Actually I think it's a good thing not to show our members, we are so divided on what they want and add that we never actually read the language on a TA. Many see money and improved vacation and so on that they do not realize they gave up work rules. That culture was created by the union many years ago. Guys here are desperate for any compensation improvements that they will unknowingly give up scope.
Aircraft maint issues
- Thread starter conehead777
- Start date
And that is where the company will RAKE in the profits after a new contract is voted in. Nothing wrong with that. But it would be nice for the employees to enjoy and SHARE the profits the company as a whole gains in the future.
I must ask you one question though. Why do you think that it is such a good thing not to show the membership the offers being made and crossed at the nego's table? I do understand that some are divided and some (if not most) do not read the language (full contract) before voting, but, I honestly think the membership should be fully informed about any and all offers from the company as well as any and all counter offers from the union. Since we went AMFA here it's been great to get all the detailed offers back and forth and has really helped with stopping all the rumors and misinformation on the floor that was causing darn near chaos. Good luck buddy, I really hope I can make it for the picketing on Wed. but hard to get day trade reversed in the middle of summer with all vacations planned. I do know our AMFA National leaders are showing up for support.
Guys will be upset if they see any part they like and ignore the rest. We are so divided and anxious for the money and benefits that it will only further divide us. We will be at each other's throats. Guys will biitch that it was good enough and others say the opposite. Guys that are looking for a buy out don't care about anything otherthan that $$$$$ to get them out. If a buy out was in the package those would be the first to complain. The association and company both stated a industry leading contract. Best of everything until the next airline does one better. Problem is we don't know what a real industry leading contract is. If one article is not industry leading then both the company and association has failed us. Guys don't see that. We need to protect scope and get the best compensation in the industry. Can't do that if the company plays that physiological head game by saying hey we offered a nice package but the union refused it on your behalf. How convenient just before the first scheduled picket from the TWU. IAM nowhere to be seen or heard from. Another reason we need to stick together on a ILC for all. The house is divided. We are falling for the head games. I want what's rightly fair but not by giving up scope. Industry is making BILLIONS in profits. No excuse to wrap this up by giving us an ILC. Too bad the IAM doesn't see it that way.
On your first point = Yes, we shouldn't have to give up scope.
On your second point = I am not sure the IAM does not agree with that.
I'm willing to give our NC the benefit of doubt. They did after all just totally reject the companies proposal as lacking across the board.
Parker needs to own this lack of JCBA 100%.
He magically found another $900 million for the pilots and flight attendants after he told them he wouldn't.
He needs to push the industry leading contract across the table to us now.
We've waited far far long enough.
B737 driver
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 3,381
- Reaction score
- 209
I think that,was our problem ,we have been about 12% above industry, well when we don't know what you guys are going to get, our negotiating committee does not want to agree to quickly, but it is creating animosity , Yes we were always paid a little more and more 401k match to get there SWA has more outsourced work than the other airlines, and always has !
I can understand that. Our company is playing the very same head games over here with our membership. Trying like mad to pivot the membership against the NC to apply pressure on our negotiators to send it out for a vote. Little does the company know if they would produce as instructed by our NC then they would get a vote, I mean it's that simple.
We too have the same older group here looking to exit this industry into retirement that will in fact jump on the money and run. They too are hoping for a buy-out as well. You know it's just fishy all of a sudden our company really wants an agreement. Something has triggered our company to try to get to an agreement and not sure what that is yet. Could it be a merger coming? Could it be the Max maint that will be coming in 2-3 years? Could it be they want to kick in the new maint program early? I really do not know, but it just seems very fishy that they are wanting a decision on this "Med-Arb" process by no later than Aug 31st. I say let them simmer for a while. Then ask them how does it feel to wanting to get to an agreement while the other side stalls. Maybe our CEO is pushing them to get done.
D
Deleted member 14439
Guest
D
Deleted member 14439
Guest
Flying low
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2011
- Messages
- 629
- Reaction score
- 232
The way I'm envisioning is this. The smaller (US AIRWAYS) is changing the way the larger (AA) does maintenance. Eventually the smaller (IAM) will force their ways unto the (TWU). Unfortunately since we were tricked into this association, there is very little we can do about. I hope I'm wrong about my way of thinking.
2ndGENAMT
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2011
- Messages
- 818
- Reaction score
- 497
” according to an advisory released Monday.
Here is an "advisory" explaining what the company wants as far as Scope, the APA stated in their support letter what the company wants as far as Scope, but the membership is shown nothing!
I feel like I'm being played. Again.
D
Deleted member 14439
Guest
Yep, it sounds like the company wants out of the backshop business altogether.
