American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[charlie Brown]

Even though we did again get an honorable mention it would be nice to see someone do one of these videos for Fleet. Or even something a little more in depth signed by Alex and Sito?

Apparently the Company has decided they want even more of our jobs than they originally said they wanted?

Not sure I would say the company wants more than what they originally said. I think it’s probably more the executive team trying to hit home to the membership, that the company is wanting to take work from the current situation even though they are making a profit. Sooo why do they need to take work or Jobs if they are currently making a profit.
This company makes a billion dollars a year on charging for bags, changing or cancelling reservations, and credit card fees. This is before they sell one ticket, Not to mention they will one day start charging for carry on bags which will be another half a billion. These are the main reasons Parker says that we will never lose money again. All these fees and all the fees they know they can add in the future if needed. So if they are making a profit already, why should we give up anything that we currently have or perform? This is the main issue!!

 

[ALUS78]

Not sure I would say the company wants more than what they originally said. I think it’s probably more the executive team trying to hit home to the membership, that the company is wanting to take work from the current situation even though they are making a profit. Sooo why do they need to take work or Jobs if they are currently making a profit.
This company makes a billion dollars a year on charging for bags, changing or cancelling reservations, and credit card fees. This is before they sell one ticket, Not to mention they will one day start charging for carry on bags which will be another half a billion. These are the main reasons Parker says that we will never lose money again. All these fees and all the fees they know they can add in the future if needed. So if they are making a profit already, why should we give up anything that we currently have or perform? This is the main issue!!

Perhaps they are trying to remain competitive with airlines like UAL where Sito and the IAM already agreed to such scope.Is the executive committee even keeping the negotiation committee informed as to what goes on in the talks? You using the terms "not sure" and "probably " and basically speculating on negotiations isnt filling me with confidence.

 

[pjirish317]

i think the update should present parkers scope proposal. If there is much contracting out then...it wont be good for management with furious coworkers.

tim,

Call Guinness, because I actually agree with you here. If the company can and does negotiate with the members directly, why can't the Association? It would make the company the common enemy and the NC would have all of us behind them in this fight.

 

[WeAAsles]

Not sure I would say the company wants more than what they originally said. I think it’s probably more the executive team trying to hit home to the membership, that the company is wanting to take work from the current situation even though they are making a profit. Sooo why do they need to take work or Jobs if they are currently making a profit.
This company makes a billion dollars a year on charging for bags, changing or cancelling reservations, and credit card fees. This is before they sell one ticket, Not to mention they will one day start charging for carry on bags which will be another half a billion. These are the main reasons Parker says that we will never lose money again. All these fees and all the fees they know they can add in the future if needed. So if they are making a profit already, why should we give up anything that we currently have or perform? This is the main issue!!

At one point early on in this JCBA journey I felt we needed to play catch-up with our counterparts at UAL and in many areas looked to gain where they are. I’ve passed that point over time that I feel we should now set the bar for them to follow.

 

[PIEDMONT784]

actually the DOL did a raid and broke down the door of Tim’s hovel forcing him to give up the keys to the cuffs and freed Sito. Leaving Tim frietened and shivering in the corner in a molested heap. Sad.

Do you mean his idol's DOL? .... sad...

Not sure I would say the company wants more than what they originally said. I think it’s probably more the executive team trying to hit home to the membership, that the company is wanting to take work from the current situation even though they are making a profit. Sooo why do they need to take work or Jobs if they are currently making a profit.
This company makes a billion dollars a year on charging for bags, changing or cancelling reservations, and credit card fees. This is before they sell one ticket, Not to mention they will one day start charging for carry on bags which will be another half a billion. These are the main reasons Parker says that we will never lose money again. All these fees and all the fees they know they can add in the future if needed. So if they are making a profit already, why should we give up anything that we currently have or perform? This is the main issue!!

This post is probably the most accurate of any account I've read yet. More than likely -- it's a game of psychology...

Negotiations 101: Pound the union leaders and the membership with negatives, while simultaneously prolonging negotiations in hopes of breaking resolve, and lowering expectations.

tim,
Call Guinness, because I actually agree with you here. If the company can and does negotiate with the members directly, why can't the Association? It would make the company the common enemy and the NC would have all of us behind them in this fight.

The company would probably scream FOUL, and file legal proceedings against the association, if they attempted what the they themselves did, and negotiate outside of parameters. More than likely, they would spend more time and money in court, then it would cost to settle for a fair agreement!!

 

[WeAAsles]

IAM CLT AGC Mark Baskett update.

Briefing for 8-12-18

NEGOTIATIONS: I want to start this briefing with a few personal comments. While this briefing originally started for just the clt IAM employees, I am glad to say that it has now grew to go out to the whole system. It is also shared by many of our brothers and sisters on the twu side.

So first let me say to those twu employees that THINK I don't feel your pain, you couldn't be more wrong. I am in my 36th year as a Piedmnont, Usair, Usairways, AA employee, that has been through 2 bankruptcies, and many concessions. So believe me, I along with many IAM employees do feel your pain working under a bankrupt contract minus the pay. I say minus the pay, because you, unlike myself along with many other IAM employees, we never could say while going through our 2 bankruptcies that we were top of the industry in pay. Yes you have made many sacrifices to keep this company going, and I assure you, those sacrifices by the IAMside of the negotiating team do not go ignored. We ( and I am speaking for the IAM negotiators ) all have many years with this company. We have been through the bankruptcies with this company more than once. We do feel your pain.

Yes I know many TWU employees are sore that there was no vote for the association. And also that the IAM didn't participate in your picketing. With all do respect to the TWU brothers and sisters, there was just a disagreement on if and when the info picketing should be done. Lets just say that it was not a decision that was made by the " association". Having said that, there were IAM employees that were present at the picketing. No there wasn't hundreds like the TWU, but there were a number of IAM employees at these pickets all wearing TWU shirts and holding TWU signs. Please keep in mind, that these info pickets were held in what I would call huge TWU stations, and very small IAM stations, so unless our members made themselves known ( which I know at least one that did ), then you wouldn't know that we were there. I am not saying this was the right thing to do, I am just stating the facts that we did have members there even though the " association " wasn't in agreement with the right time to hold the info picketing.

My point of this is, is to try and explain the IAM side of the issue from one Mark Basketts point of view. If we were to hold a info picket in CLT NC, the IAM would do so on behalf of the association, and we wouldn't expect one TWU person to show up, since it is a IAM stronghold. Any TWU persons that would show, we would simply look at as " icing on the cake" . We would never look at our info picket as not a success. We would expect to, and carry the torch so the speak, on behalf of us all.

Yes, if your TWU, I can understand your frustrations on being the majority workgroup. I can also understand your frustrations on not getting to vote on the " association". However, are we gong to sit and complain about these issues that are done and in the books, or are we going to move forward as a united group?

Now getting to the negotiations!! This past week while many people on social media are confused by the different updates from the association on the progress from one week to the next. Keep in mind, that the association updates can and are inclusive of the mechanics as well as fleet. So while last week, the update can say there was good progress made, they would be talking about the mechanics group. And while this week it seems to be negative and that no progress was made, they are talking mostly about the fleet group.

So I am gong to speak about the fleet group now, since that's what I am on the negotiating team for. First and foremost, regardless of what you are reading on any public forums, fleet is NOT done. Whether you choose to believe people that are not part of negotiations, are you can believe a person that is, its totally up to you. But I will say that I wouldn't take the time to send out these briefings to update everyone on the status of negotiations, if I didn't care for you to have the correct information. So you choose who you want to believe.

But fleet has several issues still to deal with. EX: Scope, insurance, wages, retirement, not to mention several smaller issues that are pending based on the bigger issues I just mentioned.

On the IAM side of things, the company's latest proposal wants to not only get rid of our insurance, but also take away jobs, specifically catering, and also some others like cargo. While again I feel and understand the TWU, s frustrations, the IAM side at this time in my opinion is looking at a cost negative contract for our members. So the issue is not that we don't feel for our TWU brothers and sisters, again we do, many of us have been there more than once. The issue is that we can not and WILL NOT agree to bring back a cost negative agreement to our members that we represent. I would assume that any TWU person, if on the negotiating team would feel the same way, if you were truly there for your members.

In our latest scope proposal to the company, as I have said before. We presented a proposal for fleet that preserved all the work that we are currently performing today in our 40 stations. I ask all of you that reads this, while the company is making a profit by letting us do this work today, if this is unreasonable??

In addition to what I mentioned in the above sentence, we also have presented on a separate list a number of stations that the company would in source, that once was occupied by either the IAM or TWU. These stations would be under different scope parameters than the 40 that we are in today.

So for all IAM employees out there that know they want to take your insurance, as well as the TWU employees. Not only will the company not agree to the work we are performing in our current 40 stations, they aren't even considering the additional stations, even though we are willing for these to be at a different scope proposal than our existing 40 that we have today.

BOTTOM LINE: The bottom line for everyone, no matter if your TWU or IAM reading this. The current proposal that is on the table while it might not be a cost negative proposal for the TWU since your in a bankrupt contract, and its very easy to make a cost neutral offer when your in bankruptcy. It is a cost negative for the IAM employees. What is the IAM negotiating members suppose to do?? Are we to accept a cost negative contract for our IAM members just to get the TWUmembers out of a bankrupt contract?? I am one person, speaking for myself, And again while I feel for all the TWU brothers and sisters out there, because I have lived and felt the pain and I have sacrificed as well as many of my brothers and sisters that I represent through more than one bankruptcy, I can not, and will not accept a cost negative contract for our members.

And in closing let me add, that its not only the IAM brothers and sisters that I am fighting for, its also to get the TWUbrothers and sisters what they truly deserve as well.

I don't know where we go from here. Will we get something good enough to put out in the next few weeks? Or will we go to section 6? Either way, I am confident that we will do whats best for our members as a whole.

EVERYONE HAVE A GOOD AND SAFE WEEK

MARK BASKETT

 

[PIEDMONT784]

The current proposal that is on the table while it might not be a cost negative proposal for the TWU since your in a bankrupt contract, and its very easy to make a cost neutral offer when your in bankruptcy. It is a cost negative for the IAM employees. What is the IAM negotiating members suppose to do?? Are we to accept a cost negative contract for our IAM members just to get the TWUmembers out of a bankrupt contract??

Weez... This paragraph pretty much sums up the "Divide and Conquer" strategy. The company is in a very unique, and historic position that provides a catalyst to play one group against another. At least we know the N/C realizes it...

>SPIT<

 

[Rogallo]

The company only has to pull off half the battle. We divided ourselves!

 

[WeAAsles]

Weez... This paragraph pretty much sums up the "Divide and Conquer" strategy. The company is in a very unique, and historic position that provides a catalyst to play one group against another. At least we know the N/C realizes it...

>SPIT<

The problem is that there are some people out there who want them to fall on the sword to bring us up and out. And the argument they use that we’re the majority is a piss poor and frankly offensive one to use. It implies that the minority should be either stepped on or do what they’re told (By the bullies)

IMO no the IAM side cannot give up their jobs particularly and absolutely not Catering. And they cannot give up their Medical unless it was financially advantageous to do so.

And frankly it was incredibly insulting for the Company to try and sell their inferior plans pretending they would be so much better rather than being honest about them instead.

 

[WeAAsles]

The company only has to pull off half the battle. We divided ourselves!

True. Any issues that have occurred within the Association have been magnified by members who continue without fail to harp on them and try to widen any already existing rifts.

Of course it’s because in many cases those members have a separate agenda which is particularly like yours that they have been working on for the last 30 years isn’t it?

I always wonder how much money all of those little pernicious agendas actually have cost us over the course of our careers?

 

[Rogallo]

True. Any issues that have occurred within the Association have been magnified by members who continue without fail to harp on them and try to widen any already existing rifts.

Of course it’s because in many cases those members have a separate agenda which is particularly like yours that they have been working on for the last 30 years isn’t it?

I always wonder how much money all of those little pernicious agendas actually have cost us over the course of our careers?

I too wish everyone would just fall in line like good little soldiers!

 

[WeAAsles]

Perhaps they are trying to remain competitive with airlines like UAL where Sito and the IAM already agreed to such scope.Is the executive committee even keeping the negotiation committee informed as to what goes on in the talks? You using the terms "not sure" and "probably " and basically speculating on negotiations isnt filling me with confidence.

Al unless you are just playing the let me go along with Tim as a good game it’s personally getting a little tiresome explaining that UAL deal and how it came into existence (And arguing it with non union individuals also)

There first devastation was caused through Bankruptcy. From there those members had a choice to gain a contract with more jobs but less money which they turned down. They then voted to pass a deal giving them more money but less job protestions (This was there choice)

When Oscar Munoz took over the helm from the scumbag Jeff Smisek, Munoz agreed to open the Contract early and take care of some of the issues that were incredibly harmful to those IAM Members.

Those “improvements” were then overwhelmingly passed by those Members.

You and any others in the extreme minority can disagree with their choice but they made that choice and blaming the Union assumes that all those people who voted yes are stupid where you’re I guess the genius who disagrees. (The guy who doesn’t even work there BTW)

 

[WeAAsles]

I too wish everyone would just fall in line like good little soldiers!

I wish when the Soldiers went in to battle they didn’t have their own Brothers shooting them from behind in the back of the head.

The enemies being among us as much as in front of us.

 

[cltrat]

I wish we all worked for a company that wasn’t run by pieces of chit who keep trying to put the screws to all of us despite making billions. F them

 

[737823]

Al unless you are just playing the let me go along with Tim as a good game it’s personally getting a little tiresome explaining that UAL deal and how it came into existence (And arguing it with non union individuals also)

There first devastation was caused through Bankruptcy. From there those members had a choice to gain a contract with more jobs but less money which they turned down. They then voted to pass a deal giving them more money but less job protestions (This was there choice)

When Oscar Munoz took over the helm from the scumbag Jeff Smisek, Munoz agreed to open the Contract early and take care of some of the issues that were incredibly harmful to those IAM Members.

Those “improvements” were then overwhelmingly passed by those Members.

You and any others in the extreme minority can disagree with their choice but they made that choice and blaming the Union assumes that all those people who voted yes are stupid where you’re I guess the genius who disagrees. (The guy who doesn’t even work there BTW)

When the UA CEO offers to do an early contract opener you know the union screwed up royally.

Josh