American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[dfw gen]

Don't know about American, but at SWA , the F/As, Pilots, and Stores, and Maintenance went a year between the No votes and the next T/A. What is American's offers been between failed ratification votes?

If we dont vote yes they have a tendency to "accept it without further ratification" they are pretty loose with the ruled when they choose to be. Kind of like that little trick with the check off dues cards to form the association.
In a nutshell we have no voice no input. If you complain your pro company and anti union.
"We sued them to become them"

 

[robbedagain]

Don't know about American, but at SWA , the F/As, Pilots, and Stores, and Maintenance went a year between the No votes and the next T/A. What is American's offers been between failed ratification votes?

Id guess about a year. May be lit bit shorter or longer depending on negos for other group

 

[NYer]

Then back to the table and continue nego's. Why you ask? Are you scared to vote no?? C'mon man, get on board NYer. You really seam to be leaning towards the co. side on all this, what gives???

Everything has consequences and most don't want to learn from the past or from other airlines negotiations.

While in Mediation, proposals, except for a little money, seldom gets better in language. As a matter of fact, it tends to get worse.

In the last Mediation, the positions taken by the Company became worse as time passed. Most said no because they expected a favorable ally in the NMB.

That didn't happen, we ended up with a worse agreement than what we could of had. Then we went into BK and it became even worse.

Saying no is a right each Member has, but doing so means going back into the same process. How do we achieve a better deal under that scenario?

 

[NYer]

Thats my question.

If its shot down how long wld it be til we have another shot. N with FAs n pilots n soon to be CWA talks coming up question wld be how long or wld mgmt try to fastrak it or leave it

The scenario of a no vote would likely mean we'd get put on ice for awhile.

 

[V.O. Reason]

One thing is for sure this group as a whole needs some positive news like we have a complete TA to vote on, sooner rather than a year or more from now

 

[AANOTOK]

The scenario of a no vote would likely mean we'd get put on ice for awhile.

Our interpretation of "on ice" may possibly be different, but I personally think we could be considered on ice now. It still amazes me how some here do not see how the IAM leadership is driving the boat in negotiations and willing to be put on ice till hell freezes over. Samuelson's explosion I'm sure had Sito and boys throwing high fives until their hands were bleeding. Saying the NMB tells American workers to "Drop Dead" is a surefire way to freeze stuff up and keep what you have for a very long time. And again, lapdog Garcia signed the memo as well so it just goes to show you their priorities are somewhere else, not it's members. Then when you have Rocky Balboa threatening AA, the IAM couldn't have asked for a better gift.

Bottom line is the TWU has been played by the IAM and we now live with it...again, congrats, job well done IAM.

 

[NYer]

Our interpretation of "on ice" may possibly be different, but I personally think we could be considered on ice now. It still amazes me how some here do not see how the IAM leadership is driving the boat in negotiations and willing to be put on ice till hell freezes over. Samuelson's explosion I'm sure had Sito and boys throwing high fives until their hands were bleeding. Saying the NMB tells American workers to "Drop Dead" is a surefire way to freeze stuff up and keep what you have for a very long time. And again, lapdog Garcia signed the memo as well so it just goes to show you their priorities are somewhere else, not it's members. Then when you have Rocky Balboa threatening AA, the IAM couldn't have asked for a better gift.

Bottom line is the TWU has been played by the IAM and we now live with it...again, congrats, job well done IAM.

We're on ice now, agreed.
.
Have been saying for a long time that the IAM would be in no rush to get something to vote on considering the negatives still outweigh the positives for them.

The tough guy thing on the TWU side is just the same bluster from some of the same people as past negotiations. During those times they blamed Little & Co.

Today, their tactics haven't worked so now they put out updates blaming the Company, the NMB and after the injunction it will be Judge McBryde's turn.

If the IAM just wanted to stall all they needed to do was sit and watch.

 

[dfw gen]

We're on ice now, agreed.
.
Have been saying for a long time that the IAM would be in no rush to get something to vote on considering the negatives still outweigh the positives for them.

The tough guy thing on the TWU side is just the same bluster from some of the same people as past negotiations. During those times they blamed Little & Co.

Today, their tactics haven't worked so now they put out updates blaming the Company, the NMB and after the injunction it will be Judge McBryde's turn.

If the IAM just wanted to stall all they needed to do was sit and watch.

And they are.

 

[V.O. Reason]

We're on ice now, agreed.
.
Have been saying for a long time that the IAM would be in no rush to get something to vote on considering the negatives still outweigh the positives for them.

The tough guy thing on the TWU side is just the same bluster from some of the same people as past negotiations. During those times they blamed Little & Co.

Today, their tactics haven't worked so now they put out updates blaming the Company, the NMB and after the injunction it will be Judge McBryde's turn.

If the IAM just wanted to stall all they needed to do was sit and watch.

Well I can tell you from an IAM member I am ticked at how they have made such stance for a failing pension and while certainly the higher insurance will not be great there are other things that without question are good improvements in what I saw in the company proposals if they will still be in an agreement if we ever get one. I’ve lost all faith in anything that the Ass is doing and just like they apparently wanted a long summer

 

[swamt]

Thats my question.

If its shot down how long wld it be til we have another shot. N with FAs n pilots n soon to be CWA talks coming up question wld be how long or wld mgmt try to fastrak it or leave it

Id guess about a year. May be lit bit shorter or longer depending on negos for other group

As driver previously said "we" took about a year between T/A 1 and T/A 2 just like with Pilots and F/A's. Would the same happen at AA? No clue. So far all the way up to the TRO being ordered and AA requesting further action from the Judge, AA has been running the exact same play book as SWA to a "T". With that said do not know if they would still run that same play book OR will it all change depending the outcome of this TRO-suit and request for further action from the courts? These are all parameters that are not yet happening but can and could very well completely change the direction the company may end up going IMO.
As far as voting yes or no, that is up to each and every one of you guys. I do know I have heard from numerous mechanics, both here at SWA as well as mechanics from AA say they could live with request of change in the outsourcing as long as they took care of them elsewhere within the contract (ie; IL pay and benefits and retirement including health care). I know the mechs do not make up the majority but how hard core will the other groups be with the changes the company is requesting in outsourcing is the real question here.
If it goes like NYer and others have stated and a bump in pay a bit and some tweaks here and there and maybe even put the mechanics slightly above SWA pay rates by the end of the contract will be enough to get a marginal yes passing vote. If they leave it all the same---not so sure that it would pass. I do know that one of our groups here at SWA voted down 2 offers that never changed for the better between them, they were just reshuffled around a bit, then the co. padded a bit more money and bonus to it and it passed on the 3rd try. So I would expect to see some tweaking a bit and additions IF AA really wants to get this done and over with. If they make changes for the betterment of the members I would foresee a passing vote coming at the end, if no changes I think it will fail to pass the first time.
Robbed, all this is purely my opinion, just going with common sense and basic nego's 101 at this point. I will say if your NC does not change their stance and keeps refusing to bring anything at all out, I expect to see AA clamp down big time and extreme measures will start prevailing from their side. This will totally suck if the asso. uses the membership as pawns to "show" the company how big and bad they are. The company will shove it up their and the membership arses. The attitudes of this asso. needs to change or else...

 

[swamt]

Everything has consequences and most don't want to learn from the past or from other airlines negotiations.

While in Mediation, proposals, except for a little money, seldom gets better in language. As a matter of fact, it tends to get worse.

In the last Mediation, the positions taken by the Company became worse as time passed. Most said no because they expected a favorable ally in the NMB.

That didn't happen, we ended up with a worse agreement than what we could of had. Then we went into BK and it became even worse.

Saying no is a right each Member has, but doing so means going back into the same process. How do we achieve a better deal under that scenario?

How? By posting here and on facebook what it will actually take to get a yes vote from you guys. It is so much easier for the co. to monitor these boards, facebook and social media than it is for them to engage with the employees on the floor, and while in mediation it is against mediation rules and regs set forth by the mediators. The companies do read all these boards and SM. Start posting exactly what it will take. Ex: If like NYer says a bump in money and some tweaks are needed then post them. Just don't get greedy and stupid with them, be smart and be fair and the co. will listen. Maybe ask for instead of matching SWA rates, ask for SWA plus 3%, ask for matching or slightly over SWA 401K match of 9.3%, ask for say 10% for IL. These are just examples, but it's not being greedy, it's being fair, especially when you guys are the biggest airline out there making Billions upon Billions. On the flip side be willing to except some outsourcing changes that they want, not huge changes but a small increase coinciding with the increased tweaks requested by the members. I think you get it. My point is, get what it takes to get a yes vote to the company by posting reasonable request, not unattainable request. Common sense will prevail in the end for all, this way it's a win win for both sides and everyone moves on.
Final note; get the early out complete away and out of the contract vote. That should be all on it's own and who ever wants it take it, never tie it to a contract vote.

 

[swamt]

The scenario of a no vote would likely mean we'd get put on ice for awhile.

I would say at least a year going by the playbook they are playing.

One thing is for sure this group as a whole needs some positive news like we have a complete TA to vote on, sooner rather than a year or more from now

This is where the tudes need to change within NC and asso. leadership and I mean quickly. If you all really want a vote, then the majority needs to flood the asso. with pressure to vote and I mean big pressure, if the company sees this from the membership I am sure they would help if they can. Otherwise I see the IAM getting their way and put on further ice just as we all just saw the immediate cancelation of 3 day meetings. The co. has a planned movement coming soon. What that movement is, is not clear as of yet, but I would be willing to say they have a plan to get the proposal out to the members. That is all the company wants as did SWA, and SWA did what they had to, to get the first T/A out for a vote. AA wants the same I do believe. If the membership would also apply pressure you guys may get a chance to vote. If the asso refuses to do so, then right now would be the time for a card drive. For one that would more than like give enough pressure for a vote, then as soon as the vote is done, fire them, by pulling the trigger, and bring in the new union.

 

[NYer]

How? By posting here and on facebook what it will actually take to get a yes vote from you guys. It is so much easier for the co. to monitor these boards, facebook and social media than it is for them to engage with the employees on the floor, and while in mediation it is against mediation rules and regs set forth by the mediators. The companies do read all these boards and SM. Start posting exactly what it will take. Ex: If like NYer says a bump in money and some tweaks are needed then post them. Just don't get greedy and stupid with them, be smart and be fair and the co. will listen. Maybe ask for instead of matching SWA rates, ask for SWA plus 3%, ask for matching or slightly over SWA 401K match of 9.3%, ask for say 10% for IL. These are just examples, but it's not being greedy, it's being fair, especially when you guys are the biggest airline out there making Billions upon Billions. On the flip side be willing to except some outsourcing changes that they want, not huge changes but a small increase coinciding with the increased tweaks requested by the members. I think you get it. My point is, get what it takes to get a yes vote to the company by posting reasonable request, not unattainable request. Common sense will prevail in the end for all, this way it's a win win for both sides and everyone moves on.
Final note; get the early out complete away and out of the contract vote. That should be all on it's own and who ever wants it take it, never tie it to a contract vote.

Fleet would probably take what's on the table.

Maintenance will say no, almost no matter what.

 

[NYer]

I would say at least a year going by the playbook they are playing.


This is where the tudes need to change within NC and asso. leadership and I mean quickly. If you all really want a vote, then the majority needs to flood the asso. with pressure to vote and I mean big pressure, if the company sees this from the membership I am sure they would help if they can. Otherwise I see the IAM getting their way and put on further ice just as we all just saw the immediate cancelation of 3 day meetings. The co. has a planned movement coming soon. What that movement is, is not clear as of yet, but I would be willing to say they have a plan to get the proposal out to the members. That is all the company wants as did SWA, and SWA did what they had to, to get the first T/A out for a vote. AA wants the same I do believe. If the membership would also apply pressure you guys may get a chance to vote. If the asso refuses to do so, then right now would be the time for a card drive. For one that would more than like give enough pressure for a vote, then as soon as the vote is done, fire them, by pulling the trigger, and bring in the new union.

The Association has been misleading in their description of negotiations and telling us of massive outsourcing when in fact the Company had been pretty upfront with the cuts they seek. The Association embellished bigger cuts and bigger numbers of losses.

That's the reason the Company, surely with NMB approval, released the actual language of their proposal. They tried to combat the bad information being spread.

Seems some in the Assocation have taken these negotiations and made them a personal fight against AA. That needs to change, but using the latest "update" from Association where they characterize the NMB telling us to "drop dead," that doesn't seem to be happening.

 

[V.O. Reason]

The Association has been misleading in their description of negotiations and telling us of massive outsourcing when in fact the Company had been pretty upfront with the cuts they seek. The Association embellished bigger cuts and bigger numbers of losses.

That's the reason the Company, surely with NMB approval, released the actual language of their proposal. They tried to combat the bad information being spread.

Seems some in the Assocation have taken these negotiations and made them a personal fight against AA. That needs to change, but using the latest "update" from Association where they characterize the NMB telling us to "drop dead," that doesn't seem to be happening.

As I said this group of idiots who are running this Association are digging their heels in and it’s costing each and every member money in our pockets that we won’t ever recover