District 141 Meets with United, Secures Wage Increases for Members Working Under Modified Contracts

[Kev3188]

Afternoon people will be over $30.00 because they have shift differential.

How much will the loss of longevity pay offset any increases? Not exactly a junior group over at the U...

 

[WeAAsles]

Never said any of that...
Want no part of the outmoded outgunned "leadership" we see at 141...

Well that's what you got. So from where I sit right now it's either them or nothing? You're choice? But your certainly not going to change anything from the outside looking in. Get in first and then maybe you can effect change?

 

[T5towbar]

I've had some discussions with some higher District officials when they came to the hub yesterday. They have been answering questions and explaining the changes in this TA.
The reason why they did not nclude caps, because the company and the District was supposed to use the LOA #5 the Full Time Commitment Letter. Jeff violated and went around the letter in creative ways. And the operation fell apart. Since we are hiring in places now, the company promised to agree and honor LOA 5. We know it is not in writing, but it was promised and explained that the company will not destroy the operation in that kind of manner.

Other issues was explained to me as well. Such as OT and Shift Con (now known as Task Completion) Supervisors will not be able to use the gray area in this and abuse it. Everything is in plain language. A lot of the 9 and 10 year guys (there are many in my hub) are a bit upset about the extra year. And some griping about losing longevity. But there are many positives from what we presently have and there shouldn't be any surprises in the changes. The District understands the skepticism. And the company as well. Out Packages will be discussed after signing.

I don't see too many alternatives, and now that the hedge funders will be given seats on the BOD, who knows what happens next.

 

[Kev3188]

You're conflating 141 with the IAM as a whole. That would be like me saying you have to like Jim Little if you want any part of the TWU (yes, I know he's long gone. Humor me.).

We've been told we'll be in 142 anyway...

 

[WeAAsles]

How much will the loss of longevity pay offset any increases? Not exactly a junior group over at the U...

We'll talk total max TOS. A 30 year guy with longevity gets an extra .75 in longevity. Their current next raise if they vote no will be $25.86 on 11/15. If they vote this in on 11/15 they'll go up to $29.87

An increase of $4.01 - .75 = $3.26 more per hour.

$521.60 more per month
$6259.20 more per year

Not including the added Pension increase and the addition to their 3% 401k match.

And before you maybe point it out again. That is for a FT employee with 30 years working the minimum 40 hours per week.

How many years would you suspect the average member has who is not getting the max longevity?

http://iam141.org/docs/2013-2016%20FLEET%20SERVICE%20EMPLOYEES.pdf

 

[Kev3188]

It was a rhetorical question; I did the math this morning.

What'd the membership get back I return? Any idea?

 

[Worldport]

I've had some discussions with some higher District officials when they came to the hub yesterday. They have been answering questions and explaining the changes in this TA.
The reason why they did not nclude caps, because the company and the District was supposed to use the LOA #5 the Full Time Commitment Letter. Jeff violated and went around the letter in creative ways. And the operation fell apart. Since we are hiring in places now, the company promised to agree and honor LOA 5. We know it is not in writing, but it was promised and explained that the company will not destroy the operation in that kind of manner.

Other issues was explained to me as well. Such as OT and Shift Con (now known as Task Completion) Supervisors will not be able to use the gray area in this and abuse it. Everything is in plain language. A lot of the 9 and 10 year guys (there are many in my hub) are a bit upset about the extra year. And some griping about losing longevity. But there are many positives from what we presently have and there shouldn't be any surprises in the changes. The District understands the skepticism. And the company as well. Out Packages will be discussed after signing.

I don't see too many alternatives, and now that the hedge funders will be given seats on the BOD, who knows what happens next.

So T you think it will pass?

 

[WeAAsles]

I've had some discussions with some higher District officials when they came to the hub yesterday. They have been answering questions and explaining the changes in this TA.
The reason why they did not nclude caps, because the company and the District was supposed to use the LOA #5 the Full Time Commitment Letter. Jeff violated and went around the letter in creative ways. And the operation fell apart. Since we are hiring in places now, the company promised to agree and honor LOA 5. We know it is not in writing, but it was promised and explained that the company will not destroy the operation in that kind of manner.
Other issues was explained to me as well. Such as OT and Shift Con (now known as Task Completion) Supervisors will not be able to use the gray area in this and abuse it. Everything is in plain language. A lot of the 9 and 10 year guys (there are many in my hub) are a bit upset about the extra year. And some griping about losing longevity. But there are many positives from what we presently have and there shouldn't be any surprises in the changes. The District understands the skepticism. And the company as well. Out Packages will be discussed after signing.
I don't see too many alternatives, and now that the hedge funders will be given seats on the BOD, who knows what happens next.

Thank you again T5. So are you now saying that you are hesitantly supportive of the deal?

 

[WeAAsles]

It was a rhetorical question; I did the math this morning.
What'd the membership get back I return? Any idea?

I don't deal in rhetorical Kev. You've obviously seen that I have a penchant for posting the facts and numbers.

It seems that T5's worst nuclear fears have been at least partially alleviated? I'm hopeing that as more members like him seek out the facts without the rhetoric or hyperbole they'll also see the deal for what it's truly worth?

 

[xUT]

I don't deal in rhetorical Kev. You've obviously seen that I have a penchant for posting the facts and numbers.

It seems that T5's worst nuclear fears have been at least partially alleviated? I'm hopeing that as more members like him seek out the facts without the rhetoric or hyperbole they'll also see the deal for what it's truly worth?

 
Dude, you must be a snake oil salesman.
If any one believes your hyperbole then the onus is on them.
But you are entertaining...

 

[Worldport]

 
Dude, you must be a snake oil salesman.
If any one believes your hyperbole then the onus is on them.
But you are entertaining...

You Know I only have a couple of hundred posts I think I can learn a lot from you

 

[WeAAsles]

You're conflating 141 with the IAM as a whole. That would be like me saying you have to like Jim Little if you want any part of the TWU (yes, I know he's long gone. Humor me.).
We've been told we'll be in 142 anyway...

I just want to see you organized Kev. The political crapola can take center stage if you want after you get in.

Kapeesh?

 

[WeAAsles]

Dude, you must be a snake oil salesman.
If any one believes your hyperbole then the onus is on them.
But you are entertaining...

Wash, rinse, repeat. Wash, rinse repeat. Same premise in a good circle jerk.

 

[Kev3188]

I don't deal in rhetorical Kev. You've obviously seen that I have a penchant for posting the facts and numbers.

Great. Any idea what the total cost for losing longevity is? What will the membership gain in return?

 

[Kev3188]

I just want to see you organized Kev. The political crapola can take center stage if you want after you get in.

Kapeesh?

Tell that to Klemm, Bartz, and co.

They're the ones making the climb over here a bit steeper...