CWA Tentative Agreement?

[Tim Nelson]

Surprisingly the ibt conference call ""dropped numbers" on the mx vote was a landslide 75% win for ibt. 80% clt and dca: 75% phx phl; 45% pit: 40% out stations.
Im sure the iams are just as skewed as well but i dont think the ibt did that good of a campaign

 

[737823]

Tim,
Do you think the garbage agreement with scope eliminated, meager pay increases and chicken fees as a signing bonus will be a liability when it comes to organizing at AA/US? What are the implications of the UA T/A for the IAM and future organizing?

Josh

 

[tadjr]

The LOA is a piece of XXX. The CWA is pushing hard, too hard IMO to get this thing passed. They "fear" that they wouldn't win an arbitration regarding vendors being allowed with a codeshare. We are not doing a codeshare. We are merging. I would rather say NO and make the company prove it's able to do it. Also, a big red flag is IF the Company can ALREADY use VENDORS, there would be no reason to ADD it to a LOA. They are doing it for a reason. To get it in there and never be able to get it out! Also, if they are just wanting "seamless service" and that is the only reason for this LOA, then why include Article 2 which is the Change of Control provision? That has NOTHING to do with seamless service and has no place in this LOA.

What happens if I vote no and the LOA is rejected? You would forfeit the money and job protections in this LOA. US Airways is adamant that its position on the cross utilization of employees including “vendors” and the wage scales will not change, so CWA and IBT would not have additional discussions for an LOA. The cross utilization of employees will begin after the merger is finalized in accordance with Article 3(K).

This is Article 3 K. K. The Union recognizes that the Company shall have the right to enter into
15 marketing, alliance or code-sharing agreements with other carriers under
16 which US Airways may perform passenger service work for the other
17 carrier, and/or the other carrier agrees to perform passenger service work
18 for US Airways. The Company agrees that any such agreement shall
19 provide for a fair pro rata allocation of work (based on enplaned
20 passengers or other appropriate measurements) between CWA-
21 represented employees of US Airways and the U.S.-based employees of
22 the other carrier.

NOWHERE DOES IT STATE VENDORS IN THIS ARTICLE!!! CWA is trying to tell us the Company can already use VENDORS in this Article. Then why is the company INSISTING that VENDORS be added if they can already do it?

NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!

 

[FLYUSAIRWAYS]

IMPORTANT QUESTION NEED YOUR FEEDBACK
In cities where American, is Eagle (a vendor per Cwa town hall), and UsAirways is Mainline,(currently only 1 Airbus per day) the rest Air Wisconsin, will we be Mainline or Eagle when the NEW AMERICAN starts???? This is a question that we need an answer to Now, not later. If Eagle prevails, then our choice is transfer, furlough, or retire if old enough. Something tells me that we won't have the answer until closer to actual merger date. It would be VERY helpful to all agents to get the heads up now. Why go to DFW for 2 weeks of Sabre training if you will never use it, because your on Unemployment Insurance for the next 99 weeks. Your thoughts PLEASE!!!!

 

[Tim Nelson]

The LOA is a piece of XXX. The CWA is pushing hard, too hard IMO to get this thing passed. They "fear" that they wouldn't win an arbitration regarding vendors being allowed with a codeshare. We are not doing a codeshare. We are merging. I would rather say NO and make the company prove it's able to do it. Also, a big red flag is IF the Company can ALREADY use VENDORS, there would be no reason to ADD it to a LOA. They are doing it for a reason. To get it in there and never be able to get it out! Also, if they are just wanting "seamless service" and that is the only reason for this LOA, then why include Article 2 which is the Change of Control provision? That has NOTHING to do with seamless service and has no place in this LOA.

What happens if I vote no and the LOA is rejected? You would forfeit the money and job protections in this LOA. US Airways is adamant that its position on the cross utilization of employees including “vendors” and the wage scales will not change, so CWA and IBT would not have additional discussions for an LOA. The cross utilization of employees will begin after the merger is finalized in accordance with Article 3(K).

This is Article 3 K. K. The Union recognizes that the Company shall have the right to enter into
15 marketing, alliance or code-sharing agreements with other carriers under
16 which US Airways may perform passenger service work for the other
17 carrier, and/or the other carrier agrees to perform passenger service work
18 for US Airways. The Company agrees that any such agreement shall
19 provide for a fair pro rata allocation of work (based on enplaned
20 passengers or other appropriate measurements) between CWA-
21 represented employees of US Airways and the U.S.-based employees of
22 the other carrier.

NOWHERE DOES IT STATE VENDORS IN THIS ARTICLE!!! CWA is trying to tell us the Company can already use VENDORS in this Article. Then why is the company INSISTING that VENDORS be added if they can already do it?

NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!

This is what happens when work is not spelled out in contracts like it ought to be.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,
Do you think the garbage agreement with scope eliminated, meager pay increases and chicken fees as a signing bonus will be a liability when it comes to organizing at AA/US? What are the implications of the UA T/A for the IAM and future organizing?

Josh

Dunno. I'm fairly certain the CWA/IBT will win since they almost won last time. Unions are losing their values with members by signing terrible contracts and preaching from management's book.

 

[mike33]

Send it back. You are not in BK. Smell of outsourcing!

 

[robbedagain]

Time to send a large loud and clear signal to mgmt with a no vote

 

[P. REZ]

The LOA is a piece of XXX. The CWA is pushing hard, too hard IMO to get this thing passed. They "fear" that they wouldn't win an arbitration regarding vendors being allowed with a codeshare. We are not doing a codeshare. We are merging. I would rather say NO and make the company prove it's able to do it. Also, a big red flag is IF the Company can ALREADY use VENDORS, there would be no reason to ADD it to a LOA. They are doing it for a reason. To get it in there and never be able to get it out! Also, if they are just wanting "seamless service" and that is the only reason for this LOA, then why include Article 2 which is the Change of Control provision? That has NOTHING to do with seamless service and has no place in this LOA.

What happens if I vote no and the LOA is rejected? You would forfeit the money and job protections in this LOA. US Airways is adamant that its position on the cross utilization of employees including “vendors” and the wage scales will not change, so CWA and IBT would not have additional discussions for an LOA. The cross utilization of employees will begin after the merger is finalized in accordance with Article 3(K).

This is Article 3 K. K. The Union recognizes that the Company shall have the right to enter into
15 marketing, alliance or code-sharing agreements with other carriers under
16 which US Airways may perform passenger service work for the other
17 carrier, and/or the other carrier agrees to perform passenger service work
18 for US Airways. The Company agrees that any such agreement shall
19 provide for a fair pro rata allocation of work (based on enplaned
20 passengers or other appropriate measurements) between CWA-
21 represented employees of US Airways and the U.S.-based employees of
22 the other carrier.

NOWHERE DOES IT STATE VENDORS IN THIS ARTICLE!!! CWA is trying to tell us the Company can already use VENDORS in this Article. Then why is the company INSISTING that VENDORS be added if they can already do it?

NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!

I find it crazy that this was put to a vote. I would have arbitrated the issue. I would vote this pos down.

P. Rez

 

[usa1]

IMPORTANT QUESTION NEED YOUR FEEDBACK
In cities where American, is Eagle (a vendor per Cwa town hall), and UsAirways is Mainline,(currently only 1 Airbus per day) the rest Air Wisconsin, will we be Mainline or Eagle when the NEW AMERICAN starts???? This is a question that we need an answer to Now, not later. If Eagle prevails, then our choice is transfer, furlough, or retire if old enough. Something tells me that we won't have the answer until closer to actual merger date. It would be VERY helpful to all agents to get the heads up now. Why go to DFW for 2 weeks of Sabre training if you will never use it, because your on Unemployment Insurance for the next 99 weeks. Your thoughts PLEASE!!!!

If this is not cleared up before the vote, there's only one way to vote. Another question, how much does UA and DL contribute into their agents 401K base. It's hard for me to believe it's not more than 3%?

 

[700UW]

Surprisingly the ibt conference call ""dropped numbers" on the mx vote was a landslide 75% win for ibt. 80% clt and dca: 75% phx phl; 45% pit: 40% out stations.
Im sure the iams are just as skewed as well but i dont think the ibt did that good of a campaign

Those numbers are way off, someone in the ibt is lying big time.

The exit polling conducting by the IAM shows why different numbers.

 

[mike33]

AH is playing both fleet and pax serv as suckers. DP wants to be the CEO of the biggest airline so bad that he doesn't care how he gets it or who gets it for him. If it wasn't for all our hard work then he and isom couldn't claim a thing about our OTP or bag numbers. Hell the AA guys are getting $$$ from the new stock of AAG. Which is a combo of US / AA

 

[mike33]

I think the IBT is dumping fictitious numbers to sway the late voting

 

[700UW]

AH is playing both fleet and pax serv as suckers. DP wants to be the CEO of the biggest airline so bad that he doesn't care how he gets it or who gets it for him. If it wasn't for all our hard work then he and isom couldn't claim a thing about our OTP or bag numbers. Hell the AA guys are getting $$$ from the new stock of AAG. Which is a combo of US / AA

They are getting equity to make up for their concessions, it has nothing to do with US.

72% of the new stock is going to AA's creditors and the employees of AA are creditors.

 

[mike33]

I think the IBT is dumping fictitious numbers to sway the late voting