August/September 2013 Fleet Discussion

[Tim Nelson]

edited

The drop dead date only applies to a few stations that won't make the cut in 5 years when their contract is amendable. The core scope is 15 a day. LCC core is 20 per day. LCC has a clause that protects SAN and about 6 other remaining west coast AWA stations with a certain flight limit but stations like ORD can be contracted out with 20 flights.

At any rate, I just wanted to clarify that AMR scope isn't "Basically Gone" with the wind. If a station has 15 flights, it will be staffed with TWU members.

More importantly, is the LCC scope. AH wants the definition of scope tossed out. That definition says that any US AIRWAYS, Inc., jet over 69 seats is part of the scope calculations. At the end of the day, that may be better than AMR, since AMR work doesn't define those new 76 seat RJ's as work. That's a problem. I mean, does it really matter if AMR scope is better than us on jet departures, if it doesn't protect and define work as aircraft over 69 seats? I can see Horton floating in most of his new RJ76 under the American eagle banner. The TWU won't mind, still picks up the dues.

 

[ograc]

The drop dead date only applies to a few stations that won't make the cut in 5 years when their contract is amendable. The core scope is 15 a day. LCC core is 20 per day. LCC has a clause that protects SAN and about 6 other remaining west coast AWA stations with a certain flight limit but stations like ORD can be contracted out with 20 flights.

At any rate, I just wanted to clarify that AMR scope isn't "Basically Gone" with the wind. If a station has 15 flights, it will be staffed with TWU members.

More importantly, is the LCC scope. AH wants the definition of scope tossed out. That definition says that any US AIRWAYS, Inc., jet over 69 seats is part of the scope calculations. At the end of the day, that may be better than AMR, since AMR work doesn't define those new 76 seat RJ's as work. That's a problem. I mean, does it really matter if AMR scope is better than us on jet departures, if it doesn't protect and define work as aircraft over 69 seats? I can see Horton floating in most of his new RJ76 under the American eagle banner. The TWU won't mind, still picks up the dues.

Let's start by demanding scope language defined strictly on the number of departures; regardless of the classification of mainline,express or seats. Fair enough? Simple enough? it seems to me this would eliminate the company's ability to manipulate scheduled mainline flying based on seats. The practice they use to sub contract Fleet Service work. If the union truly wants to protect work; isn't this language what they should be going after?

 

[Tim Nelson]

Let's start by demanding scope language defined strictly on the number of departures; regardless of the classification of mainline,express or seats. Fair enough? Simple enough? it seems to me this would eliminate the company's ability to manipulate scheduled mainline flying based on seats. The practice they use to sub contract Fleet Service work. If the union truly wants to protect work; isn't this language what they should be going after?

Of course. ALPA has protective language regarding the express flights at United, so why wouldn't the IAM at United? Why wouldn't the IAM at LCC? IAM is in sore need of scope and needs to quit its practice of leaning on ALPA scope from an ALPA contract. The IAM doesn't even have mainline language under scope in most stations so that's a priority. But keeping the 69 seat aircraft language is 'rock solid', especially when both Delta and United ordered 76 seat aircraft. Under the LCC agreement, any aircraft under US AIRWAYS, inc, including PSA, Piedmont, etc., is our work.

ALPA language in the United agreement is as follows. I suggest that the IAM [at United] have lasting protections with express, and not drop dead protections. If the industry is going to more express, then it makes no sense to walk into the next round of negotiations with no express protections. The battle for express is today. I mention United, because my understanding is that they may announce TA2 'shortly'. Especially since the ALPA contract has certain triggers on aircraft starting in January 2014. If IAM141 cleans up TA1 and brings better scope, then that helps the LCC negotiations.

At any rate, ALPA UNITED
• No 76-seat aircraft until Jan. 1, 2014; current legacy United 70-seat and turboprop limits until then - After Jan 1, 2014: Cap 70-/76-seat aircraft at 255 hulls; no more than 130 76-seat aircraft - Q400 included in 76-seat aircraft count limits (currently no limit in legacy Continental contract) - UAL currently has 148 70-seat aircraft and 35 Q400s - Under United Pilot Agreement definitions, UAL currently has 183 of the 255 70/76-seat aircraft • After Jan. 1, 2016: Cap 76-seat aircraft at 153 • Can only go above 153 76-seat aircraft if new small narrowbody aircraft added to UAL fleet and forces reduction of 70-seat aircraft from 148 to 102 cap • Must park 50-seat aircraft if going above 153 76-seat aircraft • Maximum UAX hard cap of 450 total hulls, from current 588

• All 76-seat aircraft downgraded to 70-seats (remove seats) if furlough • New small narrowbody aircraft – we fly it, forces reduction in UAX block hour ratio limit and number of 50- seat aircraft • 90 percent of feeder flying must be to/from specific airports • 80 percent of feeder flying must be less than 900 statute miles • Maximum 5 percent feeder hub-to-hub • Must maintain 90 percent of Company block hours to JV countries • International joint venture rules require UA “metal in the market” (no Aer Lingus type agreements)

 

[DFWFSC]

Let's start by demanding scope language defined strictly on the number of departures; regardless of the classification of mainline,express or seats. Fair enough? Simple enough? it seems to me this would eliminate the company's ability to manipulate scheduled mainline flying based on seats. The practice they use to sub contract Fleet Service work. If the union truly wants to protect work; isn't this language what they should be going after?

I agree, scope should be your top priority along with solid language. The TWU has always agreed to weak language and the company manipulates it every chance they get. A bunch of the stations that got outsourced last November because they only had 14 daily mainline flights are now up to 19 daily, and a couple are above 20. AA will run 20 daily for 11 1/2 months then say the station doesn't qualify for staffing cause the 20 daily didn't last all year. That's where there needs to be specific language in place.

 

[charlie Brown]

The drop dead date only applies to a few stations that won't make the cut in 5 years when their contract is amendable. The core scope is 15 a day. LCC core is 20 per day. LCC has a clause that protects SAN and about 6 other remaining west coast AWA stations with a certain flight limit but stations like ORD can be contracted out with 20 flights.

At any rate, I just wanted to clarify that AMR scope isn't "Basically Gone" with the wind. If a station has 15 flights, it will be staffed with TWU members.

More importantly, is the LCC scope. AH wants the definition of scope tossed out. That definition says that any US AIRWAYS, Inc., jet over 69 seats is part of the scope calculations. At the end of the day, that may be better than AMR, since AMR work doesn't define those new 76 seat RJ's as work. That's a problem. I mean, does it really matter if AMR scope is better than us on jet departures, if it doesn't protect and define work as aircraft over 69 seats? I can see Horton floating in most of his new RJ76 under the American eagle banner. The TWU won't mind, still picks up the dues.

Tim
Where are you getting your information?? The company can Not contract out Ord at 20 flights a day. They can declare Ord a class 2 station if they drop below 20 a day, but they can't contract it out until it drops below 8 mainline a day, or actually 56 weekly. Article 3 paragraph 3 ( c ) . Also the 69 seats is a big issue. But the problem is the language only convers US Airways Inc jet departures only. Most of the aircraft that are over 69 seats, are either Mesa. Or Republic. Which gives them the right to fly as many of those as they want, without being in violation.But your scope of 20 a day is wrong. They are talking about other work like lav service and things like that, once it's declared a class 2 station. The station can't be contracted out until it drops below 56 a week.

 

[robbedagain]

cb do you have any idea as to when the donkeys and the iam may come to an agreement and i hope that you folks will do all you can to strengthen the scope language etc.. i believe you folks are

 

[700UW]

They arent meeting till November if the government has the money.

Machinists to NMB: Contracts Now!
Update: September 12, 2013: Download
The National Mediation Board has notified the IAM of their decision to tentatively schedule future dates for negotiation between the IAM and US Airways. The dates are dependent on the successful resolution of the overall government budget debate currently taking place in Congress.

The NMB has determined that the first available date for resumption of negotiations for Fleet Service will be the week of November 4, 2013 in Dallas, Texas. This schedule is based on the availability of our assigned mediator and his commitment to other transportation negotiations.

We look forward to engaging management in meaningful negotiations trying to reach a tentative agreement that recognizes and rewards US Airways members both before and after any merger with American Airlines or any other possible partner.
We also intend to work closely with our Brothers and Sisters of District 142 within the Mechanic and Related classifications to demonstrate a coordinated and unified force to the company on behalf of all US Airways IAM members.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim
Where are you getting your information?? The company can Not contract out Ord at 20 flights a day. They can declare Ord a class 2 station if they drop below 20 a day, but they can't contract it out until it drops below 8 mainline a day, or actually 56 weekly. Article 3 paragraph 3 ( c ) . Also the 69 seats is a big issue. But the problem is the language only convers US Airways Inc jet departures only. Most of the aircraft that are over 69 seats, are either Mesa. Or Republic. Which gives them the right to fly as many of those as they want, without being in violation.But your scope of 20 a day is wrong. They are talking about other work like lav service and things like that, once it's declared a class 2 station. The station can't be contracted out until it drops below 56 a week.

The 69 seats prevents AH from upgrading the turboprops and smaller jets at Piedmont on Term E in CLT to the newer 76 seat models that are now becoming the new express jets. The reason why it is significant is also because of the AMR merger. At AMR, American Eagle has many jets bigger than 69 seats. So, if we keep the language, and then further it and apply it to AMR, inc in any joint contract, then that would be a coup. At any rate, it is a gold mine, given the present direction and latest ALPA contracts that address express.

The 69 seat in scope can not be overemphasized in its importance. If that is lost in negotiations then something is wrong.

 

[robbedagain]

700 you said if the govt has money.. in the event of a shutdown of the fed govt how does that affect the nmb and the schedule talks in nov? also how much more strain does that put on both sides if they cant talk then due to a govt shutdown

 

[Tim Nelson]

700 you said if the govt has money.. in the event of a shutdown of the fed govt how does that affect the nmb and the schedule talks in nov? also how much more strain does that put on both sides if they cant talk then due to a govt shutdown

The sequester affects all elements of govt. At any rate, that doesn't mean that a union and company can't talk. In many, if not most cases, a union can settle without being in mediated talks anyways. In the LCC situation, I would think that once LCC knows if the merger is a go, that it wouldn't want to delay without meeting with the unions. The thing we have to be careful of is signing any fence agreement. At United, Delaney signed a fence agreement that was ridiculous and made things quite 'seamless' for management without getting a TA first. I'm all for holding back on any dopey fence agreement if our members aren't taken care of with a new TA.

 

[necigrad]

If I read the update correctly we're not meeting until November regardless of if the government has money. IF the government has money then we'll be meeting in November. If they don't, well it will be up to both sides to meet or not on their own.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Legacy airlines aren't getting out of the mainline business.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/aircraft-demand-growth-good-news-140522552.html

 

[700UW]

Did you even realize a lot of the orders from us based airlines are replacement aircraft?

AA's is to replace the MD80s, 767-200s, and older 737s they have.

US's airbus order is to replace the 734s and the 7672s, and the 350 will replace some of the older 330s.

UAs order is to replace their 744s, 7672s, all their older 737s, and 752s.

DL is replacing their 757s with 737-900s, and DL is buying used planes to replace their smaller RJs with largers ones, and the 717s.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Did you even realize a lot of the orders from us based airlines are replacement aircraft?

AA's is to replace the MD80s, 767-200s, and older 737s they have.

US's airbus order is to replace the 734s and the 7672s, and the 350 will replace some of the older 330s.

UAs order is to replace their 744s, 7672s, all their older 737s, and 752s.

DL is replacing their 757s with 737-900s, and DL is buying used planes to replace their smaller RJs with largers ones, and the 717s.

Did you read the article, 700?

Significantly, is the part where the industry will use 41% of the aircraft orders to expand service due to passenger demand. This is significant because I don't remember aircraft orders for travel demand being so high. Usually it is around 25% of all new orders and sometimes quite less.

This is great news. Not only is the leverage of airline unions increased due to profitability but it is also increased due to the industry health and travel demand which forces airlines to to expand more.

Translation, instead of parking aircraft, airlines will be adding aircraft. When you were in negotiations, parking aircraft was the norm and you didn't have the leverage of negotiations with a airline that was growing.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim
Where are you getting your information?? The company can Not contract out Ord at 20 flights a day. They can declare Ord a class 2 station if they drop below 20 a day, but they can't contract it out until it drops below 8 mainline a day, or actually 56 weekly. Article 3 paragraph 3 ( c ) . Also the 69 seats is a big issue. But the problem is the language only convers US Airways Inc jet departures only. Most of the aircraft that are over 69 seats, are either Mesa. Or Republic. Which gives them the right to fly as many of those as they want, without being in violation.But your scope of 20 a day is wrong. They are talking about other work like lav service and things like that, once it's declared a class 2 station. The station can't be contracted out until it drops below 56 a week.

+1

Duh, Hell I was reading the 2005 contract that defined class 2 as a bar between 69-140 mainline.
Glad you are right about this CB. This should give us even more leverage than I initially thought.