Dispute Resolution

[BeenThere]

Although he said by 08/27/2002



Dear Sister and Brothers,



On Tuesday Aug 20, 2002 the Dispute Resolution Panel under Arbitrator Richard Kasher Esq. met in Washington DC, to discuss and resolve the current complex disputes submitted. Mr. Kasher has committed to finalizing the Dispute Resolutions awards by the close of business Tuesday, August 27, 2002.



Fraternally,



James C. Little

Director Air Transport Division

 

[bagsmasher]

First we heard the award would be on the 20th. Then they changed it to the 27th. Now someone is saying we should hear by Friday. This reminds me of his original award. I have to believe that Mr. Kasher needs more time to interpret his way around our contract. All LLCer's should feel more secure the longer this goes on. You can be assured he is not trying to figure out how to protect original AAer's. Go down the list of the 15 items on dispute, then try to figure out which way would be the best for the IAM. That will be his award.
Sidenote: All TWU members, it's time for a change in leadership this coming March. This is especially true for members of Local 512. Do what you think is right.

 

[Buck]

Change leadership? Change unions!

 

[1AA]

----------------
On 8/29/2002 6:35:53 AM

Change leadership? Change unions!
----------------

Change Tulsa and you can change unions. FACT!![]

 

[BeenThere]

HERE WE GO AGAIN!

August 27, 2002







VIA FACSIMILE



TO: All AA Local Presidents 501-590



RE: Dispute Resolution Committee



Dear Brothers:



As you know, it was our understanding that Mr. Kasher would issue his decision by close of business today. That is not going to happen!



Yesterday while I was in MIA, we had a conference call with Mr. Kasher and the Committee to review the final language. We got bogged down and were unable to reach a consensus on the issue of reduction in force. In order to give each party an opportunity to prepare examples of how a RIF would be applied, Mr. Kasher has rescheduled a conference call for today at 5:00 p.m. I will E-mail you later this evening with a follow-up.



Fraternally,





James C. Little

Director Air Transport Division

Intl. Administrative Vice President



JCL:cjw opeiu-153



C: G. Yingst

J. Conley

 

[bagsmasher]

I knew it, he's going to rule against 4-10-01 for reduction in force for LLCer's. Why don't we save everyone a lot of time here and just rule in favor of the IAM on all disputed items?
By the way, I am in favor of changing unions. The problem is AMFA doesn't want Fleet Service, and I would quit if we ever switched to IAM. There's no way I'm giving one red cent to those two-faced Bast@rds.

 

[bagsmasher]

Yeah, they are doing what they are supposed to do. Say one thing to get the deal done, then change your mind after the fact and try to get back what you signed away. Where are the AA/TWU lawsuits? I would be a huge supporter of any litigation against the IAM.

 

[twaokc]

Bags,
The IAM is doing what a union is supposed to do and that is protecting its members....(sorry old members that paid dues to the IAM for years and years at TWA.) The IAM is not even receiving dues now, but are still protecting the old TWA employee members.[] [] [] []

 

[mojo13]

I never thought I would say this, but,
GO IAM
[:bigsmile:]

 

[Senor Pelon]

The final ruling of the Dispute Resolution Committe is in. You may read it at the TWU website.

www.twuadt.org

 

[bagsmasher]

Kasher again bent over backwards to protect the LLCer's, and ruled against giving them all 4-10-01 occ. for RIF. But he could not get around the fact that all AAer's on the clock when the contract was signed have SYSTEM PROTECTION. LLCer's are not system protected. So STL and MCIE will be on the juniority list, and any AAer with better than 3-01-01 occ. can bump any TWAer out, no matter what occ. seniority the LLcer's have. It's good to see that Mr. Kasher couldn't interpret his way around our contract for once.

 

[mojo13]

Bags says;

So STL and MCIE will be on the juniority list, and any AAer with better than 3-01-01 occ. can bump any TWAer out, no matter what occ. seniority the LLcer's have.

The decision says;

Selection for Furlough



Under the TWU/AA agreement, selection for furlough is based on occupational seniority in a classification when headcount in a classification is reduced at a location. Therefore, the occupational seniority under the Award which a former TWA LLC employee has at his location will be used in identifying the junior employees in the classification at a location. At STL and MCI that will be 100% of TWA seniority, at the “10% cities” (where AA employees in the classification have been recalled from a furlough that occurred prior to the April 29, 2002 Award) that will be 25% of TWA seniority, and at other locations 4/10/2001.



System Displacement



Once a junior employee at a location is given a furlough notice, he has the opportunity to displace junior employees on a systemwide basis as identified by the juniority list. Operation of the juniority list is intended to identify those junior employees sytemwide who can be displaced by the furloughed employee through normal operation of occupational seniority. However, because former TWA LLC employees’ occupational seniority varies from location to location (i.e.- 4/10/2001 and 25% and 100%), the juniority list must be constructed to account for this fact.



As stated above, the DRC is unwilling to create new restrictions on use of occupational seniority applicable only to former TWA LLC employees. On the other hand, the contract already has a significant restriction on application of occupational seniority -- a system protected employee may not be "bumped" in a system displacement. Because the vast majority of TWU-represented AA employees have occupational seniority dates prior to 3/1/2001, they are system protected under the TWU/AA collective bargaining agreement. No former TWA LLC employee is system protected. For this reason, the occupational seniority provided former TWA LLC employees by virtue of the Seniority Integration Opinion and Award is of limited use to such employees in competing with system protected AA employees in a system displacement.



In recognition of the above problems, the "juniority" list shall be constructed within each classification subject to furlough in the following fashion. All unprotected employees – all AA employees hired after 3/1/2001 and all former TWA LLC employees – shall be placed on the list in reverse seniority order as determined by their occupational seniority under the Seniority Integration Opinion and Award. For former TWA LLC employees their occupational seniority for placement on the list shall be the occupational seniority they are exercising at their location at the time the juniority list is constructed, i.e. – 100% of TWA seniority, or 25% of TWA seniority, or 4/10/2001, depending on location. The AA employees hired after 3/1/2001 shall be blended with the former TWA LLC employees according to the AA employees’ occupational seniority.



This juniority list will be used solely for identifying the unprotected positions to which a furloughed employee (AA or former TWA LLC) may exercise his occupational seniority to displace a junior employee. With respect to the actual displacement of any employee on the juniority list, a comparison between the two employees of the occupational seniority at the location under the Award will determine whether the displacement can, in fact, occur. Junior employees displaced will similarly use their occupational seniority under the Award in determining their options under the TWU/AA agreement.



A furloughed former TWA LLC employee may exercise the occupational seniority he would hold at a location under the 25% or 100% or 4/10/2001 formula in displacing an employee on the juniority list. In addition to the normal operation of the juniority list, furloughed or displaced former TWA LLC employees will be afforded the additional opportunity to displace junior employees at STL and/or MCI.



I really don't see where you can bump any TWALLCer at MCI or STL (unless they are junior to you) when they still have 100% of their occ. seniority.

 

[bagsmasher]

In recognition of the above problems, the "juniority" list shall be constructed within each classification subject to furlough in the following fashion. All unprotected employees – all AA employees hired after 3/1/2001 and all former TWA LLC employees – shall be placed on the list in reverse seniority order as determined by their occupational seniority under the Seniority Integration Opinion and Award.


What part of your own post did you not read? "all AA employees hired after 3/1/2001 and all former TWA LLC employees-shall be placed on the list in reverse seniority order" All LLcer's will be on the juniority list, meaning they can be bumped by a system protected employee. All AAer's with 3/1/2001 or better sniority can bump anyone on the juniority list no matter what their occ. seniority. Read it again.

 

[mojo13]

I guess my interpretation of it is different than yours, and I think you are wrong.

 

[bagsmasher]

Do you not understand what the juniority list is? Do you understand what it is used for? Go back and read it again. It says "all former TWA LLC employees - shall be placed on the list in reverse seniority order..." There really isn't any interpretation here. Either you are on the juniority list, or you are not. All LLCer's are on that list. All system protected employees are not, and can use their system protection to bump non-protected employees out.