American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[MetalMover]

I don’t know? When you find a person with the name TWU we can both go and ask him or her together.

Real cute WeAAz... I guess you don't consider transfer of work to your work group "outsourcing." Very hard for me to sympathize with potential fleet job loss with a reply like that.

 

[WeAAsles]

Real cute WeAAz... I guess you don't consider transfer of work to your work group "outsourcing." Very hard for me to sympathize with potential fleet job loss with a reply like that.

Words in my mouth now Metal? Don’t ever guess what “people” think.

 

[MetalMover]

Looked to me like the poster was just clarifying that what the Company is asking for would effect BOTH sides.

Funny how PT BARNUM gets booted off the forums and THE ASSOCIATION suddenly appears here.

 

[MetalMover]

You don't feel your comment sounds like you don't think it's a problem?

I don’t know? When you find a person with the name TWU we can both go and ask him or her together.

 

[WeAAsles]

Funny how PT BARNUM gets booted off the forums and THE ASSOCIATION suddenly appears here.

People seem to get booted off of Forums just about every day if you haven’t noticed.

 

[WeAAsles]

You don't feel your comment sounds like you don't think it's a problem?

No. Because I don’t like the childish game of people looking for the gotcha moment. As far as my opinion after over 20,000 posts you know I’ve more than covered it that we don’t have to rehash it again do we?

I think you have a better memory of what “people” here have written more than the average participant.

I’m not ever going to speak for around 120,000 TWU “People” but if you want to address your questions towards “Me” I’ll glady respond. Although I’d prefer we try to cover ground not already paved over many times if you don’t mind.

Forums posters have a serious rehashing issues problem here sometimes.

 

[MetalMover]

No. Because I don’t like the childish game of people looking for the gotcha moment. As far as my opinion after over 20,000 posts you know I’ve more than covered it that we don’t have to rehash it again do we?

I think you have a better memory of what “people” here have written more than the average participant.

I’m not ever going to speak for around 120,000 TWU “People” but if you want to address your questions towards “Me” I’ll glady respond. Although I’d prefer we try to cover ground not already paved over many times if you don’t mind.

Forums posters have a serious rehashing issues problem here sometimes.

So maybe you need to realize my question was serious and directed at every and any one who reads this topic. You answered it as if it were directed only at you.
It was a genuine question answered a long time ago by the TWU with the "half a loaf is better than no loaf" socialist philosophy.
I have a good memory too.

 

[Racer X]

Just curious. Does the union consider fleet taking over all aircraft moves outsourcing? Did they ever consider fleet taking deicing and pushbacks from mx outsourcing?

In the IAM agreements fleet can do it when not in conflict with Maintenance and related. In TWU agreements I believe MTC does it.

 

[WeAAsles]

So maybe you need to realize my question was serious and directed at every and any one who reads this topic.

So now are you going to say that you also don’t know how your question will be responded to by each individual poster?

Are you looking for another mutual opinion party.

BTW to use the wonderful tool of common sense here. Why would the TWU as an entity prefer to have an in house Represented group of higher paid work transferred down to a group of lower paid individuals? Again that makes ZERO sense.

Just to use a Mathematical equation here not using actual wages for any Represented groups.

Group A, $50.00 per hour = $100.00 per month Dues.

Group B, $30.00 per hour = $60.00 per month Dues.

Group C, $15.00 per hour = $30.00 per month Dues.

The Company is still only going to want to carry as many Humans as needed to perform any type of particular work.

 

[WeAAsles]

In the IAM agreements fleet can do it when not in conflict with Maintenance and related. In TWU agreements I believe MTC does it.

Racer in the TWU Contracts Aircraft movement exists in both groups. It has transferred between both groups in the past and currently sits back in the hands of where I think it belongs which is with Aircraft Maintenance.

Especially I would feel it should be in their hands when the Aircraft is being moved for Maintenance work or returned to service after Maintenance work has been performed.

Again though not to cause my bud MetalMover any confusion, that’s just “MY” opinion.

 

[MetalMover]

In the IAM agreements fleet can do it when not in conflict with Maintenance and related. In TWU agreements I believe MTC does it.

Yes and at AA both mx and fleet have aircraft moving language in both agreements.
My question was simply DOES THE UNION CONSIDER IT OUTSOURCING.
Better yet, dees the union consider it loss of aircraft mechanics' work when transferred to another work group?

Quite a straightforward question.

 

[MetalMover]

So now are you going to say that you also don’t know how your question will be responded to by each individual poster?

Are you looking for another mutual opinion party.

BTW to use the wonderful tool of common sense here. Why would the TWU as an entity prefer to have an in house Represented group of higher paid work transferred down to a group of lower paid individuals? Again that makes ZERO sense.

Just to use a Mathematical equation here not using actual wages for any Represented groups.

Group A, $50.00 per hour = $100.00 per month Dues.

Group B, $30.00 per hour = $60.00 per month Dues.

Group C, $15.00 per hour = $30.00 per month Dues.

The Company is still only going to want to carry as many Humans as needed to perform any type of particular work.

WeAAz, I don't know if you realize it, but sometimes when you answer a post, it sounds like you take it personally. That is what I meant.

Now to answer your equations. It may not be what the TWU wants, but it is what the company wants. So for the TWU, it may be about dues, but for the company it is about performing any task for less.

 

[Kev3188]

Can we not decend into this nonsense yet again? Fighting amongst each other is the lifeblood that the Management Vampires look to suck on to thrive.

+1

It’s even worse when it comes from someone that likes to label themselves as a “trade unionist.”

Funny how PT BARNUM gets booted off the forums and THE ASSOCIATION suddenly appears here.

Funny indeed. Must be slow season in catering land.

 

[ALUS78]

Oh Boo F'ing Hoo. Cry me a river.

Your airline was done and you got bailed out. You're lucky you ain't left with nothing.

Wait who do you work for AA was in bankruptcy while the couple of years leading to the merger US was having record profits.

 

[WeAAsles]

Better yet, dees the union consider it loss of aircraft mechanics' work when transferred to another work group?

I would have to suppose people would consider it a loss. If Aircraft Mechanics are currently performing any particular type of work and eventually they aren’t any longer, what other way would there be to look at?

But are you looking particularly for the TWU or the IAM to specify it as Doctrine?

WeAAz, I don't know if you realize it, but sometimes when you answer a post, it sounds like you take it personally. That is what I meant.

Now to answer your equations. It may not be what the TWU wants, but it is what the company wants. So for the TWU, it may be about dues, but for the company it is about performing any task for less.

Because I look at how many posters write things here and can usually pick up on their intent pretty quickly. Not to mention some of the history of their past postings is pretty clear how they feel about things and what they deem as the lower groups.

Second part absolutely. Except 100% about it being strictly a Dues grab for particular Union Leaders.

I suspect very much so that Gary Peterson is not focused on Dues as a number one priority rather than at the very least trying not to lose work under his watch.

Speaking for myself again I know I wouldn’t want that type of Legacy on my hands.

“The guy who sold us out and gave away X number of jobs”

That label carries a pretty long shelf life since you guys go all the way back 36 years ago still (1983)