April/May 2013 IAM Fleet Discussions

[700UW]

I dont work for UA, did back in 1988, you havent shown one fact that the IAM facilitated anything.

Once again, the IAM does not tell the company who they choose as a vendor.

How many times do you have to be told the same thing over and over?

 

[737823]

I dont work for UA, did back in 1988, you havent shown one fact that the IAM facilitated anything.

Once again, the IAM does not tell the company who they choose as a vendor.

How many times do you have to be told the same thing over and over?

They should have held their foot down on SCOPE and had such weak protection.

UA system is riddle with Air Wisconsin IAM represented ground workers
The IAM and UA management have/will allow express to replace mainline. IAM keeps dues and UA has less employees
https://www3.ultirec...aspx?_vt=extcan
Don’t see MHT yet

Josh

 

[700UW]

You, I nor John John were in negotiations, and that probably happened under the Chapter 11 case.

No one is gauranted a job in the airlines in a specific city, its the nature of the business especially since 9/11.

No one has posted a factual information that the IAM facilitated the jobs away.

Once again, when a UA or any other airline picks a vendor it goes out for bid, finance and operations pick the vendors, and it usually goes to the lowest bidder.

Ask John John, how the CWA let US open Res centers in Manila, and El Salvador along with baggage service while they closed PIT res. Yes US brought the call centers back into the US but it was still a net loss of jobs.

And the link you posted doesnt work, still waiting for facts.

And the IAM loses dues money as ZW workers pay less dues than mainline UA as they make less money.

So keep trying.

Here is a link to the UA Ramp CBA, show me under the scope language where the IAM has facilitated MIA and MHT outsourcing.

http://www.iam141.org/docs/contract05UAramp.pdf

 

[Tim Nelson]

Creepy? You mean like 700's attacks on Tim Nelson and AMFAinMiami? This is a forum to discuss the airlines, hence the name. It is a place people ask questions, share ideas and information. If you don't like reading my posts, feel free to place me on ignore.

Josh

Josh, your post are usually well thought out and you pose legit questions that go unanswered, especially if the questions are an attack on the IAM's unaccountability. The IAM screwed over United bigtime with that last TA as I explicitly noted and called every play along the way over the past two years. Starting with the complete leverage giveup by our eboard just to position the IAM [the institution] with gain by bartering the leverage of the members and working out a deal that is win win for management and the IAM but LOSE for the membership across the board. I hate being right about such things. regards,

 

[700UW]

Rich Delaney, April 20, 2013­—Download Reevaluation of bargaining positions, communication processes and voting procedures, in advance of returning to contract negotiations with United Airlines, continued this past week. Meetings, both formal and informal, were held in stations across the system in which members could share their opinions and concerns about what needs to be included in any future tentative agreement. These meetings are intended to create an environment of discussion that moves beyond the fixation of the rejected tentative agreement and starts the serious dialogue about future negotiations. District and Local representatives participated in these face to face conversations and are forwarding the information and impressions they gather to the District. This information will help us shape the membership surveys that will be the next step in this process. We are working both internally, with our International’s Strategic Resources Dept., and externally, with a consulting firm specializing in polling and surveying, to structure a questionnaire that allows members to share their honest thoughts and opinions of contract issues of importance. As we have reported recently, we are also restructuring the format future surveys will be conducted in order to insure accurate and secure participation by members.
Through these most recent meetings the issue of conducting future ratification votes was of concern in many locations. Although it has been verified that less than 1% of all eligible voters did not receive their voting package, an urban legend is developing that claims thousands of members were unable to cast a vote in the recent ratification. Unfortunately, there was a significant number of members who chose not to vote, but that was not due to being unable to vote. However, the feeling shared by members regarding the issue of mail balloting is understood. The Constitution of the IAM calls for in person voting for contract ratification. District 141 requested a one- time dispensation of that rule in order to accommodate voters that were not yet members of our Union and therefore were not members of identified local lodges where in person voting would have been conducted. Future voting will be conducted in conformance with existing constitutional rules and requests for alternative procedures will not be made.
The traditional method of voting will be used in local lodges within District Lodge 141 during the month of May when voting on a referendum to modify the District 141 Bylaws is conducted on the day of the first, or only, meeting of a local during the month. There are two amendments to the District’s Bylaws that are subject to membership action. One proposal seeks to modify the process historically used to endorse candidates for possible nomination for District offices and positions. This proposal expands the opportunities members have to submit names of members for consideration by local lodges for endorsement. The second proposal seeks to streamline the procedure used to make future modifications to the existing Bylaws by separating proposed changes into economic and non-economic status and using different ratification procedures for each. Specifically, this proposed change would maintain the requirement of full membership ratification voting, through the referendum process, for all future proposed changes involving dues or salaries of District representatives. In addition, the proposal would require any other change to the Bylaws be voted on by the membership elected delegates to any District 141 Convention. The result of this proposal would be the ability to enact procedural changes to the Bylaws more immediately, while protecting the ability of the full membership to have a say in the spending of dues money through a referendum vote conducted the year after the proposed change was presented at a convention. Members that have come out against these proposals suggest they take away members’ right to vote on changes to the Union’s rules. That opinion is incorrect. Members’ voting rights are protected in two ways under the proposal. First, it requires a full membership vote for any issue involving dues and salaries. Secondly, the delegates that would participate in discussion and voting of issues at conventions are elected by the members of the local lodges they represent. In other words, members control, through their vote, either the issues that are subject to referendum or the individuals that will represent them at a convention. It is significant to understand that these current proposals subject to referendum voting were presented, discussed, voted on, and endorsed by the elected delegates at last year’s convention.
Negotiations resume this week in Washington, D.C. between District 141 and USAirways. We expect to receive a comprehensive economic proposal from the company in response to the proposal the IAM presented to them last month. The probable merger of USAirways and American Airlines, expected to be confirmed in the fall of this year, is a major concern of the Negotiating Team. The delays in reaching an agreement once the merger becomes a reality are already known by members of District 141. The necessary representation determinations caused by mergers is the number one delay in negotiations. While unions argue and fight amongst each other seeking to represent the employees of the restructured airline, the company is allowed to sit back and wait to see which union they will have to deal with in the future. Our intent is to reach an agreement with USAirways that protects and improves the work lives of USAirways members before any delaying tactics can be used by the company or others. Our brothers and sisters of District Lodge 142, working in the maintenance and related classifications of USAirways, have already requested a release from their mediated talks, citing no meaningful movement by the company over economic issues. This week’s talks will give us an indication of whether or not we are moving down the same road. Any potential action by the IAM will be done within the rules of the Railway Labor Act and the determination of the National Mediation Board.
Just as our negotiations are controlled by acts of Congress and government agencies, such as the NMB, the industry we work in is also reliant on government. The recent action by Congress to force reductions in government spending through what they call “sequestration” is going to begin having an impact on airlines and their employees and set the stage for another summer of crap. Because elected representatives refused to raise the tax responsibility on corporations and millionaire CEO’s – including the overcompensated heads of airlines – there will be a furlough of government employees (who are paying their taxes) in critical areas including Air Traffic Control. The furloughing of controllers is going to be done across the board without regard to the size or importance of specific airports. This reduction of skilled controllers is going to cause either irritating delays that passengers will hold our agents responsible for, or will force airlines to adjust their schedules to reduce delays, which may affect the job security of members. Since there does not appear to be any movement by Congress to solve the underlying causes of the budget problems the only hope to prevent another long, hot summer is for the government to change the sequestration rules and evaluate their needs better than the required across the board cuts. But, of course, Congress knew what they were doing when the agreed to sequestration and expect that the travelling public, forced into long lines at the TSA and then delayed flights due to furloughed controllers, will pressure the “other side” to surrender (tax the rich or screw the poor). History tells us the public will blame airline employees instead. Get ready.

 

[700UW]

Josh, your post are usually well thought out and you pose legit questions that go unanswered, especially if the questions are an attack on the IAM's unaccountability. The IAM screwed over United bigtime with that last TA as I explicitly noted and called every play along the way over the past two years. Starting with the complete leverage giveup by our eboard just to position the IAM [the institution] with gain by bartering the leverage of the members and working out a deal that is win win for management and the IAM but LOSE for the membership across the board. I hate being right about such things. regards,

Now this is the funniest post I have ever read, Josh is the king of misinformation, and you Tim, we all know your true colors. Your own coworkers have posted about that many times.

 

[737823]

First of all john john posted the link and it is nearly four years old, they probably filled the position by now. MHT is indeed UAX, some of the MHT workers are now in BOS. Why did they give away so much scope in the recent failed TA? I mean only seven stations will have protection by 2016? Is this a joke? UA isn't in bankruptcy, the pilots got a competitive agreement the IAM should strive for the same rather than lowering the standards for everyone.

Josh

 

[Tim Nelson]

Now this is the funniest post I have ever read, Josh is the king of misinformation, and you Tim, we all know your true colors. Your own coworkers have posted about that many times.

Clearly my coworkers have voiced their opinion of me by handing me the hub nominations at each US AIRWAYS hub over their committees and AGC's. Lol

 

[Tim Nelson]

First of all john john posted the link and it is nearly four years old, they probably filled the position by now. MHT is indeed UAX, some of the MHT workers are now in BOS. Why did they give away so much scope in the recent failed TA? I mean only seven stations will have protection by 2016? Is this a joke? UA isn't in bankruptcy, the pilots got a competitive agreement the IAM should strive for the same rather than lowering the standards for everyone.

Josh

Again, Josh, you have valid points although I suspect that you aren't really a banker. I mean, why would you be fussing with 700 if you didn't have any skin in the game? At any rate, you make valid points. regards,

 

[737823]

Again, Josh, you have valid points although I suspect that you aren't really a banker. I mean, why would you be fussing with 700 if you didn't have any skin in the game? At any rate, you make valid points. regards,

Tim,
I do work in financial services but travel on AA, UA, and occasionally US for work. Am interested in the airlines and know several AA and CO (now UA) employees, I find the forums interesting.

Josh

 

[700UW]

First of all john john posted the link and it is nearly four years old, they probably filled the position by now. MHT is indeed UAX, some of the MHT workers are now in BOS. Why did they give away so much scope in the recent failed TA? I mean only seven stations will have protection by 2016? Is this a joke? UA isn't in bankruptcy, the pilots got a competitive agreement the IAM should strive for the same rather than lowering the standards for everyone.

Josh

I guess you will have to ask the UA and the IAM negotiators that question.

Since you have never been an airline employee nor in CBA negotiations, you have no idea of what transpired.

I hate to say this but Pilots can shut an airline down, the ramp cant.

And that is the reality of the situation, no union has been able to get everything back from their chapter 11 CBAs.

 

[700UW]

Clearly my coworkers have voiced their opinion of me by handing me the hub nominations at each US AIRWAYS hub over their committees and AGC's. Lol

oooh a nomination, wow that is so impressive, yet you finished in last place in the election.

Getting a nomination, means nothing if you cant get elected, so Mitt Romney got nominated, yet did he get elected?

Means nothing.

And I have participated in more elections than you and even ran them, it is not uncommon for a US member to get a nomination in a US majority city than a UA employee, it has been going on for years, even before you were a union member.

 

[737823]

And that is the reality of the situation, no union has been able to get everything back from their chapter 11 CBAs.

Giving away SCOPE in all but seven stations isn't getting anything back from CH 11, it's giving further concessions, you know that full well.

Josh

 

[pjirish317]

Clearly my coworkers have voiced their opinion of me by handing me the hub nominations at each US AIRWAYS hub over their committees and AGC's. Lol

Tim, What happened after those nominations? Didn't you essentially pull out because you got your behind handed to you in the election. Also, did the hubs vote for you? I don't think so, maybe a few did, but I believe that the ND took most of the hubs didn't they? You post like the hubs actually wanted you, yet you couldn't garner enough votes to stay in the election? Why is that? Talk about misleading. You are the king of misdirection.

 

[700UW]

http://www.iam141.org/messenger/election.html