April/May 2013 IAM Fleet Discussions

[ograc]

Fair enough.

Sure, 7/per week is great; hopefully you guys make that the target baseline for all stations. It'd be nice to see the threshold lowered permanently.

As for my weak language comment: If the CBA didn't have such terrible language to begin with, you guys wouldn't have had to neg. an MOU in the first place...

The MOU is a great accomplishment. One battle won in the war. The reality is; the current NC is tasked with recovering and repairing language adopted under two bankruptcy agreements and a Transition Ageement when we merged with AW. A challenging task IMO. Those who believe, the losses of the Fleet Service, experienced through the forementioned, will be recovered with one contract negotiated by the current NC, are being somewhat naive. Kev 3188... it's unfortunate the current NC is tasked with digging out from such terrible language; but that is the challenge at hand. IMO... based on recent developments, the NC is on the right path.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim
I assure everyone that I'm not revealing these big secrets that the company dosent know. The company is fully aware of how the NC feels and expects. Secondly, I don't know how many times I have to tell you I don't care what your interested in knowing! And let me make it clear ( before the spin doctor spins it ) I do care greatly what the membership is interested in. Just not Tim Nelson!
I don't care what Tim Nelson thinks were doing. We are there on behalf of our members, not Tim Nelson. And why do you feel like you have a right now to say you expect all these things before joint talks begin, when like I said, you have stated before to the members that fleet wouldn't get anything before joint talks. Well again you are wrong, so now you try to shift the focus. Why you think I'm going to care enough to answer any of your questions is comical to me. I answer the memberships questions because I respect them. I don't answer Tim Nelson's questions because I have NO respect for you whatsoever. So you might want to get one of your buddies to ask your questions for you, if you want a answer from me.

LMAO. Your attempt to spin this personally is disappointing. I don't give a rats arse if you respect me, you can hate my guts. At any rate, what I care about is getting a solid contract for our members and I'm not going to sit back and listen to you pimp off our members with your BS comments about joint talks. You are the one who blew off robbedagain and I just called your Bull S on it. He isn't the only one. Thousands of surveys came back saying that the members want their retirement enhanced. Nothing has changed that and an AMR merger shouldn't get in the way of that. Why don't you share with Robbedagain when Joint talks will most likely start??? Try 12+ months. Then why don't you educate everyone on how many years joint talks normally last? Try 3-5+ years. Your boy Delaney couldn't get joint talks done yet at United in 3+ years. You and other Delaney Pollyanna's are clueless unless Rich instructs you. When you say "we think that some things are better left for joint talks" that is thoroughly insulting and retarded since "WE" is NOT the membership. "We" the membership EXPECT you to negotiate for an enhanced retirement and 'we' don't care about your personal feelings since 'we the membership' don't want to wait 5 more years to get retirement gains. Also, "we" expect YOU to keep fighting for scope BEFORE joint talks. YOU are doing the same damn thing Delaney did at UA and I instructed you as such and unfortunately I hate being right again. Also, don't you think it is about time you be a stand up guy and post under your real name? regards,

 

[Tim Nelson]

Kev
It is only a 1 year reprieve. Don't understand what you mean by weak language? 7 weekly flights is about as strong as you can get. But do we need to get better all around scope. Yes!! IMO you have better leverage negotiating that better scope as a whole as the worlds largest carrier. Combining the numbers for both airlines in particular cities, then seeing what we have.

very very sad. You have leverage now to enhance the scope and retirement now. You've explicitly mentioned how you are punting both to joint talks which will take years and years of negotiations. You guys are doing the exact same thing Delaney did over at United and punt everything to joint talks. Then in joint talks, Delaney told everyone that leverage sucked because of piecing two contracts together. All you guys do is BS. Why don't you tell these members what you are really negotiating so they can be humored? LMAO. regards,

 

[Tim Nelson]

The MOU is a great accomplishment. One battle won in the war. The reality is; the current NC is tasked with recovering and repairing language adopted under two bankruptcy agreements and a Transition Ageement when we merged with AW. A challenging task IMO. Those who believe, the losses of the Fleet Service, experienced through the forementioned, will be recovered with one contract negotiated by the current NC, are being somewhat naive. Kev 3188... it's unfortunate the current NC is tasked with digging out from such terrible language; but that is the challenge at hand. IMO... based on recent developments, the NC is on the right path.

Great accomplishment? I can understand your feelings in JAX but which stations could have been insourced like ATL was last year? IAH? The LOA isn't a great accomplishment but, imo, it is fair, in and of itself. However, I am shocked at how CB is explicitly stating that they will pick up scope and retirement in joint talks where the company's leverage will be greater than today when it needs cooperation to accelerate the merger. Secondly, I don't believe DL142 is taking the same path therefore I don't want our NC ONCE AGIN agreeing first to a half arse agreement only to see our mx wait and pick up a lot more. IAM142 has been in talks 6 months longer than IAM141 so let's see what they get and go from there. And mark this post for later reference. regards,

 

[Tim Nelson]

as a matter of case study, this isn't the first merger. Between the IBT, AFA, and IAM, only the IAM leaned on joint talks at United and promised 'bigger' wages and better leverage in joint talks. Instead, the IBT and AFA took a wiser step and told management that it would delay any merger until their members received a ta PRIOR to joint talks. The AFA got a 10% across the board pay raise then 7% more over the next 3 years; increased 401k; no furlough protections; bonus; $40,000 buyout; and some smaller perks as well. The IBT received 12.5% over 3 years; kept current health care for the duration of the new agreement; no furlough protection; overtime increases; $75,000 buyout; $12,000 bonus. The IAM received nothing after it pulled up out of pre-joint talks one year after the single carrier. The IBT and AFA are now in front of the IAM AGAIN attempting to get a second contract while the IAM 141 has stayed buried in management's bed. Regarding US AIRWAYS, our NC is only asking for small tiny wage increases while our NC members have admitted that retirement enhancements should wait till 'joint talks' and scope is done for now until joint talks start. R U Freakn Kiddn Me???? Folks, you have tremendous leverage right now so don't swallow what some NC members are telling you how scope and retirement and those sorta things don't need to be enhanced until joint talks start because they will just 'get in the way' as CB stated. Such talk does serious harm to justice and, if such threats are carried out, it will mean that most of you won't be able to have such things addressed by your collective bargaining agent for years. Scope has to be enhanced now. Sorry but the IAM has to stop negotiating drop dead scope dates and instead negotiate better language where folks don't have to worry about each April. regards,

 

[pjirish317]

Tim,

I realize that what I am about to do is an exercise in futility, but I am going to do it anyway. Here is a serious question for you. What do you think you and your very own NC, should you have different people on YOUR NC, would have been able to get for fleet through section six negotiations? Honest answer requested. You come on here and spew your hatred for the US NC, along with RD and the ND team as a whole, all the while making assumptions/accusations that you could have/can do a better job regarding our current negotiations. I have my doubts that you could accomplish anything at the table with the company, due to your enormous ego, and that “I know what is best for fleet” attitude. I think the excuses would start flying out of your mouth as to why YOU could not accomplish anything toward a gain for fleet, and it would never be YOUR fault. Do you not think that as a whole, this group, will decide for ourselves what we deserve, and will accept? Not what tim nelson thinks we deserve, or the NC & DL141. I mean with that “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” attitude you have towards DL141 and all, you come across as, should you have won the PDGC spot, the company would have just handed you a blank check and said“whatever you want for fleet timmy, we are scared of you”. LMFAO. You are not the voice for Fleet at US, nor UA for that matter. You are a disgruntled ex DL141 employee with an axe to grind and a point to prove. That is all you are. And BTW, what is this “small tiny wage increase”? You say it like you know what the NC is asking for? So please share with the class what this “small tiny wage increase” is. I bet you have no idea what the NC is asking for. Regards.

 

[roabilly]

Tim,

I realize that what I am about to do is an exercise in futility, but I am going to do it anyway. Here is a serious question for you. What do you think you and your very own NC, should you have different people on YOUR NC, would have been able to get for fleet through section six negotiations? Honest answer requested. You come on here and spew your hatred for the US NC, along with RD and the ND team as a whole, all the while making assumptions/accusations that you could have/can do a better job regarding our current negotiations. I have my doubts that you could accomplish anything at the table with the company, due to your enormous ego, and that “I know what is best for fleet” attitude. I think the excuses would start flying out of your mouth as to why YOU could not accomplish anything toward a gain for fleet, and it would never be YOUR fault. Do you not think that as a whole, this group, will decide for ourselves what we deserve, and will accept? Not what tim nelson thinks we deserve, or the NC & DL141. I mean with that “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” attitude you have towards DL141 and all, you come across as, should you have won the PDGC spot, the company would have just handed you a blank check and said“whatever you want for fleet timmy, we are scared of you”. LMFAO. You are not the voice for Fleet at US, nor UA for that matter. You are a disgruntled ex DL141 employee with an axe to grind and a point to prove. That is all you are. And BTW, what is this “small tiny wage increase”? You say it like you know what the NC is asking for? So please share with the class what this “small tiny wage increase” is. I bet you have no idea what the NC is asking for. Regards.

It is evident why Timmy is coming unglued and resorting to insults, and personal attacks. He knows he’s losing... AGAIN! His whole ideological argument depends on everyone believing that Timmy... and only Timmy can Lead Labor in this Industry.
When reality is thrown in his face along facts, it bursts his bubble of illusion that he attempts to perpetuate on anyone gullible enough to believe him!

 

[700UW]

The IBT isnt going for a second contract for mechanic and related at UA, they are negotiating for a JCBA, they voted down one agreement on the UA side, and later ratified one last year, not for the CO side.

Even though they are the same union they are not integrated for seniority UA has mechanics on layoff while CO is hiring off the street.

Dont let the facts get in your way.

 

[mike33]

PJ

I have adressed the " small wage " increase with Tim and he has not responded with an amount. I assume its because its a guess or he doesn't want to blow the cover of his inside informant, if there even is one and maybe that's why he hounded CB to give it up. ( the $ amt that is )

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,

I realize that what I am about to do is an exercise in futility, but I am going to do it anyway. Here is a serious question for you. What do you think you and your very own NC, should you have different people on YOUR NC, would have been able to get for fleet through section six negotiations? Honest answer requested. You come on here and spew your hatred for the US NC, along with RD and the ND team as a whole, all the while making assumptions/accusations that you could have/can do a better job regarding our current negotiations. I have my doubts that you could accomplish anything at the table with the company, due to your enormous ego, and that “I know what is best for fleet” attitude. I think the excuses would start flying out of your mouth as to why YOU could not accomplish anything toward a gain for fleet, and it would never be YOUR fault. Do you not think that as a whole, this group, will decide for ourselves what we deserve, and will accept? Not what tim nelson thinks we deserve, or the NC & DL141. I mean with that “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” attitude you have towards DL141 and all, you come across as, should you have won the PDGC spot, the company would have just handed you a blank check and said“whatever you want for fleet timmy, we are scared of you”. LMFAO. You are not the voice for Fleet at US, nor UA for that matter. You are a disgruntled ex DL141 employee with an axe to grind and a point to prove. That is all you are. And BTW, what is this “small tiny wage increase”? You say it like you know what the NC is asking for? So please share with the class what this “small tiny wage increase” is. I bet you have no idea what the NC is asking for. Regards.

You just aren't listening and you shift everything personally. A different person sitting across from AH under the same strategies isn't going to change squat. Has nothing to do with me or anyone else and everything to do with leverage and strategy. I'm not trying to say I'm superman, I'm trying to say that the IAM continues to bring a knife to a gunfight. If it brought a gun, with the same NC then things would be fine. For instance, CB says more leverage is in joint talks. That is incorrect and a known strategic flaw when compared to section 6. Anyone who knows about negotiation and leverage knows this. The biggest reason why I forced my own firing was because of the one eboard meeting in which I was present at, I believe it was July 2011 directly before the UA ramp election, where the eboard [including MF, NH, FO] were more concerned with increasing the numbers in the IAM and agreeing to transition talks than sticking in section 6 talks and gaining things for our members at United. I mean, Delaney knows that transition talks [he calls them joint talks] are a weaker position but our eboard and perhaps the entire IAM is more concerned with appeasing management and fashioning contracts that are win win for the IAM and management at the cost of the membership. They take the natural leverage that we have and barter it and use it for "IAM gain". It has nothing to do with my opinion and if you just for once took your head out of NH or FO arse and even slightly understood that what happened at HAL was a huge win for the IAM at the membership cost; and what ALMOST happened at United was almost a bigtime huge win for the IAM/management at the cost of the membership, then you would realize that what CB himself just expressed, i.e., joint talks is much stronger, is the same damn scam and scandal the eboard pulled at United. CB may be too naïve to understand as were some decent brothers on the NC negotiation team who never had the skillset to understand anything other than what Delaney's theories allow their untrained ears to hear. I have no doubt that CB actually believes that transition talks is the bomb! I don't believe IAM 142 feels the same way and thankfully the IBT is raiding there to keep that district accountable. PJ I'm not asking you to believe one damn thing I'm saying, but, for once, compare how the IBT and AFA strategies at United have furthered that membership immediately before transition talks. Section 6 isn't to be given up easily. Does this mean we will get a completely new exhaustive contract? No. But it ought to mean that we get an enhanced retirement; more than tiny wage increases; and a bump in scope. Unfortunately, CB already admitted scope was done until joint talks and that he didn't feel such items like an enhanced retirement is anything to bother with since it will just 'get in the way' of other things. I will tell you this, if they can't get squat in section 6 talks then it is more unlikely they will get it in transition talks. I had a big gripe with Canale by waiving section 6 talks for America west and forcing transition talks, but he wanted the America west in the IAM pension quick and the company accommodated that provided Canale would sign the deal and not push for a more favorable scope clause. And that's what this is all about, SCOPE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is why CB DEEPLY offended me because he just waived it off to joint talks. R U FREAKN KIDDN ME???? I'm financially free but I understand our membership needs more than tiny wage gains, BUT WE HAVE TO SOMEHOW GO FROM OUR MEMBERSHIP TALKING ABOUT GAINING MORE SCOPE TO OUR NEGOTIATIONS TEAM INSISTING UPON IT WITHOUT SIGNING GOOFY CONTRACTS THAT DON'T ENHANCE SCOPE. Enough with this dopey, "well we will take care of scope later in joint talks bull s". I expect these pricks to take care of it now as they ought to. This IAM always comes up with some bull s reason to delay or push back real talks and it begins and ends with Delaney. Do I hate him? No. He's probably a nicer fellow than I am. Do I hate the injustice and bull s he puts on the membership? Yes and I will 'hammer' him and those like him as much as I can if they continue to d&ck around blowing smoke up our members arses. regards

 

[Harry Callahan]

Charlie:
I passed along your info on the pay increase to my former co workers & the response was to go after the money. Nothing here for me any more just passing & wishing every one the best.
Harry

PS: Retirement is awesome. Everyone needs to try it.

 

[robbedagain]

I thought that when the nd team goes to dfw in a few days they are going to discuss the scope financial packages and so forth but may be im wrong in that

 

[Tim Nelson]

I thought that when the nd team goes to dfw in a few days they are going to discuss the scope financial packages and so forth but may be im wrong in that

my understanding is that the iam and twu may rush a new union entity because of the ibt. And in doing so it will need management to voluntarily recognize it. You can count on management asking "what is in it for me" and if we use history as our guide we can conclude that the iam will leverage its own situation with our leverage and will necessarily get tiny wage increases and a limit on retirement or scope increases. Dont be surprised to start hearing the soft sell by the nc dressing up transition talks as the great leverage position. Lmao. Let us not forget that this is the sorta thing that canale did with the last america west merger and what 141rising blew up at united. A tiny wage increase will b bad enough but with no enhanced retirement (% in our current 401k) and no enhanced scope is nothing less than treason against the members. Stay in section 6 like big boys and get what our membership deserves instead of bull s and saying joint talks is the bomb. Most of our membership may not understand the leverage difference between section 6 and transition talks, including cb, but it is incredibly significant. regards

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,

I realize that what I am about to do is an exercise in futility, but I am going to do it anyway. Here is a serious question for you. What do you think you and your very own NC, should you have different people on YOUR NC, would have been able to get for fleet through section six negotiations? Honest answer requested. You come on here and spew your hatred for the US NC, along with RD and the ND team as a whole, all the while making assumptions/accusations that you could have/can do a better job regarding our current negotiations. I have my doubts that you could accomplish anything at the table with the company, due to your enormous ego, and that “I know what is best for fleet” attitude. I think the excuses would start flying out of your mouth as to why YOU could not accomplish anything toward a gain for fleet, and it would never be YOUR fault. Do you not think that as a whole, this group, will decide for ourselves what we deserve, and will accept? Not what tim nelson thinks we deserve, or the NC & DL141. I mean with that “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” attitude you have towards DL141 and all, you come across as, should you have won the PDGC spot, the company would have just handed you a blank check and said“whatever you want for fleet timmy, we are scared of you”. LMFAO. You are not the voice for Fleet at US, nor UA for that matter. You are a disgruntled ex DL141 employee with an axe to grind and a point to prove. That is all you are. And BTW, what is this “small tiny wage increase”? You say it like you know what the NC is asking for? So please share with the class what this “small tiny wage increase” is. I bet you have no idea what the NC is asking for. Regards.

just to add to my other post to you, the same was true with organizing. The iam used outdated organizing strategies that relied on really goofy principles. When i was director of organizing, i won elections not because of me or that i was smart but because i employed the leverage building strategies that are successful. During the same time i was director of organizing, under the same rules, the iam lost 30,000 members in all organizing losses at delta and the stews at continental. Morons! Education does play a role and it doesnt help that what little education roach and sito had was not interdisciplinary but focused entirely on labor. A proper skillset to understand most leverage building systems requires sociological education as well to understand culture shifts and approach the various sacred and profane things for each culture. I told roach he was going to F up delta by having uneducated agcs from dtw and msp going to atl talking down to the southern folks. I put forth a strategy that reagon blocked at delta and it ended up costing the election. At continental, ira levy mentioned the name "continental" every fourth word but it was a big turnoff to afa ua stews. Then when he decided the best strategy was to leave ord alone he sealed the fate.
These things are all about strategy and thus far i have only met huey dewey and louie as our iam bosses. Morons. Not because they are dumb but because they dont listen and cant see two feet past wherever they are standing. regards,

 

[necigrad]

Tim, take a break. Your making no sense and can't type worth a damn. You need to step back for a bit.