AA and Labor Negotiations-2020

[Filter]

Assuming the contract is voted in. Does anyone have an idea of what will be the (DOS) date of signing?

From what I’ve heard in the next 3 weeks the language will go through a final tweak and every member will receive a complete physical copy of the agreement...it will also be available digitally...then some kind of roadshow to roll it out to the membership...finally there will be 1 day to vote at a designated location in each city...if I were to guess?...I would say sometime in March.

 

[Rogallo]

I've been thinking about this "agreement in principal" for Fleet for over a day now. As time goes on I lean more and more towards a "No." Let me explain why. For perspective I'm a 21 year employee and, if it matters, LUS.

PAY: We were promised DL or UA (whichever is higher) +7%. Then they gave us profit sharing and said because of that it would be only +3%. A 4.8% raise tops us out at $32.28. UA (I don't know the DL number) is at $32.01 RIGHT NOW; UA +3% is $32.97. Oh, and BTW, UA is about to enter negotiations in a few months, so of course they'll be getting higher raises.

PROFIT SHARING: I get it, but what profit? You can't sell this as a benefit when there isn't profit to be shared. I've HEARD that if 2019 was paid out on the agreed to rules our PS would have been about double; that still puts at something like 20-25% of what DL got.

SIGNING BONUS: After what? Four years? You're going to give the people who have been here fo decades, some four or MORE decades $3000 along with the people who just walked in the door? Give the new guys $3000; those who have been here at least since the AA/US merger deserve more.

SCOPE AND JOB PROTECTION: There's a lot of questions here, but we do know some. Some known or questionable negatives from the agreement are...
Cargo: What work exactly is protected? Is it just going to be running cargo? Office work?
Catering (PHL/CLT): Gone at the end of this contract. Job loss.

MEDICAL: First off, while I know a lot of people like the 100% LUS insurance I think VERY few of them are likely to actually need that, if any. IT's just WAY overpaying for unneeded coverage. Because of that I don't object to getting rid of it. The 90% plan however, I do object to. It WILL be gone after 2025, and it's a reasonable step for many above the 80% plan. The "Me too" clause is borderline bait & switch; not that it's ONLY regarding the Standard and Core plans. Lastly, we're supposed to be bring LAA and LUS together; How the HELL do you do that by offering one group a better plan? HIGHLY OFFENSIVE TO LAA!
RETIREMENT: I'm going to set aside the pension arguments; they may well be moot if TWU can't get in them and I know many LUS (myself included) don't want to give them up. Because of that I'm going to assume (correctly or not) that the pension and 5% contribution are relatively equal. That leaves the 4% match and a (I think) effective 9% match for comparison. The FAs get I think 9.9% match and we're close to that. The pilots however get I think 14% contribution automatically, not a match, just 14%.
RETIREE BENEFITS: I really don't think I have an opinion here, so I'll just leave it alone.

VACATION: This is a mega sore spot because of where I fall. I've had four weeks for I think nine years now. If I was admin I'd have had a fifth week four years ago. The scale will fix that, BUT IN THREE YEARS. I need to wait ANOTHER three years for a fifth week, and then I just to six right after? Come on, split the difference!

HOLIDAYS: ASSUMING there's nothing shady, I have no complaints here. In fact I'd say the 2 1/2 rate is a good improvement.

OT: On it's face it seems all right, but I'd like to see the language before judging.

SICK LEAVE: Not much of a change here IMO coming from th eUS side. We get that tenth day back. Payout for unused time when leaving is still offensive though.

HOURS OF SERVICE AND TRAINING: Really can't comment here. The summary is just too vague.

Overall, I think I would vote for this contract. In 2017, maybe even early 2018. Now, it's simply a case of "After all that time THIS is all we get???" This falls far short of what we should get and even short of what we were promised by Parker. Barring spectacular things in the full language I'll likely be a no vote. I encourage everyone to vote what YOU think, but don't just look at the money. The money doesn't matter when you don't have a job, have to pay a lot more for insurance, get treated different than your coworkers, or could and SHOULD have had more.

Thank You for your opinion and it looks like you understand our plight at LAA.

 

[Filter]

I've been thinking about this "agreement in principal" for Fleet for over a day now. As time goes on I lean more and more towards a "No." Let me explain why. For perspective I'm a 21 year employee and, if it matters, LUS.

PAY: We were promised DL or UA (whichever is higher) +7%. Then they gave us profit sharing and said because of that it would be only +3%. A 4.8% raise tops us out at $32.28. UA (I don't know the DL number) is at $32.01 RIGHT NOW; UA +3% is $32.97. Oh, and BTW, UA is about to enter negotiations in a few months, so of course they'll be getting higher raises.

PROFIT SHARING: I get it, but what profit? You can't sell this as a benefit when there isn't profit to be shared. I've HEARD that if 2019 was paid out on the agreed to rules our PS would have been about double; that still puts at something like 20-25% of what DL got.

SIGNING BONUS: After what? Four years? You're going to give the people who have been here fo decades, some four or MORE decades $3000 along with the people who just walked in the door? Give the new guys $3000; those who have been here at least since the AA/US merger deserve more.

SCOPE AND JOB PROTECTION: There's a lot of questions here, but we do know some. Some known or questionable negatives from the agreement are...
Cargo: What work exactly is protected? Is it just going to be running cargo? Office work?
Catering (PHL/CLT): Gone at the end of this contract. Job loss.

MEDICAL: First off, while I know a lot of people like the 100% LUS insurance I think VERY few of them are likely to actually need that, if any. IT's just WAY overpaying for unneeded coverage. Because of that I don't object to getting rid of it. The 90% plan however, I do object to. It WILL be gone after 2025, and it's a reasonable step for many above the 80% plan. The "Me too" clause is borderline bait & switch; not that it's ONLY regarding the Standard and Core plans. Lastly, we're supposed to be bring LAA and LUS together; How the HELL do you do that by offering one group a better plan? HIGHLY OFFENSIVE TO LAA!
RETIREMENT: I'm going to set aside the pension arguments; they may well be moot if TWU can't get in them and I know many LUS (myself included) don't want to give them up. Because of that I'm going to assume (correctly or not) that the pension and 5% contribution are relatively equal. That leaves the 4% match and a (I think) effective 9% match for comparison. The FAs get I think 9.9% match and we're close to that. The pilots however get I think 14% contribution automatically, not a match, just 14%.
RETIREE BENEFITS: I really don't think I have an opinion here, so I'll just leave it alone.

VACATION: This is a mega sore spot because of where I fall. I've had four weeks for I think nine years now. If I was admin I'd have had a fifth week four years ago. The scale will fix that, BUT IN THREE YEARS. I need to wait ANOTHER three years for a fifth week, and then I just to six right after? Come on, split the difference!

HOLIDAYS: ASSUMING there's nothing shady, I have no complaints here. In fact I'd say the 2 1/2 rate is a good improvement.

OT: On it's face it seems all right, but I'd like to see the language before judging.

SICK LEAVE: Not much of a change here IMO coming from th eUS side. We get that tenth day back. Payout for unused time when leaving is still offensive though.

HOURS OF SERVICE AND TRAINING: Really can't comment here. The summary is just too vague.

Overall, I think I would vote for this contract. In 2017, maybe even early 2018. Now, it's simply a case of "After all that time THIS is all we get???" This falls far short of what we should get and even short of what we were promised by Parker. Barring spectacular things in the full language I'll likely be a no vote. I encourage everyone to vote what YOU think, but don't just look at the money. The money doesn't matter when you don't have a job, have to pay a lot more for insurance, get treated different than your coworkers, or could and SHOULD have had more.

Two items I want to touch on here...I haven’t seen any more than what has been posted online...

Signing bonus...now I’m not necessarily in disagreement with you, but when it comes to profit sharing we want to be equals with all employees...but when it benefits us we want more of a bonus than some with less time and less pay than us...I know profit sharing is a specific amount to be divided but an imperfect example would be professional sports...everyone gets equal shares for post season play, the guy making 15m and the guy on the end off the bench making league minimum...and by the way they are union.

Catering...I’m LAA, so this brief language that we see that has secured catering till the end of this contract means one thing...the next contract will drag on and on trying to extend/save these jobs...so get ready for the association to divide us and keep/delay us from more compensation 5 years from now.

 

[dfw gen]

this guy should be ashamed at what his organization brought to laa fleet to vote. maybe he didn't know...i don't know.

we, at laa, were told from 2014 til yesterday that the compensatory discrepancy with lus would vanish and all be would equal with the next contract. it's here and there are still compensatory discrepancies that favor lus over laa.

1) parker did nothing to smooth everything over after bringing lus non-hub employees up to laa wages. he knew how to right that wrong. his leadership consists of his employees bickering over obvious compensatory discrepancies by equals (seniority/job classification).

2) the twu told us..just wait..

3) the iam, didn't give a flying banana peel.

no clue how the iam strong-armed it's way into the president's seat of this assoc.

it's clear it's main objective was to maintain lus' 2014 compensatory advantages to laa's detriment...now, all the way to 2025.

no offense to lus or it's negotiators who post here. the only offense to be taken would be to make up absurd rationale to justify what has occurred with this AIP (the twu would have stolen my seniority, etc.). i blame the twu and to some extent, the company, for allowing this to happen.

i will vote no, without even looking at scope, i don't give a f(uck about the great victory of catering jobs, though we know there is a very tiny minority who do.

it real simple how and why sito runs the show. the iam has equal veto power over anything that comes to a vote. meaning it doesnt matter if hey are chai/vice chair sito can sit there and just say no until he gets what he wants. hence the iam contract modified where laa employees are actually and officially marked as second class members. and in 5 years if the association stays we go thru it all ovar again

 

[JFK Fleet Service]

.20 cent increase in CC premium, then another .20 in *four* years?

Where do I drop my wings?

 

[Rogallo]

can we keep our insurance and please, can we keep catering.

So GSE can go away in Class 2 stations for LAA? Don't know how they staff LUS side.

Another screwing to LAA

 

[Rogallo]

From what I’ve heard in the next 3 weeks the language will go through a final tweak and every member will receive a complete physical copy of the agreement...it will also be available digitally...then some kind of roadshow to roll it out to the membership...finally there will be 1 day to vote at a designated location in each city...if I were to guess?...I would say sometime in March.

Another IAM way?

What if I'm on vacation.....I'm screwed?

 

[Filter]

.20 cent increase in CC premium, then another .20 in *four* years?

Where do I drop my wings?

Understand the sentiment but we have the highest override, including mechanics, in the system at $2.09...negotiating against ourselves...surprised we got anything here.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

why do multi-million dollar athletes vote on distributing a 'bonus'...such as a bonus given to a championship team? late season call-ups get 20%? a trainer that left the club in june gets 5%? is that unfair? did the 50 hr guy get an equal bonus to the 5th infielder? yes. these guys are also union.

as far as title 3 vs. title 2 vs title 1. the bonus is irrelevant to the skill. your skill(s) is/are being compensated through contractual wages and benefits. a bonus is not contractual, it's a 'bonus'.

Two items I want to touch on here...I haven’t seen any more than what has been posted online...

Signing bonus...now I’m not necessarily in disagreement with you, but when it comes to profit sharing we want to be equals with all employees...but when it benefits us we want more of a bonus than some with less time and less pay than us...I know profit sharing is a specific amount to be divided but an imperfect example would be professional sports...everyone gets equal shares for post season play, the guy making 15m and the guy on the end off the bench making league minimum...and by the way they are union.

i agree. my same argument a few weeks ago.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

it real simple how and why sito runs the show. the iam has equal veto power over anything that comes to a vote. meaning it doesnt matter if hey are chai/vice chair sito can sit there and just say no until he gets what he wants. hence the iam contract modified where laa employees are actually and officially marked as second class members. and in 5 years if the association stays we go thru it all ovar again

yeah..

i tried to stay out of cutting down the assoc. people posting about the 'ass'...etc. i'm thinking these guys are rowing upstream...trying hard for all. the harshest critics were correct all along.

dysfunctional was too easy, but what has occurred is worse than dysfunction. there was no association. it was a one-man show pulling on the rope for iam members.

easy hour.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

Another IAM way?

What if I'm on vacation.....I'm screwed?

just go here and vote...easy hour

 

[Filter]

Another IAM way?

What if I'm on vacation.....I'm screwed?

Don’t know if you’re screwed but you won’t be able to vote...yes, another IAM way.

 

[Real tired]

As a whole, this is an older work group facing retirement.

If any on the LUS side are giddy at the fact that we get to keep our glorious IAM pension, lest we not forget that the failing IAM Ponzi Scheme is in the red zone.

Active Cover Letter.pdf
Active Participant FAQs_0.pdf

The AA people should be happy you weren't forced into the plan, because we'll never see the money back we put into it. Especially if it goes to the PBGC as the next step.

 

[787nightmare]

IAM, TWU & IBT are absolute masters at selling chit sandwiches....
It’s what they do.

And the sheep will likely vote it right in.

 

[Kev3188]

PAY: We were promised DL or UA (whichever is higher) +7%. Then they gave us profit sharing and said because of that it would be only +3%. A 4.8% raise tops us out at $32.28. UA (I don't know the DL number) is at $32.01 RIGHT NOW; UA +3% is $32.97. Oh, and BTW, UA is about to enter negotiations in a few months, so of course they'll be getting higher raises.

DL is at $32.29/hr.

As a whole, this is an older work group facing retirement.

If any on the LUS side are giddy at the fact that we get to keep our glorious IAM pension, lest we not forget that the failing IAM Ponzi Scheme is in the red zone.

Active Cover Letter.pdf
Active Participant FAQs_0.pdf

The AA people should be happy you weren't forced into the plan, because we'll never see the money back we put into it. Especially if it goes to the PBGC as the next step.

That plan is on borrowed time. I can’t imagine anyone being happy about being in it.