won the election easily.

Funny how thing is they are still working to try to organize DL.............

perhaps the IAM sees DL as the uber cash cow that's out there?

 

[WeAAsles]

Maybe also seeing that the TWU failed as you say only recently prior do you think that might have been why the IAM was shy in giving it a shot?

Perhaps?

 

[AANOTOK]

Ok Guy's, I will apologize now for the hijack...but I figured this thread could answer it and I didn't want to start a new one or go back pages and try to find a related topic.
 
Anyway, I just listed my wife on a US metal and have printed the confirmation info. What do I do next or what does she do. Does she just show up at the gate before departure with id??? Or anything else need to be done before she goes? I'm assuming it's by seniority (after US employees)? Thanks in advance.