AMFA vs Idustrial Unions for elections of National Officers

[WNMECH]

Thanks for the info Tynker,
My post still stands regardless of where Anomaly works.

From his defense of every word negative of the reamsters and the old local 19, I thought he was J.D. potter himself.

 

[Vortilon]

I heard a 20 year AA overhaul mechanic will not be able to exercise his seniority over a 5 year line mechanic if he can't pass an updated test designed to make him fail.

Is this how the TWU does it Anomaly?

And I suppose the IBT will stop this too?

Remember, VOTE TEAMSTERS AND KEEP YOUR EARNED SENIORITY, DATE OF HIRE.

Just like they got the Airtran guys huh.

I haven't seen a line AMT with only 5 years seniority for over 5 years.

 

[WNMECH]

Want to talk about fair?
That same GSE mechanic only lost 4 years and enters our list in the top one third.
He also got a raise to $44 an hour from a reported low $20s. I don't have his exact old wage.

Correction.
That GSE mechanic does not get our $4 license premium pay.
He now makes about $40 an hour. unless he is a lead.

 

[Anomaly]

You are so good at fact checking everyone, how about you fact check yourself.

Airtran had no 20 year mechanics.
Their highest seniority date was in 1994 and he is a GSE mechanic.

My posts on this issue were as an example. Even while ATA may have at most 18 years, there are plenty of people at AA who have 20 years and more. In case you did not know, this is who I am communicating with on this AA thread.

Swa guys only got a 4 year boost.

Want to talk about fair?
That same GSE mechanic only lost 4 years and enters our list in the top one third.
He also got a raise to $44 an hour from a reported low $20s. I don't have his exact old wage.

ONLY 4 YEARS? Are you kidding me? If someone, my union, came along and stole 4 years of the seniority I worked hard for because the company I worked for merged with another I would be completely pissed. Having to relive the last 4 of my 28 years and know it will NEVER regain my position on the seniority list would not make me happy at all.

Nobody asked the ATA mechanics if the wanted to merge. There was not a questionnaire from the board of directors or a note from the CEO asking for the approval. ATA mechanics were driven to this against their will, and their seniority was taken away from them by their new union. You put a price on justifying the act, but this is something taken away that they can not buy back.

Question: How is a 5 year swa guy going to displace a 20 year AT guy when a 18 year AT guy is now above 13-14 year Swa guys?
Answer: He is not.

Why did the all mighty IBT not take it to arbitration and get DOH ?

Because it was not fair and equitable to BOTH side and they would have lost.

Your question makes no sense. Your original proposal was to staple AT mechanics to the bottom of the SWA list. When you could not get that, you started picking away at years until you got less than what you wanted, but as much as AT was willing to let you steal. Your statement 18 year AT guy is now above a 13-14 year SWA guys seems to be asked with bitterness as if somehow the AT mechanic has inflicted injury to the SWA mechanic. Like I said, AT mechanics were not asked, and at this point, there really is no ATA. You are all SWA mechanics, and the seniority should reflect this in true nature.

amfa wanted to take many more years of seniority than what was eventually agreed on. Why didn't the not so mighty amfa take it to arbitration? For the same reasons the IBT did not. Arbitration would have taken much to long to hear and decide. With a merger looming, it is important to get a combined contract quickly in order to offer protections for both groups. The Teamsters knew this and did not want to jeopardize future negotiations. At the same time, the mechanics at ATA were absolute in their desires to come to an agreement as soon as possible in order to take advantage of SWA's higher rate of pay.

You assume the IBT would have lost in arbitration, but I know that there are no sure things in any legal setting.

 

[TWU informer]

 

[WNMECH]

My posts on this issue were as an example. Even while ATA may have at most 18 years, there are plenty of people at AA who have 20 years and more. In case you did not know, this is who I am communicating with on this AA thread.



ONLY 4 YEARS? Are you kidding me? If someone, my union, came along and stole 4
years of the seniority I worked hard for because the company I worked for merged with another I would be completely pissed. Having to relive the last 4 of my 28 years and know it will NEVER regain my position on the seniority list would not make me happy at all.

Nobody asked the ATA mechanics if the wanted to merge. There was not a questionnaire from the board of directors or a note from the CEO asking for the approval. ATA mechanics were driven to this against their will, and their seniority was taken away from them by their new union. You put a price on justifying the act, but this is something taken away that they can not buy back.



Your question makes no sense. Your original proposal was to staple AT mechanics to the bottom of the SWA list. When you could not get that, you started picking away at years until you got less than what you wanted, but as much as AT was willing to let you steal. Your statement 18 year AT guy is now above a 13-14 year SWA guys seems to be asked with bitterness as if somehow the AT mechanic has inflicted injury to the SWA mechanic. Like I said, AT mechanics were not asked, and at this point, there really is no ATA. You are all SWA mechanics, and the seniority should reflect this in true nature.

amfa wanted to take many more years of seniority than what was eventually agreed on. Why didn't the not so mighty amfa take it to arbitration? For the same reasons the IBT did not. Arbitration would have taken much to long to hear and decide. With a merger looming, it is important to get a combined contract quickly in order to offer protections for both groups. The Teamsters knew this and did not want to jeopardize future negotiations. At the same time, the mechanics at ATA were absolute in their desires to come to an agreement as soon as possible in order to take advantage of SWA's higher rate of pay.

You assume the IBT would have lost in arbitration, but I know that there are no sure things in any legal setting.

Let's start at the beginning.
Airtran mechs voted overwhelmingly to trade raises for 4 years seniority. Argue with them about it.

Second, if my question makes no sense to you it is YOUR premise.
You said Swa mechs want 5 years mechs to stand over 20 year employees. Shameful you said. You made that statement not me and it was clearly not the truth.

Third, you do not know what I wanted in a SLI deal.
I wanted 3 years to match the pilots deal.
When the IBT lawyer wanted DOH and a bunch of protections and fences that we would not accept, of course our negotiators went higher.

Forth, you said with a merger looming it is important to get a combined contract quickly to protect everyone.

Ok, then why did the Ibt refuse to respond to us for the first 9-12 months after the merger was announced and why did they stall the process all the way to the company imposed deadline if it is so important?
The Ibt acted like children and would nor even return phonecalls.
It took their own members complaining to get them to answer the phone.

You don't have a clue to how the teamsters lawyer handled this.
He was out matched, threw tantrums, put on a show and then caved.

Fifth, after the dispatchers arbitration ruling, everyone knew the IBT would lose in arbitration also.

We also got a laugh reading the teamsters try to spin the deal into something positive.
You apparently will believe anything they say.
The Airtran guys would have gotten their raises quicker if the IBT had not stalled for so long.

In the end the IBT lawyer got absolutely nothing he wanted. They got the deal we put on the table.

So much for the superior Ibt negotiators.

 

[Overspeed]

Not really. If you were here back then you realize that Jim Little took it upon himself to settle the TWA seniority issue by going to BINDING ARBITRATION. You either have a short memory or selective memory recall.

Negative. Several Int'l reps advised against the "put them at the bottom of the list" strategy. The Local Presidents were advised that type of strategy could be used against TWU members in a future acquisition or merger with another airline. The 2001 CBA has the arbitration language so Jim did not "settle" the seniority issue as you incorrectly remember it.

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

Negative. Several Int'l reps advised against the "put them at the bottom of the list" strategy. The Local Presidents were advised that type of strategy could be used against TWU members in a future acquisition or merger with another airline. The 2001 CBA has the arbitration language so Jim did not "settle" the seniority issue as you incorrectly remember it.

Who were these "several Int'l reps"?

 

[DNTULSA]

Sounds of Crickets.....

C'mon, overspeed!

Lie to us!

 

[Rogallo]

Sounds of Crickets.....

C'mon, overspeed!

Lie to us!

It's what he does best!!

 

[Rogallo]

Who were these "several Int'l reps"?

Ken, we all know his response. He will deflect the question with a personal attack.

 

[Anomaly]

Let's start at the beginning.
Airtran mechs voted overwhelmingly to trade raises for 4 years seniority. Argue with them about it.

Second, if my question makes no sense to you it is YOUR premise.
You said Swa mechs want 5 years mechs to stand over 20 year employees. Shameful you said. You made that statement not me and it was clearly not the truth.

Third, you do not know what I wanted in a SLI deal.
I wanted 3 years to match the pilots deal.
When the IBT lawyer wanted DOH and a bunch of protections and fences that we would not accept, of course our negotiators went higher.

Forth, you said with a merger looming it is important to get a combined contract quickly to protect everyone.

Ok, then why did the Ibt refuse to respond to us for the first 9-12 months after the merger was announced and why did they stall the process all the way to the company imposed deadline if it is so important?
The Ibt acted like children and would nor even return phonecalls.
It took their own members complaining to get them to answer the phone.

You don't have a clue to how the teamsters lawyer handled this.
He was out matched, threw tantrums, put on a show and then caved.

Fifth, after the dispatchers arbitration ruling, everyone knew the IBT would lose in arbitration also.

We also got a laugh reading the teamsters try to spin the deal into something positive.
You apparently will believe anything they say.
The Airtran guys would have gotten their raises quicker if the IBT had not stalled for so long.

In the end the IBT lawyer got absolutely nothing he wanted. They got the deal we put on the table.

So much for the superior Ibt negotiators.

The Teamsters have an opposite opinion.

http://www.teamster.org/content/airtran-mechanics-ratify-seniority-integration-agreement

 

[odie01]

Hey Analman,

The Reamsters are the twu x 10, everyone knows this, and I'm pretty sure Tulsa is catching up.
You get an E for effort, and a A for ####.

 

[High Speed Steel]

Hey Analman,

The Reamsters are the twu x 10, everyone knows this, and I'm pretty sure Tulsa is catching up.
You get an E for effort, and a A for ####.

Hey odie, AMFA is dead stick in Tulsa....

 

[odie01]

Hey odie, AMFA is dead stick in Tulsa....

How would you know, your not on the floor. Your days of eating Dove bars and drinking sparkling water out of your personal fridge, are numbered.