American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[P. REZ]

Don’t you needs weapons to fight. What weapons do you think you have in this “fight”?

Informed employees of the language that will harm them.

 

[NYer]

Huh? Work that isn't protected under scope and listed under "when and where directed" could be gone. Look upstairs, their intentions are clear. Our goal in our 14 contract was to protect current work we did but the company kept pushing us towards a JCBA. We got what we could with the intentions of protecting this work moving forward in the JCBA, and here we are, with a company that has made Billions, has Billions in cash and has bought back Billions worth of shares. What now? Stop fighting and cave to GREED?

Stop going upstairs. We have our own language for reference. Show us the language that opens the door for the eliminate jobs with the when and where directed. Just point the way...

Where is mail in the above language? Not protected!

Don't change the subject. This is about the when and where directed and you mentioned cargo.

So, again, point is towards the language that shows they can outsource the protected jobs in Article 6 by using language from Article 7.

 

[NYer]

With our current language the company outsourced mail in LAX a few years ago. Under "when and where directed" we were allowed to do mail, then they decided not to direct us to do mail. Mail is gone in LAX unless they want to direct us to do again.

Not talking about your current language, talking about the proposed language.

 

[P. REZ]

Not talking about your current language, talking about the proposed language.

Answered with where is mail. Mail is under other customary cargo work that can be outsourced. They didn't list it specifically but that is where it can be outsourced, line 33-34 in the company proposal. Also, Art. 7 C 4 lines 44-45 for "when and where directed" for mail.

 

[NYer]

Answered with where is mail. Mail is under other customary cargo work that can be outsourced. They didn't list it specifically but that is where it can be outsourced, line 33-34 in the company proposal.

So by changing the subject as consistently as you've done, you haven't pointed us towards the language that shows "when and where" means they can outsource protected work as specified in Article 6 of the proposed language.

So far, you've used examples from agent language, your current language, mentioned mail isn't protected but you can't, I'll say haven't, shown us how language in Article 7 (when and where) allows the Company to take jobs protected in Article 6.

Please point us to that point.

 

[NYer]

Answered with where is mail. Mail is under other customary cargo work that can be outsourced. They didn't list it specifically but that is where it can be outsourced, line 33-34 in the company proposal. Also, Art. 7 C 4 lines 44-45 for "when and where directed" for mail.

Mail isn't protected. They don't need when and where language.

So, AGAIN, show us how when and where eliminates those protected positions in Article 6.

 

[P. REZ]

So by changing the subject as consistently as you've done, you haven't pointed us towards the language that shows "when and where" means they can outsource protected work as specified in Article 6 of the proposed language.

So far, you've used examples from agent language, your current language, mentioned mail isn't protected but you can't, I'll say haven't, shown us how language in Article 7 (when and where) allows the Company to take jobs protected in Article 6.

Please point us to that point.

You apparently don't understand what I'm saying. Mail is not protected, it isn't listed as protected under Art. 6, and under Art. 7 C 4, mail is listed as "when and where directed" work. I can't explain it any other way, it is NOT protected and is "when and where directed" work.

 

[P. REZ]

Mail isn't protected. They don't need when and where language.

So, AGAIN, show us how when and where eliminates those protected positions in Article 6.

"When and where directed" work doesn't take away work that is protected, never said that. What I'm saying is that work that is not protected but done under "when and where directed" is the problem. Hence, our problem with the company's scope proposal.

 

[NYer]

You apparently don't understand what I'm saying. Mail is not protected, it isn't listed as protected under Art. 6, and under Art. 7 C 4, mail is listed as "when and where directed" work. I can't explain it any other way, it is NOT protected and is "when and where directed" work.

So if that's not protected in Article 6 then they don't need Article 7 to outsource. They just do it.

The when and where doesn't take it away, the fact it isn't protected is what allows it to be taken away.

You haven't made that connection in the language. If Article 7 didn't exist you're saying they couldn't eliminate any jobs? Is that really your contention?

 

[CremaDiLimone]

Don’t you needs weapons to fight. What weapons do you think you have in this “fight”?

post of the year nominee

 

[NYer]

"When and where directed" work doesn't take away work that is protected, never said that. What I'm saying is that work that is not protected but done under "when and where directed" is the problem. Hence, our problem with the company's scope proposal.

When and where isn't Scope language.

Aside from that, you've made my point. When and where doesn't take jobs away, it's scope that didn't protect those jobs from being eliminated, like it does with all the other positions.

Many other representantes are telling their Members that when and where can be used to eliminate all jobs.

This is from a Fleet Local to their Members: "This "WHEN AND WHERE SO DIRECTED" language removes ANY guarantee of the described work..."

 

[P. REZ]

So if that's not protected in Article 6 then they don't need Article 7 to outsource. They just do it.

The when and where doesn't take it away, the fact it isn't protected is what allows it to be taken away.

You haven't made that connection in the language. If Article 7 didn't exist you're saying they couldn't eliminate any jobs? Is that really your contention?

No, I'm saying we want jobs like mail and catering protected under scope. They aren't in the company's proposal and that's why we have problems getting a JCBA. I'll make this simple, our proposal to the company was to protect every job we do in a particular city, for example, in PHX we do lavs, water and mail, so those would be protected under Art. 6. We don't do catering in PHX so catering could be under "when and where directed" for PHX. Hope this explains better. This has been briefed in IAM stations numerous times and is understood. Maybe you haven't been briefed, I assumed you knew the scope issue, you were part of the TWU structure.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

I was tired about every other post they complained that maintenance was offered swa pay . I’m tired of hearing about it

you mean you're tired that title 2 and title 3 pay attention and wonder where their piece of candy is.

so, we can't get a piece, only you. if we wonder where our piece of the pie is, that means we are against you, complaining??

i've never seen anyone complain about aa matching southwest's AMT wages.

i've seen posts from others, including a dl AMT, that talk about the ratio of AMTs per aircraft.

complain about that.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

You think the AMTs goi g to turn down another 6$ per hour.They may say no in the breakroom but.....

the AMTs i know, want to vote tomorrow.

 

[NYer]

No, I'm saying we want jobs like mail and catering protected under scope. They aren't in the company's proposal and that's why we have problems getting a JCBA. I'll make this simple, our proposal to the company was to protect every job we do in a particular city, for example, in PHX we do lavs, water and mail, so those would be protected under Art. 6. We don't do catering in PHX so catering could be under "when and where directed" for PHX. Hope this explains better. This has been briefed in IAM stations numerous times and is understood. Maybe you haven't been briefed, I assumed you knew the scope issue, you were part of the TWU structure.

I know exactly what it means.

"When and where" doesn't take jobs away, that's the work of the language in Scope.

Of the work being done, that is not expressly protected in Article 6, it can continue to be done by Association Members or it could be outsourced at the Company's discretion.

Positions not protected by Scope may be assigned to Association Members "when and where directed" to do those jobs.

Positions protected by Scope will be done exclusively by Association Members and not affected by "when and where directed" language.