American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[GVPSPIAM]

Special Jetwire
Title: American Airlines
Sunday, Feb. 17, 2019

American Responds to Flight Attendant Skit Video

We wanted to clarify some information that is being circulated through social media about a video featuring a flight attendant skit. To be clear, we are as upset as many of you are with the video. We have been in touch with APFA and several flight attendants since early this morning and we all share the same concerns.

Here is what we know: The video is from a customer-organized concert held at a private residence. The group is composed of customers who host various meetings and events each year. This was not an American Airlines event. We did not have any say about the content of the event, nor did we preview any of the agenda. Additionally, we were particularly upset to see our logo on the screen as the skit was performed.

What was portrayed in the skit was not sanctioned by the airline and is not representative of the 27,000 professional flight attendants who take great care of millions of customers each year. We spoke to the customer who posted the original video and shared our concerns that the actions depicted in the skit he witnessed are demeaning to our professional flight attendants and crew members throughout the industry. We are thankful that he listened to our concerns and that he agreed to remove the video.

We have reached out to this group of customers that hosted the event to express our displeasure with the content of the skit. Additionally, we will continue our discussion with the APFA on this matter. Our flight attendants do incredible things each and every day to take care of our customers and each other. We have the best team in the business and are proud of the work they do.

 

[dfw gen]

No matter how you view the latest video that depicted flight attendants in a poor light, the complete lack of any vocal support for the APFA against American Airlines from the "Fighting" IAM speaks volumes.....

The iam offers support for nothing.

 

[GVPSPIAM]

Funny didn’t see you anywhere we went on strike in 92 or any time in the three rounds of concessions we took in two bankruptcies.

 

[dfw gen]

Mark, your update was very informative. Really put out there what the company is seeking.

I do have a question or two. This info you provided, is this your opinion or is it something that was passed on from the Executive Committee? Secondly, I haven't seen that in writing from the company, but you also state the company will not put in writing that they would not do that. I would like to see both.
And finally, why is it that Executive Committee can run the show (negotiate my and many other members future) yet they can not put out the detailed info that you did. Would love to hear from from the room that is actually face to face with the company. Yours, Fa's, and others write and interpret things a bit differently. If the "Leaders" would update something with detail, nothing gets lost. If they will not let you in the room to hear first hand, at least they can post info first hand!

Can you post or send me a copy of his update?

 

[GVPSPIAM]

It’s mostly for fleet.

Briefing for 2-17-19


NEGOTIATIONS: After this past week of negotiations, their is still no movement from the company on fleet scope. I want to take this briefing and address some the questions I have been asked the last couple of weeks.

1. WHAT IS THE BIGGEST HOLD UP WITH OUR SCOPE: To put it simply, its that the company wants to take away our work.
Keep in mind, its not only what a contract says, but sometimes its what a contract doesn't say, that can make it be very damaging. For ex: In our current 2014 agreement our fleet work is defined as such: " Normal and customary work associated with the handling and transporting of luggage and material: the loading and unloading of aircraft: the delivery of baggage and Company material". In the current TWUagreement, it defines fleet work even more detailed than our language above. However in these negotiations, the company wants to define " core work ". They basically want to guarantee our core work. And nothing else. The BIG catch however, is that they consider core work just the one part above where it states " the loading and unloading of aircraft. " That's it!! Nothing else.

Now of course they didn't mention in their proposal they put on jetnet that they want to take away all our other work. BUT, the company refuses to put in a written proposal, the current language that we have today in our IAM agreement, or the current language that is in the current TWU agreement.
So even though their jetnet proposal doesn't say they want to take away everything except loading and unloading aircraft. They will tell our executive team in the room that they need the flexibility to compete with DL and UA.

2. BUT HAVEN'T THEY GUARANTEED EVERYONE THEIR JOB: Yes they have. However, they haven't promised you that you will still be performing the work you are performing today. If that's transferring bags and company material ? No guarantee. If that's working Bagroom? No guarantee. If your TWU and reading this and you own other work today besides loading and unloading of aircraft? No guarantee. ( Except listed below ). They basically want to have the ability to shrink our work over the length of the contract, down to whatever number they deem necessary.
Also, since they will never be replacing people as they transition out, you can forget about your seniority going anywhere. If nobody is coming behind you, then the company every year of their proposal, will need less shifts, days off, vacation, etc. for our work group. Your days off, your available vacation weeks, your shifts, they will not grow and get better with more opportunities, they will shrink and you will have less and less opportunities, even though your time with the company will be increasing.

3. BUT THEY DID GUARANTEE US LAV AND WATER AND DEICING AND CARGO DIDN'T THEY: Today we perform lav and water in 34 stations combined. The company wants to guarantee this in 19 stations. Today we deice in 19 combined stations, the company wants to guarantee 5. I call that taking away from what we do today!! And again, I know I keep saying this, but its really unbelievable, that this is work that we achieved as the 5th largest carrier ( IAM ) or in a bankrupt contract (TWU ). Think about that and let it sink in. This company doesn't even want to give you the work that you achieved in those two agreements. They still want to take from our work group.

4. DIDN'T THEY GUARANTEE TO MAKE US THE HIGHEST PAID IN THE INDUSTRY: Yes, your first year of the contract only. After that UA, and maybe DL ( non union so who knows ) would pass us in pay.

5. WHATS NEXT? This is up to the mediators on what's next. It will be up to them to decide if they can get the two sides to move to a t/a and put it out for a vote. If they can't get either side to move, then they will eventually ( its up to them when ) offer both sides to go to arbitration with the remaining issues. We would more than likely decline this option ( just my opinion ) and then move to our 30 day cooling off period to where we could strike. BUT, because we are the largest carrier in the world, what would most likely happen instead of allowing us to strike, would be for the President to form a PEB ( Presidential Emergency Board ) that would make recommendations on a t/a. This recommended t/a by the PEB is not binding and can be voted down by the membership. Again, the timeline when anything else happens is strictly up to the mediators.

Bottom line in all of this, is DO YOU TRUST THE COMPANY WITH YOUR SCOPE?? Do you really think for one second, if we allow our current scope language to go down to just loading and unloading aircraft that this company will not decimate our work group over a period of time just because they didn't specifically state they would in their jet net proposal? You have to read between the lines. There is a HUGE reason they want the scope language changed. BUT, they want you to trust them again!!
Sisters and brothers, we have made mistakes in the past by looking at just the money in a contract. Hopefully we have learned from those mistakes. This company doesn't think we have. They think you should agree to what they are offering and trust them that they will take care of your jobs. I remember the days when at LUS we had I believe 81 stations at one time, and the company said they had no intention of getting rid of any of them, to just trust them. Well look where we are today. I for one, will never trust this company on anything, unless they put it in writing. If they want us to trust them, then they should have no problem proving it and putting it in a written proposal. The fact that they refuse to do this, should scream to everyone out there, on just what they plan to do with our fleet service group if we allow them.
There comes a time where as union sisters and brothers we have to stand up and tell the company to shove it.
We can not allow this company to continue to take us backwards. We have to say that we are finished being screwed by this company.
Sorry for such a long brief, but wanted to answer some of the questions I have been asked.

EVERYONE HAVE A GOOD AND SAFE WEEK
Mark Baskett

 

[swamt]

Here I’m not going to do your research for you, do it yourself.

How do you like it?

I LUV it!!
I already know and don't need to do any. As do most at AA who lived it, they too all know.

 

[WeAAsles]

Special Jetwire
Title: American Airlines
Sunday, Feb. 17, 2019

American Responds to Flight Attendant Skit Video

We wanted to clarify some information that is being circulated through social media about a video featuring a flight attendant skit. To be clear, we are as upset as many of you are with the video. We have been in touch with APFA and several flight attendants since early this morning and we all share the same concerns.

Here is what we know: The video is from a customer-organized concert held at a private residence. The group is composed of customers who host various meetings and events each year. This was not an American Airlines event. We did not have any say about the content of the event, nor did we preview any of the agenda. Additionally, we were particularly upset to see our logo on the screen as the skit was performed.

What was portrayed in the skit was not sanctioned by the airline and is not representative of the 27,000 professional flight attendants who take great care of millions of customers each year. We spoke to the customer who posted the original video and shared our concerns that the actions depicted in the skit he witnessed are demeaning to our professional flight attendants and crew members throughout the industry. We are thankful that he listened to our concerns and that he agreed to remove the video.

We have reached out to this group of customers that hosted the event to express our displeasure with the content of the skit. Additionally, we will continue our discussion with the APFA on this matter. Our flight attendants do incredible things each and every day to take care of our customers and each other. We have the best team in the business and are proud of the work they do.

Much ado about nothing and way overblown. The APFA has much bigger issues IMO to concern themselves with coming on the heels of Section 6 openers then to react to this fluff that is now gaining way too much media attention.

 

[GVPSPIAM]

I LUV it!!
I already know and don't need to do any. As do most at AA who lived it, they too all know.

Wasn’t AA, so you don’t know and I’ve worked under seven CBAs at US.

 

[PIEDMONT784]

Bet you wouldn’t call Baskett a liar to his face.

Tell Tim to ask RR what happens when you try that...

 

[GVPSPIAM]

Tell Tim to ask RR what happens when you try that...

I was going to post that, but I didn’t, but your right.

 

[swamt]

Who knon when will that happen.... Haha
I got an interview coming up, I'm not sure if I want to take the offer or not.

Curious to what position?

Reading the latest update from Mark Baskett i think the state of talks could very well wind up in the cooling off period. The company wants wants wants yet regardless how much the airline makes they want to kill our jobs yet they want us to Trust Them? The he!! if i were to trust them. Im not alone at DCA who feels this way. What a bunch of greedy self centered mgmt clowns running the airline. Keep on fighting the good fight Association.

It's the exact same play book as our nego's. Everything that has happened in our nego's is now happening in yours (as far as delays and stalls). It is just uncanning how well they resemble one another.
I am not hearing any rumblings about a cooling off period, but, they do think it will be longer than the EC expected.
Robbed, I can only hope you guys do not go as long as us, but hey, you never know. You guys going on 4 years? Is that right? We are in our 6th. May God help us all for new contracts this year...

 

[ALUS78]

It’s mostly for fleet.

Briefing for 2-17-19


NEGOTIATIONS: After this past week of negotiations, their is still no movement from the company on fleet scope. I want to take this briefing and address some the questions I have been asked the last couple of weeks.

1. WHAT IS THE BIGGEST HOLD UP WITH OUR SCOPE: To put it simply, its that the company wants to take away our work.
Keep in mind, its not only what a contract says, but sometimes its what a contract doesn't say, that can make it be very damaging. For ex: In our current 2014 agreement our fleet work is defined as such: " Normal and customary work associated with the handling and transporting of luggage and material: the loading and unloading of aircraft: the delivery of baggage and Company material". In the current TWUagreement, it defines fleet work even more detailed than our language above. However in these negotiations, the company wants to define " core work ". They basically want to guarantee our core work. And nothing else. The BIG catch however, is that they consider core work just the one part above where it states " the loading and unloading of aircraft. " That's it!! Nothing else.

Now of course they didn't mention in their proposal they put on jetnet that they want to take away all our other work. BUT, the company refuses to put in a written proposal, the current language that we have today in our IAM agreement, or the current language that is in the current TWU agreement.
So even though their jetnet proposal doesn't say they want to take away everything except loading and unloading aircraft. They will tell our executive team in the room that they need the flexibility to compete with DL and UA.

2. BUT HAVEN'T THEY GUARANTEED EVERYONE THEIR JOB: Yes they have. However, they haven't promised you that you will still be performing the work you are performing today. If that's transferring bags and company material ? No guarantee. If that's working Bagroom? No guarantee. If your TWU and reading this and you own other work today besides loading and unloading of aircraft? No guarantee. ( Except listed below ). They basically want to have the ability to shrink our work over the length of the contract, down to whatever number they deem necessary.
Also, since they will never be replacing people as they transition out, you can forget about your seniority going anywhere. If nobody is coming behind you, then the company every year of their proposal, will need less shifts, days off, vacation, etc. for our work group. Your days off, your available vacation weeks, your shifts, they will not grow and get better with more opportunities, they will shrink and you will have less and less opportunities, even though your time with the company will be increasing.

3. BUT THEY DID GUARANTEE US LAV AND WATER AND DEICING AND CARGO DIDN'T THEY: Today we perform lav and water in 34 stations combined. The company wants to guarantee this in 19 stations. Today we deice in 19 combined stations, the company wants to guarantee 5. I call that taking away from what we do today!! And again, I know I keep saying this, but its really unbelievable, that this is work that we achieved as the 5th largest carrier ( IAM ) or in a bankrupt contract (TWU ). Think about that and let it sink in. This company doesn't even want to give you the work that you achieved in those two agreements. They still want to take from our work group.

4. DIDN'T THEY GUARANTEE TO MAKE US THE HIGHEST PAID IN THE INDUSTRY: Yes, your first year of the contract only. After that UA, and maybe DL ( non union so who knows ) would pass us in pay.

5. WHATS NEXT? This is up to the mediators on what's next. It will be up to them to decide if they can get the two sides to move to a t/a and put it out for a vote. If they can't get either side to move, then they will eventually ( its up to them when ) offer both sides to go to arbitration with the remaining issues. We would more than likely decline this option ( just my opinion ) and then move to our 30 day cooling off period to where we could strike. BUT, because we are the largest carrier in the world, what would most likely happen instead of allowing us to strike, would be for the President to form a PEB ( Presidential Emergency Board ) that would make recommendations on a t/a. This recommended t/a by the PEB is not binding and can be voted down by the membership. Again, the timeline when anything else happens is strictly up to the mediators.

Bottom line in all of this, is DO YOU TRUST THE COMPANY WITH YOUR SCOPE?? Do you really think for one second, if we allow our current scope language to go down to just loading and unloading aircraft that this company will not decimate our work group over a period of time just because they didn't specifically state they would in their jet net proposal? You have to read between the lines. There is a HUGE reason they want the scope language changed. BUT, they want you to trust them again!!
Sisters and brothers, we have made mistakes in the past by looking at just the money in a contract. Hopefully we have learned from those mistakes. This company doesn't think we have. They think you should agree to what they are offering and trust them that they will take care of your jobs. I remember the days when at LUS we had I believe 81 stations at one time, and the company said they had no intention of getting rid of any of them, to just trust them. Well look where we are today. I for one, will never trust this company on anything, unless they put it in writing. If they want us to trust them, then they should have no problem proving it and putting it in a written proposal. The fact that they refuse to do this, should scream to everyone out there, on just what they plan to do with our fleet service group if we allow them.
There comes a time where as union sisters and brothers we have to stand up and tell the company to shove it.
We can not allow this company to continue to take us backwards. We have to say that we are finished being screwed by this company.
Sorry for such a long brief, but wanted to answer some of the questions I have been asked.

EVERYONE HAVE A GOOD AND SAFE WEEK
Mark Baskett

Man,was i ever wrong I thought we would go through this bullchit the second contract.I thought the first contract would be a cinch,I thought the company would just want the merger complete.They got a lot of balls asking for what they want considering what we all have been through and how well they are doing.F@@,k em

 

[Kev3188]

Non issue,

Company had nothing to do with it.

Don’t you have cards to sign, phone banking or visibility?

It’s a big issue.

Besides being the right thing to do...

 

[swamt]

It’s mostly for fleet.

Briefing for 2-17-19


NEGOTIATIONS: After this past week of negotiations, their is still no movement from the company on fleet scope. I want to take this briefing and address some the questions I have been asked the last couple of weeks.

1. WHAT IS THE BIGGEST HOLD UP WITH OUR SCOPE: To put it simply, its that the company wants to take away our work.
Keep in mind, its not only what a contract says, but sometimes its what a contract doesn't say, that can make it be very damaging. For ex: In our current 2014 agreement our fleet work is defined as such: " Normal and customary work associated with the handling and transporting of luggage and material: the loading and unloading of aircraft: the delivery of baggage and Company material". In the current TWUagreement, it defines fleet work even more detailed than our language above. However in these negotiations, the company wants to define " core work ". They basically want to guarantee our core work. And nothing else. The BIG catch however, is that they consider core work just the one part above where it states " the loading and unloading of aircraft. " That's it!! Nothing else.

Now of course they didn't mention in their proposal they put on jetnet that they want to take away all our other work. BUT, the company refuses to put in a written proposal, the current language that we have today in our IAM agreement, or the current language that is in the current TWU agreement.
So even though their jetnet proposal doesn't say they want to take away everything except loading and unloading aircraft. They will tell our executive team in the room that they need the flexibility to compete with DL and UA.

2. BUT HAVEN'T THEY GUARANTEED EVERYONE THEIR JOB: Yes they have. However, they haven't promised you that you will still be performing the work you are performing today. If that's transferring bags and company material ? No guarantee. If that's working Bagroom? No guarantee. If your TWU and reading this and you own other work today besides loading and unloading of aircraft? No guarantee. ( Except listed below ). They basically want to have the ability to shrink our work over the length of the contract, down to whatever number they deem necessary.
Also, since they will never be replacing people as they transition out, you can forget about your seniority going anywhere. If nobody is coming behind you, then the company every year of their proposal, will need less shifts, days off, vacation, etc. for our work group. Your days off, your available vacation weeks, your shifts, they will not grow and get better with more opportunities, they will shrink and you will have less and less opportunities, even though your time with the company will be increasing.

3. BUT THEY DID GUARANTEE US LAV AND WATER AND DEICING AND CARGO DIDN'T THEY: Today we perform lav and water in 34 stations combined. The company wants to guarantee this in 19 stations. Today we deice in 19 combined stations, the company wants to guarantee 5. I call that taking away from what we do today!! And again, I know I keep saying this, but its really unbelievable, that this is work that we achieved as the 5th largest carrier ( IAM ) or in a bankrupt contract (TWU ). Think about that and let it sink in. This company doesn't even want to give you the work that you achieved in those two agreements. They still want to take from our work group.

4. DIDN'T THEY GUARANTEE TO MAKE US THE HIGHEST PAID IN THE INDUSTRY: Yes, your first year of the contract only. After that UA, and maybe DL ( non union so who knows ) would pass us in pay.

5. WHATS NEXT? This is up to the mediators on what's next. It will be up to them to decide if they can get the two sides to move to a t/a and put it out for a vote. If they can't get either side to move, then they will eventually ( its up to them when ) offer both sides to go to arbitration with the remaining issues. We would more than likely decline this option ( just my opinion ) and then move to our 30 day cooling off period to where we could strike. BUT, because we are the largest carrier in the world, what would most likely happen instead of allowing us to strike, would be for the President to form a PEB ( Presidential Emergency Board ) that would make recommendations on a t/a. This recommended t/a by the PEB is not binding and can be voted down by the membership. Again, the timeline when anything else happens is strictly up to the mediators.

Bottom line in all of this, is DO YOU TRUST THE COMPANY WITH YOUR SCOPE?? Do you really think for one second, if we allow our current scope language to go down to just loading and unloading aircraft that this company will not decimate our work group over a period of time just because they didn't specifically state they would in their jet net proposal? You have to read between the lines. There is a HUGE reason they want the scope language changed. BUT, they want you to trust them again!!
Sisters and brothers, we have made mistakes in the past by looking at just the money in a contract. Hopefully we have learned from those mistakes. This company doesn't think we have. They think you should agree to what they are offering and trust them that they will take care of your jobs. I remember the days when at LUS we had I believe 81 stations at one time, and the company said they had no intention of getting rid of any of them, to just trust them. Well look where we are today. I for one, will never trust this company on anything, unless they put it in writing. If they want us to trust them, then they should have no problem proving it and putting it in a written proposal. The fact that they refuse to do this, should scream to everyone out there, on just what they plan to do with our fleet service group if we allow them.
There comes a time where as union sisters and brothers we have to stand up and tell the company to shove it.
We can not allow this company to continue to take us backwards. We have to say that we are finished being screwed by this company.
Sorry for such a long brief, but wanted to answer some of the questions I have been asked.

EVERYONE HAVE A GOOD AND SAFE WEEK
Mark Baskett

I applaud this mans stance. We all can only hope the EC is on the same page as he.
Our co. tried the same BS and refused to ever put anything in writing (IMO a way to delay and stall). Until they finally abandoned it, now with new NC for co. they opened pandora's box again.
Mark is correct guys, get it in writing or you will be saying later, how can they do that. Language more important than $$$. It's the language and rules that will get the co the huge savings, all the while most of the membership is just staring at the $$$ as Mark has admittedly stated in his update.

 

[swamt]

Wasn’t AA, so you don’t know and I’ve worked under seven CBAs at US.

Never said you were AA. Just bringing up that the members are sick and tired of the concessionary contracts of the past at AA, and they have lived it for decades, so with their higher numbers it will be much harder to sell any more concessions to the TWU side. The IAM will not want to give up what they have, as I have said in the past, this contract offer will be somewhere in the middle of both sides and I am still a very firm believer you guys will not get the first one to pass...