Overspeed
Veteran
- Jun 27, 2011
- 3,245
- 1,065
You that's right but the IAM never negotiated it in. It was in the term sheet, it was voted down, AMFA came in, and then signed off the same deal but added in outsourcing to foreign MROs. I understand the deal perfectly. AMFA rolled over. OV stated after the vote at UA on the 2005-2009 CBA that the AMFA membership decided it was better to take the deal then keep fighting. Why? Because that another NWA style beat down was coming. The craft union tried and failed.Hey Overspeed;
Here is some more evidence for you. Below is a quote from the IAM's local president. Notice where he states that they new this was coming, as well as, and I quote; "United now has the flexibility to outsource "ALL" of its heavy maintenance work, which involves taking apart and rebuilding giant engines and airframes." Cap letters and quotations added by me. Keep posting OS, you really are helping the AMFA drive.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"But the bankrupt carrier also is changing the way it does business. As part of a new six-year contract with its 12,000 mechanics, United now has the flexibility to outsource all of its heavy maintenance work, which involves taking apart and rebuilding giant engines and airframes.
The Indianapolis closing seemed likely after United in March said it was temporarily closing the facility because of a falloff in traffic related to the Iraq war, union officials said.
"We've been anticipating it," said Ben Nunnally, president of Local Lodge 2294 of the International Association of Machinists, which represents the 1,200 Indianapolis workers affected by the closing. "They were unable to say it straight out. But they've been shipping United tools and parts since March, when they announced the temporary closing. The most we can do is keep our chins up and go forward and be successful in whatever we do.""