April/May 2013 IAM Fleet Discussions

[ograc]

Tim,

Don't confuse my intentions in my post, I do realize that our section 6 negotiations are more important then ever. My point was that the alliance would expedite the whole process which would be a positive for all members involved. The nixing of a threat of a long drawn out representational dispute could only help. Getting a section 6 solid contract followed by getting AA employees and US employees integrated would be sooner by not having the reprensentation dispute. That was my intent. I realize that section 6 has teeth, integration no teeth.

P. Rez

P. Rez,
CB solicited input from members on this forum. To date... the members on this forum have expressed their opininion on how the NC and the district should proceed regarding US contract negotiations under section 6. It is quite clear the members on this forum expect the NC to pursue significant improvement in working conditions NOW. It is quite clear the members on this forum believe "kicking the can down the road" for improvements in transition talks would be a huge mistake. Transition talks should not take place until a fair and equitable contract is achieved at US Fleet. The time for much needed and overdue improvements in wage, scope, vacation / sick accrual and other issues is NOW not later. We have the leverage NOW. Let's hope it is used wisely.
Respectfully submitted.

 

[P. REZ]

P. Rez,
CB solicited input from members on this forum. To date... the members on this forum have expressed their opininion on how the NC and the district should proceed regarding US contract negotiations under section 6. It is quite clear the members on this forum expect the NC to pursue significant improvement in working conditions NOW. It is quite clear the members on this forum believe "kicking the can down the road" for improvements in transition talks would be a huge mistake. Transition talks should not take place until a fair and equitable contract is achieved at US Fleet. The time for much needed and overdue improvements in wage, scope, vacation / sick accrual and other issues is NOW not later. We have the leverage NOW. Let's hope it is used wisely.
Respectfully submitted.

Ograc,

I do agree with improvements now not in transitions. My post about integration negotiations was tied to the alliance. The alliance would allow vast improvements now and the ability to get to integrations sooner if the representational issue is set aside. I agree that the time to get these improvements is in section 6. My point is all of this can get done sooner with the alliance.

P. Rez

 

[ograc]

Ograc,

I do agree with improvements now not in transitions. My post about integration negotiations was tied to the alliance. The alliance would allow vast improvements now and the ability to get to integrations sooner if the representational issue is set aside. I agree that the time to get these improvements is in section 6. My point is all of this can get done sooner with the alliance.

P. Rez

P. Rez,
The progress made by the NC and district (LOUs regarding outsourcing, seniority integration and the alliance) are indeed commendable. These achievements will certainly lead to a more expedited merger. Wheather that translates into the benefit of the members remains to be seen. With that being said... the NC must not allow the company to roll right over us in section 6. The district and the TWU have gone to great lengths to make this merger as seamless as possible. It's up to the NC at US to ensure they don't take advantage of the preliminary work and achievements. I fear the company will try to take advantage of the obstacles removed. They will continue this BS, poor me stance as being number 5, in an attempt to force feed us a sub par agreement. Heads up... the membership won't buy it!

 

[charlie Brown]

I didn't mean to stir everyone up by saying the company states they are 5th largest. I was just trying to say this is the companies stance in negotiations, is that they are not going to make deals as the worlds largest carrier with us now, and then the merger not be finalized. But now due to the coalition and us not having to worry about a run off election holding us up. We can take section 6 as long as we want. Where we before was wanting to get some things in place prior to the possible election. Now we don't have to worry about that IMO.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,

Don't confuse my intentions in my post, I do realize that our section 6 negotiations are more important then ever. My point was that the alliance would expedite the whole process which would be a positive for all members involved. The nixing of a threat of a long drawn out representational dispute could only help. Getting a section 6 solid contract followed by getting AA employees and US employees integrated would be sooner by not having the reprensentation dispute. That was my intent. I realize that section 6 has teeth, integration no teeth.

P. Rez

I hear ya. but don't think that if you guys can't get a contract that me and others are going to start pissing and moaning and blaming. I understand these talks and it takes time. Many would have the NC's 'back' if they stayed dug in. If you can get a solid contract expediently then great, if not then we must hold like they did in braveheart!. Lol regards,

 

[P. REZ]

I hear ya. but don't think that if you guys can't get a contract that me and others are going to start pissing and moaning and blaming. I understand these talks and it takes time. Many would have the NC's 'back' if they stayed dug in. If you can get a solid contract expediently then great, if not then we must hold like they did in braveheart!. Lol regards,

Tim,

I don't believe for one second that you would ever piss, moan or blame the NC for anything. LOL

P. Rez

 

[necigrad]

I didn't mean to stir everyone up by saying the company states they are 5th largest. I was just trying to say this is the companies stance in negotiations, is that they are not going to make deals as the worlds largest carrier with us now

To be honest I support this condition, as it's accurate. I do not, however, support two ther postions they have. The first is that we a re only the 5th largest and that that actually means something. At the size US is it's a MAJOR company regardless of how many flights or employees or aircraft it has. My second issue is that that they won't be saying this nce the merger goes through. Get that #### in writing. Get on paper where the company says that we will get substantially more when we're a larger company, because I guarantee that when we do merge they'll have new excuses as to why that doesn't matter.

 

[roabilly]

I think the whole issue here is time, and patience. We are presumably a few months away from consummation of the merger. Perhaps, the best strategy is to simply go for post merger compensation and benefits! This may very well take a lot longer... but it may be the best strategy. We’ve gone nine years already, why not take one, or two more if needed?

I think the question is this... is everyone patient enough? Further, the Membership is fully capable of their own collective and independent strategy! This strategy can be executed by simply voting down any T/A that is not acceptable in view of this merger-- UA just did it! The Membership is in the drivers seat when it comes to accepting agreements outside of bankruptcy!

 

[robbedagain]

roa lets use the merger to close as say aug 31 i think that we should have a contract with improvements to wages, to the scope esp in protecting all the cities we have now... and at least better sick wages.... i think those things should come now and then in transition talks nail down the remaining things and a joint contract. they say take offs and landings are the most critical phases of flights... well for us now is the critical time and its time we get something now
roa i do see your points and all but i also feel that as members weve been beaten beyond the death of the horse if you will and seeing how the company is making money over money and other groups taking home profit sharing in the thousands i understand the frustrations along with the fact we are the lowest paid group in the airline industry in the usa i think we should have something now not a yr or 2 or 3 later but could always improve it in the joint talks in a yr or so

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,

I don't believe for one second that you would ever piss, moan or blame the NC for anything. LOL

P. Rez

Strategy is everything. Nobody was faulting Delaney for going 3 years without a contract when he kept his word that he would not support management into transition talks, but instead stay in section 6. Me and Delaney's rift came when he flipped and then started BSing telling folks that leverage is greater in transition talks as the worlds biggest airline. At that detour, yes, members should have been pissed at the NC because it not only tossed away 3 years of section 6 talks but shifted to a plan that was inevitably going to fail because we all know that transition talks isn't the strongest place to pick up scope and strong benefit improvements. So, at UA, hell yeah, everyone is pissed at the amount of time LOST because of waffling and poor decisions over strategy. After 2 years of dopey 'interest based talks" [terrible idea], Delaney finally refilled section 6 last month at United. Our US AIRWAYS NC needs to stick where they are at and not succumb to pressure from management when management says, "Every day will be a holiday" in transition talks. And not succumb to Tommy or Delaney when they start doing their IAM math saying how you will have more leverage later. A 'mini contract' that is sold by saying "now isn't the time to get things back because we will fix everything later in transition talks", is something that folks have heard before and will be reminded of by me. The truth is that management is greedy now and later. What they are offering now is a joke. Management should at least offer what they agreed to at AMR, which would mean stock in the company and a 10% immediate boost in pay to $22.50. What the union should be proposing is clearly something much north of that. Meeting somewhere in the middle won't happen overnight. The bottom line is that our NC should get a 'pre merger' contract with an airline that is making hundreds of millions of dollars that is > the 'pre merger' contract that the TWU got in bankruptcy. If the IAM 141 can't get a better deal under this great environment, than another union in bankruptcy then what the hell? Throw in more leverage because the company NEEDS transition talks and 'seamlessness'. Once the merger is done and we are stuck in transition talks, then the company may drag things out like it did to the pilots and flight attendants. Let's not give management anything until we get a contract with dignity and respect. Certainly, one that is better when compared to a bankrupt broke arse contract at AMR. regards,

 

[robbedagain]

i agree there now is the time

 

[blownkneesbob]

Tim
Is it true that if we vote No on the alliance we will lose representation there seems to be some confusion on that

 

[necigrad]

Pretty certain that's not correct. We're not voting on representation, we're voting to have the groups that already represent us work in concert instead of voting to pick one organization to represent. Something tells me, however, that we will be doing the later at some point regardless; I don't see the IAM And TWU playing well together in the long run.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim
Is it true that if we vote No on the alliance we will lose representation there seems to be some confusion on that

I'm not sure. Back in 2005, the IAM and TWU came together with the TWU agreeing to yield representation. They said, they didn't want to risk putting the membership in an election where non-union can win. Now, it appears that they are joining in an association and that the only two options will be vote for the association or non union in an NMB election. However, I can't be sure. One thing is for sure, we better get a solid contract that will keep people from voting against representation. There is risk to anything, and in theory, the association is interesting if it is taken advantage of against management for a better leveraged position for the membership. That however remains to be seen. If we get to vote on a 'mini contract' that does not expand scope immediately and raise wages substantially past the bankrupt contract at AMR then many may say 'why bother with this'. regards,

 

[700UW]

Its not a true representational election, you didnt sign A-Cards and the association will have no members and no dues collections.

You will either be an IAM or TWU member and pay dues to either union depending on location.

Its voting for the association or status quo.