April/May 2013 IAM Fleet Discussions

[robbedagain]

cb how about better the sick policy, increase in wages protection for all the current stations and better enhanced scope benes going in as US if possible even go for improving the open time policy add say 1 to 3 more weeks vacation etc just my opinion

 

[charlie Brown]

cb how about better the sick policy, increase in wages protection for all the current stations and better enhanced scope benes going in as US if possible even go for improving the open time policy add say 1 to 3 more weeks vacation etc just my opinion

Robbed
Can't really go Into detail except to tell you that all the above is being addressed, except for the open time issue. That IMO should be addressed by your grievance committee in your station.

 

[roabilly]

Hmmm... interesting times indeed...

Thanks Charlie!

 

[charlie Brown]

Hmmm... interesting times indeed...

Thanks Charlie!

Yes Roa, interesting is correct.
Thanks

 

[necigrad]

Question for everyone on here.
Do you think that everything in our contract would be better handled in section 6 negotiations as the number 5 carrier. Or do you think certain things would be better negotiated in joint talks as the worlds largest carrier? Give me your opinions.

We're US Airways, not American or the New American. For negotiation purposes everyone needs to forget about being American. Fifth largest or just the largest, at this point they're all large enough companies that it's irrelevant. Negotiate as US, a company with a $537M profit last year.

Once Section Six is done, the merger is final, and single carrier status has been reached we can look at negotiating for the New American.

 

[Black Magic]

MR. Magic......The agreement between the TWU and the IAM forms an Association which will oversee a Joint CBA. By the formation of this Association Both Unions (TWU and IAM) will together call for single carrier status when they deem. The NMB will then have an election for either the Association (TWU/IAM) or no union. It will definitely be in the best interests of the "New" American Airlines Fleet to have a union. This will strengthen the section six negotiations occurring at USAirways and in the long run benefit our brothers and sisters at AA. For clarity purposes you may want to visit iam141.org and read the association agreement and also the Q&A that also addresses some of the more common questions that are being asked. Get a hold of your AGC and open up a line of communication to see if there are any more questions that are being asked and make them find the answers for you. After all, the AGCs work for us.

If that is the case then this coalition screams desperation to keep the dues flowing at any cost. Does anyone really think the company is going to give a better offer to the IAM than it currently has in place that AA has at TWU?! Is this a joke? WTF! What about the lackluster industry leading contract TA that the IAM came up with for the United ramp? What ever happened to workers getting a fair shake in CHOOSING what representation they want, with unions fighting eachother for votes? I guess both the IAM and TWU are so far in hole with their membership this is what takes place. Back door deals at its finest.

 

[700UW]

Wrong, it is either for an association or remain status quo till either after the merger and SCS is declared.

 

[ChockJockey]

Question for everyone on here.
Do you think that everything in our contract would be better handled in section 6 negotiations as the number 5 carrier. Or do you think certain things would be better negotiated in joint talks as the worlds largest carrier? Give me your opinions.

We've waited five years to get to Section 6 negotiations with this company after having accepted a lackluster TA in 2008. The question is do we now squander this opportunity for the suggested (not promised) benefits of another TA negotiation to occur at an unknown date and with an unknown degree of interest or good faith on the part of the new AA's management?

What kind of contract would we be negotiating if there were no pending merger? It is the very same contract we should be negotiating now. The operating assumption should be that current negotiations need to produce a contract with a five year shelf life, because if the process gets tripped up or delayed it's going to be our lifeboat. They seem to want to negotiate as if the merger and its implications are irrelevant. By doing the same you spare yourself even to having to consider future joint negotiations at all, and what you might now sacrifice to them.

If the cost of negotiating with the "#5" is them offering symbolic and mediocre improvements then we should politely decline their offerings and cheerfully see our way onwards to self-help. Maybe it will complicate their merger schemes, and maybe it won't. Oh well.

Also, can't merger-contingent language be put into the contract, so in the case that the merger does get to a certain point yet joint negotiations never seem to take off (or take place) automatic benefits/upgrades kick in anyway? I just don't want to be under the same situation after the last merger where a lot of us were languishing under an older, inferior contract two years post-merger.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Since the coalition has been announced. Single carrier status can not be declared until both the TWU and IAM both agree to declare it.

single carrier status has nothing at all to do with "worlds biggest carrier". Although we cant know for sure, it honestly doesnt appear that there are any major obstacles that we know of to stop the merger from being completed by september. Thus, legally, no matter which negotiation strategy is pursued, we will be in negotiations with the worlds biggest airline. Whatever the case, there is no proof, given history, that transition talks are much to fuss about. The iam failed strategy of walking away from section 6 and proclaiming pie in the sky transition talks as the worlds biggest airline at united didnt prove anything other than poor choices based on a compromised stance.
Covet section 6!!!
I can support that. We have 3 years already invested so lets buckle down and take advantage of the extra leverage of not having to worry about a union calling single carrier anytime soon. The company wants single carrier so lets give them that after we attain a fair and equitable contract. We waited 15 years to get in section 6 so lets embrace it and make sure we dont leave it for transition talks until we attain enhanced scope (with no attached drop dead dates), a fair wage and some other increases, including enhancing the retirement by getting a 401 match to go along with the current iam pension.
Once single carrier is triggered by a union, leverage is lost because thats one more action off the list that makes mergers more seamless for management.
You guys are our last defense before a membership vote against perhaps an iam/management desire to save negotiation cost and protecting their interest over the members as what happened at united. Signing a "mini contract" or otherwise making any moves to transition talks would be foolish given how far along we currently are in the negotiation process and we dont even have to worry about the twu triggering single carrier now.
As you know, only a union can trigger single carrier so if that means that management has to wait 3 years on its holy grail then fine. No fuss from here as there shouldnt be any rush on our end.
Certainly such a position by our nc is a worthy one to support. No?
regards,

 

[Tim Nelson]

Mike klemm, "management promised better wages in joint talks". (regarding united). Ill put up a few of my famous quotes locked in from facebook from klemm, bartz, and steinburg about how giving up section 6 and signing fence agreements and pursuing transition talks was the way to go.
Not surprisingly those "botched" transition talks by our eboard resulted in mostly 1% pay raises, big boost in medical cost, unlimited part time, and worst of all less stations under scope. History is in sore need of being our guide of not giving up present leverage in anticipation that somehow management will throw more money in transitions.
One thing is incredibly clear, as this airline and its profits get bigger, management gets more greedy. I can only imagine if weshift to transition talks and a terrorist attack or some other economic risk turns this industry into profit losses in the midst of negotiations. Supper is ready now when the airline is profitable. There is no better time to stand firm. regards,

 

[robbedagain]

cb i realize the open time is not important but when u asked everyone i just figured the most important as us not as the new aa i think should be scope enhancements more wages better sick etc but down the road i think the open time should be addressed bec there is very little in the 08 contract with that.. and i think if i can suggest may be as far as wages goes given that this airline makes money esp on the bag fees and all i think we should see wages along the lines of say 23 to 26 an hr just my opin and improvements in scope station protections for all we have now and improved sick policies i think those items are the most important at this stage

 

[charlie Brown]

single carrier status has nothing at all to do with "worlds biggest carrier". Although we cant know for sure, it honestly doesnt appear that there are any major obstacles that we know of to stop the merger from being completed by september. Thus, legally, no matter which negotiation strategy is pursued, we will be in negotiations with the worlds biggest airline. Whatever the case, there is no proof, given history, that transition talks are much to fuss about. The iam failed strategy of walking away from section 6 and proclaiming pie in the sky transition talks as the worlds biggest airline at united didnt prove anything other than poor choices based on a compromised stance.
Covet section 6!!!
I can support that. We have 3 years already invested so lets buckle down and take advantage of the extra leverage of not having to worry about a union calling single carrier anytime soon. The company wants single carrier so lets give them that after we attain a fair and equitable contract. We waited 15 years to get in section 6 so lets embrace it and make sure we dont leave it for transition talks until we attain enhanced scope (with no attached drop dead dates), a fair wage and some other increases, including enhancing the retirement by getting a 401 match to go along with the current iam pension.
Once single carrier is triggered by a union, leverage is lost because thats one more action off the list that makes mergers more seamless for management.
You guys are our last defense before a membership vote against perhaps an iam/management desire to save negotiation cost and protecting their interest over the members as what happened at united. Signing a "mini contract" or otherwise making any moves to transition talks would be foolish given how far along we currently are in the negotiation process and we dont even have to worry about the twu triggering single carrier now.
As you know, only a union can trigger single carrier so if that means that management has to wait 3 years on its holy grail then fine. No fuss from here as there shouldnt be any rush on our end.
Certainly such a position by our nc is a worthy one to support. No?
regards,

Tim
You make some good points and I agree with some of them. While I do think your strength is in section 6 negotiations. I do feel things are going to be added for the better once we are in joint talks. The company's goal isn't just to get us into integrated talks, their goal, is to get us into an agreement. So IMO we will still have some leverage there by demanding certain things before we agree to any joint agreement. There many people across our system however that have the " just get me something " attitude, and they want it 6 months ago. We've been beat down so long, they just want and need something now. So as the NC, you are always dealing with both extremes of what people want.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim
You make some good points and I agree with some of them. While I do think your strength is in section 6 negotiations. I do feel things are going to be added for the better once we are in joint talks. The company's goal isn't just to get us into integrated talks, their goal, is to get us into an agreement. So IMO we will still have some leverage there by demanding certain things before we agree to any joint agreement. There many people across our system however that have the " just get me something " attitude, and they want it 6 months ago. We've been beat down so long, they just want and need something now. So as the NC, you are always dealing with both extremes of what people want.

thats where leadership and solidarity come in to educate and continue building strength to the finish line. Im not sure if my opinion to stand firm, and get more gains now, is in the majority, but i myself would fully support the nc stance to stand firm. With the loa there is even some breathing space. Certainly there isnt a rush and if wenegotiate then we might as well do it right. But educating those in the breakroom of the plan is key. Will we get $26 before transitions like robbedagain or myself may want? I doubt it, but enhancing the scope and getting a competitive wage, among a few other items ought to be a baseline before approaching transition talks. It would be a welcomed shift in approach and without the treat of a competing union calling for single carrier it should be clean sailing on the union side.the nc has my full support on this and i can assure you that ord will support an extended negotiations as opposed to a quick settlement with small bumps in pay. regards,

 

[Tim Nelson]

Goes without saying, i think us posters appreciate your communicating on here. regards

 

[charlie Brown]

Goes without saying, i think us posters appreciate your communicating on here. regards

I appreciate everyone posting. Good or bad, that's what it should be. I want people to get Informed, and also to inform the NC on what we all expect. I feel we have a good handle on what is expected of us, but it never hurts to get continuous updates and suggestions from all our members.