2015 Fleet Service Discussion

[Tim Nelson]

 
You haven't heard, huh?
 
That means we wasted 4 months in "tough guy" antics and those issues are going to be addressed by arbitration, if they even file. What is happening now is EXACTLY what could of happened 4 months ago. What is happening now is EXACTLY what was suggested happened.
 
It took some 4 months to figure it out and it takes others even more time to figure it out. =/
 
And BTW, I guess those in big hubs can wait and wait since they're not affected by a prolonged negotiations like those that have been on the street, commuting or in a Preferential Hire situation. According to you, we all just need to be patient.

 
You have been consistently correct. According to our new contract term sheet, the company was obligated to be prepared for Joint talks, 30 days after our ratification [I think the union omitted this important item when it posted the 'new contract', unless I couldn't find it.  So, something is holding up the JCBA talks, and it isn't the company.   I don't want to completely toss the TWU under the bus, since there are a lot of new relationships going on, but if they solely focus on the membership, I would think things would move quicker.
 

 

[WeAAsles]

You have been consistently correct. According to our new contract term sheet, the company was obligated to be prepared for Joint talks, 30 days after our ratification [I think the union omitted this important item when it posted the 'new contract', unless I couldn't find it.  So, something is holding up the JCBA talks, and it isn't the company.   I don't want to completely toss the TWU under the bus, since there are a lot of new relationships going on, but if they solely focus on the membership, I would think things would move quicker.

Tim if you go to Wings (Jetnet) the company has posted updates as to where negotiations currently stand. They just like the rest of us have stated that they are awaiting the NMB decision before negotiations begin. They did not stipulate that discussions would or could begin until the issue of who our representative will be is finalized by that Government agency.

Otherwise yes when that is concluded both unions or the Association as I understand it would need to commence JCBA talks within 30 days.

Hope that helps clear up things for you?

 

[NYer]

Tim if you go to Wings (Jetnet) the company has posted updates as to where negotiations currently stand. They just like the rest of us have stated that they are awaiting the NMB decision before negotiations begin. They did not stipulate that discussions would or could begin until the issue of who our representative will be is finalized by that Government agency.

Otherwise yes when that is concluded both unions or the Association as I understand it would need to commence JCBA talks within 30 days.

Hope that helps clear up things for you?

 
And oddly, the joint negotiation preparations to adhere to that timeline has not started.
 
Being that we are not preparing and I would venture to guess that we will inevitably hear the screams of not being "rushed" coming from the TWU side. 

 

[WeAAsles]

And oddly, the joint negotiation preparations to adhere to that timeline has not started.
 
Being that we are not preparing and I would venture to guess that we will inevitably hear the screams of not being "rushed" coming from the TWU side.

I've heard that mantra coming out of both camps to be honest. But IF there is some type of time line that needs to be adhered to as some have alluded, then in the end it may be rhetoric designed for nothing more than a little dramatic effect?

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

You are truly clueless about Chapter 11 and CBAs.

You are just truly clueless in general. 

 

[Hope777]

You All need to Remember that DP's Klan has said in the past about FSA's, We want you here for a JOB, NOT a Career !!!!

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim if you go to Wings (Jetnet) the company has posted updates as to where negotiations currently stand. They just like the rest of us have stated that they are awaiting the NMB decision before negotiations begin. They did not stipulate that discussions would or could begin until the issue of who our representative will be is finalized by that Government agency.

Otherwise yes when that is concluded both unions or the Association as I understand it would need to commence JCBA talks within 30 days.

Hope that helps clear up things for you?

 
The company website isn't a proper reference for representation questions. I don't recognize company updates regarding our representational matters, I just recognize communication from our union and the contract signed. 

On the legally binding term sheet that we voted on, it specifically says, "The company will be prepared to commence JCBA negotiations within 30 days from the date of ratification." And that was followed up on this site by those in negotiations for the union. So, I'm sure the company was prepared [and IAM]  if not for the TWU stall.

The NMB determination has nothing to do with it, as it's common for two unions to go into JCBA negotiations prior to NMB elections or determinations. But to do so, both unions have to be on the same page.  The NMB determination isn't what has postponed negotiations, it's the TWU that has intentionally postponed them.  The IAM has been screaming to negotiate since the members have fully supported the commencement of negotiations. 

That said, it was good to see that the TWU/IAM put out a joint statement and it looks like things are finally moving.

 

[WeAAsles]

 

 


 
You haven't heard, huh?

No I haven't? I'm not in a leadership position to know these thing if they are not published. It seems you may be though if you have the answers? --Been telling you for months.
 
 
That means we wasted 4 months in "tough guy" antics and those issues are going to be addressed by arbitration, if they even file. What is happening now is EXACTLY what could of happened 4 months ago. What is happening now is EXACTLY what was suggested happened.

Wasted? Really, how so? It seems to me that we are still waiting on the NMB to make it's decision on the Association and from there we still have to vote on it which will take at least another month possibly? --You keep talking about the NMB. I guess you believe that if the decision comes today we are ready to run towards negotiations? Hardly. This is a DIFFICULT process that will take time to learn and debate each others CBA, language and the airlines tendencies. The IAM has experience with that management team in negotiations, we don't. If the parties do not get together and understand each others point of view, then we will be in limbo for even more time.
 
If you are correct, then we will not hear the TWU or their leaders talk about being "rushed" into a decision or negotiations. We'll see how that works out. =/

 
It took some 4 months to figure it out and it takes others even more time to figure it out. =/

An effort was made to correct some issues while there was time to do so. You personally have stated that you consider those items to only be pesky nuisances. Well maybe not everyone thinks the same way as you do. That's a shame. --Four months later, those issues haven't been addressed and remain the same as they did dating back to MAY 2013. In the meantime, no negotiations prep has taken place. The shut that door and achieved nothing in doing so.
 
And BTW, I guess those in big hubs can wait and wait since they're not affected by a prolonged negotiations like those that have been on the street, commuting or in a Preferential Hire situation. According to you, we all just need to be patient.

Boy my patient comment really seems to light up your Christmas Tree?

Well let's see here. It seems that you insist on conveniently omitting, forgetting or ignoring the fact that the Association had to wait 9 months while our IAM Brothers and Sisters secured a very well deserved standalone contract. I'm glad that you have no outrage against that as you do the TWU's issues. --We waited for them to negotiate a standalone agreement which I guess is fair since they waited until WE negotiated the terms of the Merger and our MOU's that gave us raises from the company our Brothers & Sisters at the IAM work for. They waited on the sidelines and were ignored by their own management team. Talk about conveniently omitting, but that is what happens when you use other people's talking points.

Of course BTW the APFA and APA already secured their JCBA's. They were 9 months ahead of us in the process I need to point out yet again. Let's put this thought in our minds. The APFA members rejected their TA on November 10, 2014 so if we add 9 months to that date being as how we got started after them and our submission to the NMB is a lot more complicated then there's was it put's us at a date of August 10, 2015.

Personally I "think" we'll have a JCBA before August. But that's just my opinion if you're ok with that?  --You've been consistently wrong to this point. At this pace, no JCBA until 2016. If you believe some published timelines, they won't even meet until March.

 

 



Trying to take this off the confusing color variables.

Yes there absolutely will be some difficulties and the two sides need to come together to discuss some of those items they might hold sacrosanct. Hopefully soon a new "invitation" will come from either side to get together and discuss those issues. Wippinger would be the preferred choice IMO since the facility is already fully capable to handle that prep work and as the IAM are the Association leaders for the first two years that courtesy should be recognized.

On top of that yes the IAM negotiating committee is far more experienced in negotiations with this management team and our team should lean and rely on that fact.

Too bad on the 3 issues that dialogue and discussion couldn't solve or make modifications to those issues if what you are saying is true and a stone wall was put up instead? When it comes to the "System Ratio" agreement that will be a dud IMO if taken to arbitration. What do you think about Paragraph 5.A of that agreement? Personally it makes me feel like I'm standing on an auction block waiting to be sold. Even if I am in a station where it will likely never affect me. It just sounds so totally anti Union and pro dues that the idea of it disturbs me which is the thing you don't seem to gather that is in my mind. We'll ALL of course have to move on from it if that's what the powers that be ultimately want, but that bad taste in my mouth won't go away anytime soon. BTW are you in a Station where you would ever have to be concerned with that agreement?

Fair is fair and yes US management did leave the IAM members waiting on the sidelines while they negotiated with us. I can write a whole bunch of explanations, reasoning's or excuses for that but ultimately you are correct so there is no point in disagreeing. So a lot of issues are the cause of why we are behind the APFA and APA and neither side should have the finger pointed at it exclusively and not forgetting the role management played as you remind us.

To be consistently wrong one has to state an absolute. "Maybe, possibly, could and should" are all measured by guesses unless someone is staring at the signed documents. It's pretty easy to look in the rear view and criticize when you want someone to point a finger at. We both have pretty fuzzy crystal balls by that measure then NYer. If that's your litmus I can point the same finger at you for plenty of things you've said in the past as well. But that would be poor show when hopefully we both are just wanting to reach the same end goals and results. I think?  

 

 

[WeAAsles]

 
The company website isn't a proper reference for representation questions. I don't recognize company updates regarding our representational matters, I just recognize communication from our union and the contract signed. 
On the legally binding term sheet that we voted on, it specifically says, "The company will be prepared to commence JCBA negotiations within 30 days from the date of ratification." And that was followed up on this site by those in negotiations for the union. So, I'm sure the company was prepared [and IAM]  if not for the TWU stall.

The NMB determination has nothing to do with it, as it's common for two unions to go into JCBA negotiations prior to NMB elections or determinations. But to do so, both unions have to be on the same page.  The NMB determination isn't what has postponed negotiations, it's the TWU that has intentionally postponed them.  The IAM has been screaming to negotiate since the members have fully supported the commencement of negotiations. 

That said, it was good to see that the TWU/IAM put out a joint statement and it looks like things are finally moving.

That is your right of course Tim. But if it's the Company who we are going to be negotiating with and it is the Company who is stating why we aren't currently negotiating I'd have to give them a measure of latitude for what they're saying.

They maybe even more than us want this done before they file for SOC. Since we are also not in Section 6 where the Company is forbidden from negotiating with us directly one would truly have to think that if they would or could negotiate with us now, they would be applying all sorts of pressure to force that to be happening?

Since they aren't then common sense has to tell you something right?

 

[BLUTO]

That is your right of course Tim. But if it's the Company who we are going to be negotiating with and it is the Company who is stating why we aren't currently negotiating I'd have to give them a measure of latitude for what they're saying.

They maybe even more than us want this done before they file for SOC. Since we are also not in Section 6 where the Company is forbidden from negotiating with us directly one would truly have to think that if they would or could negotiate with us now, they would be applying all sorts of pressure to force that to be happening?

Since they aren't then common sense has to tell you something right?

MYBE DOOSH
CAN HELP 
NIELSON SPIN
THS 1> THY
WERK WELL 2
GATHER!
 
GEORGE

 

[WeAAsles]

MYBE DOOSH
CAN HELP 
NIELSON SPIN
THS 1> THY
WERK WELL 2
GATHER!
 
GEORGE

George your extreme wisdom and guidance is what keeps me coming back to these boards. My appreciation to you is immeasurable.

Ricardo.

 

[BLUTO]

George your extreme wisdom and guidance is what keeps me coming back to these boards. My appreciation to you is immeasurable.

Ricardo.

THNKS> I
NEEDED THT!
>BURP<
 
JUAN

 

[NYer]

Trying to take this off the confusing color variables.

Yes there absolutely will be some difficulties and the two sides need to come together to discuss some of those items they might hold sacrosanct. Hopefully soon a new "invitation" will come from either side to get together and discuss those issues. Wippinger would be the preferred choice IMO since the facility is already fully capable to handle that prep work and as the IAM are the Association leaders for the first two years that courtesy should be recognized. --Hopefully?
 
--Good grief. They are not the leaders, there are no leaders as all decision are by consensus. (I guess it's just easier to repeat rhetoric)

On top of that yes the IAM negotiating committee is far more experienced in negotiations with this management team and our team should lean and rely on that fact.

Too bad on the 3 issues that dialogue and discussion couldn't solve or make modifications to those issues if what you are saying is true and a stone wall was put up instead? --Couldn't solve? Those issues were already spoken and agreed to. It is a signed agreement as of May 2013.
 
When it comes to the "System Ratio" agreement that will be a dud IMO if taken to arbitration. What do you think about Paragraph 5.A of that agreement? Personally it makes me feel like I'm standing on an auction block waiting to be sold. Even if I am in a station where it will likely never affect me. It just sounds so totally anti Union and pro dues that the idea of it disturbs me which is the thing you don't seem to gather that is in my mind. We'll ALL of course have to move on from it if that's what the powers that be ultimately want, but that bad taste in my mouth won't go away anytime soon. BTW are you in a Station where you would ever have to be concerned with that agreement? --I'd rather be in a situation where both side are working together. I don't want to be in a situation in which two large groups are continuously fighting each other regardless of who wins a representational vote. If the TWU wins, we would have to deal with a workforce that will have many changes on their futures completely changed by their loss of their pensions and medical plans. I'd rather not see that. In contrast, I do not want to take the chance of losing my 401K or other items that may be at risk, like the CS Policy. In contrast, the Association is a better safeguard for the majority of the Members to keep those things they value.

Fair is fair and yes US management did leave the IAM members waiting on the sidelines while they negotiated with us. I can write a whole bunch of explanations, reasoning's or excuses for that but ultimately you are correct so there is no point in disagreeing. So a lot of issues are the cause of why we are behind the APFA and APA and neither side should have the finger pointed at it exclusively and not forgetting the role management played as you remind us. --The fact the TWU is crawling towards negotiations prep is exclusively at the feet of the TWU. Trying to pull third parties into this only makes those mistakes more glaring. NO ONE but the TWU is in control as to when they decide to get prepared for negotiations with their partners and their own Members.

To be consistently wrong one has to state an absolute. "Maybe, possibly, could and should" are all measured by guesses unless someone is staring at the signed documents. It's pretty easy to look in the rear view and criticize when you want someone to point a finger at. We both have pretty fuzzy crystal balls by that measure then NYer. If that's your litmus I can point the same finger at you for plenty of things you've said in the past as well. But that would be poor show when hopefully we both are just wanting to reach the same end goals and results. I think?  --Point on. Go right ahead and show us....Pleeeeaassssseeee.
 
At some point you will realize how you're being used by others to fill their agenda.
 

 

 

[WeAAsles]

Trying to take this off the confusing color variables.
Yes there absolutely will be some difficulties and the two sides need to come together to discuss some of those items they might hold sacrosanct. Hopefully soon a new "invitation" will come from either side to get together and discuss those issues. Wippinger would be the preferred choice IMO since the facility is already fully capable to handle that prep work and as the IAM are the Association leaders for the first two years that courtesy should be recognized. --Hopefully?
 
--Good grief. They are not the leaders, there are no leaders as all decision are by consensus. (I guess it's just easier to repeat rhetoric)
On top of that yes the IAM negotiating committee is far more experienced in negotiations with this management team and our team should lean and rely on that fact.
Too bad on the 3 issues that dialogue and discussion couldn't solve or make modifications to those issues if what you are saying is true and a stone wall was put up instead? --Couldn't solve? Those issues were already spoken and agreed to. It is a signed agreement as of May 2013.
 
When it comes to the "System Ratio" agreement that will be a dud IMO if taken to arbitration. What do you think about Paragraph 5.A of that agreement? Personally it makes me feel like I'm standing on an auction block waiting to be sold. Even if I am in a station where it will likely never affect me. It just sounds so totally anti Union and pro dues that the idea of it disturbs me which is the thing you don't seem to gather that is in my mind. We'll ALL of course have to move on from it if that's what the powers that be ultimately want, but that bad taste in my mouth won't go away anytime soon. BTW are you in a Station where you would ever have to be concerned with that agreement? --I'd rather be in a situation where both side are working together. I don't want to be in a situation in which two large groups are continuously fighting each other regardless of who wins a representational vote. If the TWU wins, we would have to deal with a workforce that will have many changes on their futures completely changed by their loss of their pensions and medical plans. I'd rather not see that. In contrast, I do not want to take the chance of losing my 401K or other items that may be at risk, like the CS Policy. In contrast, the Association is a better safeguard for the majority of the Members to keep those things they value.
Fair is fair and yes US management did leave the IAM members waiting on the sidelines while they negotiated with us. I can write a whole bunch of explanations, reasoning's or excuses for that but ultimately you are correct so there is no point in disagreeing. So a lot of issues are the cause of why we are behind the APFA and APA and neither side should have the finger pointed at it exclusively and not forgetting the role management played as you remind us. --The fact the TWU is crawling towards negotiations prep is exclusively at the feet of the TWU. Trying to pull third parties into this only makes those mistakes more glaring. NO ONE but the TWU is in control as to when they decide to get prepared for negotiations with their partners and their own Members.
To be consistently wrong one has to state an absolute. "Maybe, possibly, could and should" are all measured by guesses unless someone is staring at the signed documents. It's pretty easy to look in the rear view and criticize when you want someone to point a finger at. We both have pretty fuzzy crystal balls by that measure then NYer. If that's your litmus I can point the same finger at you for plenty of things you've said in the past as well. But that would be poor show when hopefully we both are just wanting to reach the same end goals and results. I think?  --Point on. Go right ahead and show us....Pleeeeaassssseeee.
 
At some point you will realize how you're being used by others to fill their agenda.

You make some mighty assumptions that you know me or you know who I am or am not talking to? On that one you're really missing the mark.

Besides that it seems like most of your comments directed at myself and the TWU are filled with a lot of vitriol and ill will and I am extremely curious why? Have you had personal experiences with those currently in positions in the union? Are you currently or were you formerly in a TWU position?

I'm sorry but it just seems like too many of your comments are filled with either emotion or maybe even perhaps some measure of resentment?

And you allude to know an awful lot about the TWU hierarchy and direction to be just an average member IMO?

 

[NYer]

You make some mighty assumptions that you know me or you know who I am or am not talking to? On that one you're really missing the mark.

Besides that it seems like most of your comments directed at myself and the TWU are filled with a lot of vitriol and ill will and I am extremely curious why? Have you had personal experiences with those currently in positions in the union? Are you currently or were you formerly in a TWU position?

I'm sorry but it just seems like too many of your comments are filled with either emotion or maybe even perhaps some measure of resentment?

And you allude to know an awful lot about the TWU hierarchy and direction to be just an average member IMO?

 
Oh Brother!