AA and Labor Negotiations-2020

[1AA]

you are absolutely correct on a few of those issues. where you are wrong is the role of the chair and vice chair. it does not have any affect there is equal veto power. so please stop with that nonsense. everything else you are correct. stepping stones kind of like the iam has been doing to us? hate is not at the lus members but at the respective internationals. we as members both iam and twu are stuck in the middle like pawns. this contract is clearly the iam contract with a few modifications. designed to keep the iam advantage over the twu. via the retirement plan. if the iam chair or vice chair does not like it nothing moves forward. check mate.
time for change, and i have a feeling its coming sooner rather then later.

A continuation to streamline some issues between the two unions did not have to take four years. This is not a JCBA. It's a pathetic disgraceful act of bad union negotiating tactics only to screw its members out of compensation. Call it what it is and keep it simple. The TWU side faired worse from the day negotiations started.

 

[1AA]

why members would like to keep the iampnf is beyond me. everything i read its not looking good, that alone would be enough for me to want out of the association. actually when they froze my pension and started matched at 5.5% it is working out much better i have 3 legs to the retirement stool. a 9% match would be even better.

I believe Sito and the IAMPF had all the say in keeping the IAMPF in the contract. It's obvious the membership under the association have no say.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

You say you want fleet money reshuffled and sito and garcia fired. My question to you is are you willing to wait 4 more years for that??

i am, but parker and isom are not.

observe how they folded on their 'red lines' - lus insurance and catering jobs.

 

[1AA]

dfw gen,

I hope that this CBA is a good hybrid of both, because there is a good amount of TWU language also I believe. I will judge when I see it in the mail and actually read the language. And thank you

Thank you for stating your position in reading the entire proposal. Many will not waste the time since the company and association beat the membership down so hard they will just vote yes on anything. I'm sure some won't even vote out of disgust.
I too am ready to read the entire proposal. Work rules and other changes that affect us on a daily basis need to be taken seriously.

 

[1AA]

Almost forgot this was a joint negotiations, if ramp or any other title group doesn't pass the contract, no contract for any group even if they passed it. So ramp vote no, a loft of bread cost you the same as it cost to stores and AMT's. You should be getting the 6K also.

It's all going to pass. It always does.

 

[AANOTOK]

I stand corrected grandpa...

Oops, I'm sorry Mr. Mekanic, you are being corrected once more. In reality, I'm not a Grandpa, meaning I'm not the father of anyone's father or mother. Here, let me make it even easier, I don't have any grand kids. But hey seeing that your goal is to one up someone or disparage them, we will use grandpa as you calling me an old man at 60, I'll tell you that you hurt my feelings and we will be done with it.

Have a good day Mr. Mekanic...

 

[pjirish317]

Almost forgot this was a joint negotiations, if ramp or any other title group doesn't pass the contract, no contract for any group even if they passed it. So ramp vote no, a loft of bread cost you the same as it cost to stores and AMT's. You should be getting the 6K also.

chellow,

You are incorrect. If Fleet passes and MTC does not, then Fleet has a JCBA and MTC does not. Same as if MTC ratifies their AIP and Fleet does not, then MTC has a ratified JCBA and Fleet does not. They are not "tied" together. Where do people come up with this stuff? Honestly.

 

[chellow]

chellow,

You are incorrect. If Fleet passes and MTC does not, then Fleet has a JCBA and MTC does not. Same as if MTC ratifies their AIP and Fleet does not, then MTC has a ratified JCBA and Fleet does not. They are not "tied" together. Where do people come up with this stuff? Honestly.

What do you think that joint negotiations mean?

 

[CremaDiLimone]

Again, that party had ZERO to do with the Association, it was because of a standalone agreement between USAirways and the IAM, why are you mad about that? You had a BK agreement, we did not. Green with envy because of that?

mad? green with envy?

you guys in your non-hub stations had to be brought up to my wages. who was green with envy and who had to be propped up?

it was unfair and not tenable to lus. parker took care of that. fair enough. parker then decided not to bring laa up to your holidays/holiday pay rate/sk time/inusrance rates.

now, it will continue?? you're angry because this is being pointed out?

you are the selfish one, not me.

So you are just mad that the "majority" couldn't steamroll the "minority" for a few pieces of silver. I remember some on here touting the AA insurance as being good. Look LAA would have screwed over the LUS people for holidays and doubletime. LAA didn't make insurance a priority, LUS did. LAA (most anyway) have a perception as being arrogant, entitled pricks. And when they don't get what they want or want what someone else has they whine and cry about it, stomp their feet and hold their breath till they turn blue. Had the whole of the TWU supported the IAM insurance from the start would there have been a different outcome? who knows, the fact is that LAA did not.

where did i say i want to steamroll you? laa are selfish pricks and laa are whiners, stomping their feet?

you are the new captain us air.

 

[1AA]

What do you think that joint negotiations mean?

 

[AANOTOK]

What do you think that joint negotiations mean?

I have been told the same, one votes yes, it's a yes for them and if any other workgroup votes no, they go back to the table.
I believe I heard that from one of the negotiators...

 

[dfw gen]

chellow,

You are incorrect. If Fleet passes and MTC does not, then Fleet has a JCBA and MTC does not. Same as if MTC ratifies their AIP and Fleet does not, then MTC has a ratified JCBA and Fleet does not. They are not "tied" together. Where do people come up with this stuff? Honestly.

all the "flow thru" items? kind of leads you to believe there were no separate negotiations.

 

[swamt]

my understanding is that they were forced into it by a few behind the scenes wheel in motion.
1) the nmb suggesting it
2) the amfa drive
3) more importantly the court case and hearing in February. you will probably not hear that the court case will be pushed back till after a vote. if its voted in it will be quietly put to rest. the maintenance difference between a signing bonus and true retro actually paid for it. if its turned down it could get ugly for the association. look for the association to push hard for a yes vote.

the company claims they lost 100 million on the "work action"

lets see now if the raise is say $7.00 an hour and their are are 14,500 maintenance and related. the contract was amendable in Sept of 2018 approximately 18 months. if there are 2080 hours in a work year that would be 3120 hours of retro.

the average retro check no overtime or holidays.

$7.00 x 3120 = would be $21,840.00 if the "signing bonus" is $6,000.00, that leaves a loss of $15,840

$21,840 - $6,000 is $15,840

if the retro shortage is $15,840 x 14,500 maintenance and related

$15,840 x 14,500 =$229,460,000.00

hmm i wonder if the court case next month will be dismissed....

i didnt do the math but it looks like fleet service at $3,000 is roughly correct since i believe they are getting 4% which is a little more then a dollar an hour.

DFW gen, do you know the all in rate at DOS? I'm getting some conversations about comparing SWA rates. Can you share what the all in rate is with hourly rate, lic. prem., shift diff., CC override (Lead for us), and maybe any other premiums.

Maybe. But question 6 under "THE ALLIANCE":

Q. Will I still be a member of my union, or will I become a member of the Association?

A: The Association will have no members, but it will hold certification for the combined work group. Union membership will be based on a person's location as outlined in appendix B to each Association agreement.

Appendix B clearly states which locations fall under which union.

Yes I know the Q&A also states that you will have opportunity to vote to be represented by the Association. We know that didn't happen but no matter how you read it having that vote for representation can only be approved and run by the NMB. The NMB decision was final and binding. Association certification approved and no vote needed. End of story. Members screwed but it wasn't the Unions decision to make.

Agree with you. But, this asso knew the entire time there would never be a vote and led the membership to believe there would be a vote. I tried as hard as I could to get these guys to believe this, hell, I even contacted the NMB first and relayed their answers to them and only a few followed up after I did and reported the exact same info, that the NMB did not have jurisdiction over a vote for the combined 2 unions becoming an asso. That was all a scam to keep the cards from getting signed for AMFA. They knew from the very get go and purposely screwed this membership all the way to the forced asso. They should be brought up on charges for FTR!!!

 

[1AA]

I have been told the same, one votes yes, it's a yes for them and if any other workgroup votes no, they go back to the table.
I believe I heard that from one of the negotiators...

True, that was mentioned when negotiations started four years ago. I wouldn't be surprised if this was changed somewhere along the line without anyone bringing it up.
I don't know who lies more, the association or politicians.

 

[swamt]

It's not even a JCBA. It's still plenty of us and them. After four years of negotiations we get this? Why did they wait four years if we didn't even get a JCBA but a closer path to a single operation? We got jerked around all this time and lost potential compensation that was beneficial to the unions, AFL-CIO and the company in cost savings. I hope guys see this for what it was and is today. Let's sign those cards and get rid of the cancerous association once and for all. They take our money and get nothing beneficial in return.

Sign, sign, sign a AMFA CARD!!!

Now that we have had discussions, think about this. We have not heard one iota about full retro from the nego since that suit was filed. Could it be that all the nego's as well as this pathetic exec. cmte. has just surrendered the full retro fight, the low bonus for mechanics, in order to help offset the cost that they say is 100 million? With your math it's more like the asso would pay them back double, what's up with that? You guys could been offered at least 1/2 of "full retro" and still covered the 100 million so the suit could get dropped. This is what I think happened gentlemen.
I know some of you are for this offer, but I cannot support one with out full retro. Nor do I agree with the divisional agreements that still differ too much between the two unions. Those guys are 100% correct, this is NOT a JCBA, it IS still a DCBA (D= Divided). Just with the highlights alone I would vote no. But I don't get to vote as you all know. Read it all guys, don't just look at the $$$.