FCFS Handicapping System

[blue collar]

I do not fly much, but I prefer the D.O.H. system. Seniority is all we have left anymore.

Can you explain how seniority is 'all we have left anymore'?

This may have been the feeling after you went BK, but I thought you guys just ratified a CBA WITH 80-some% voting yes? That would lead me to believe you're happy with the current agreement, and that would make seniority not one of the 'only things left anymore'.

 

[john john]

Can you explain how seniority is 'all we have left anymore'?

This may have been the feeling after you went BK, but I thought you guys just ratified a CBA WITH 80-some% voting yes? That would lead me to believe you're happy with the current agreement, and that would make seniority not one of the 'only things left anymore'.

And the CBA WITH 80-some% voting yes? has DOH for boarding priority for travel benefits

 

[john john]

<>

 

[pjirish317]

And the CBA WITH 80-some% voting yes? has DOH for boarding priority for travel benefits

Yes it is still part of our newly ratified agreement.

 

[pjirish317]

Can you explain how seniority is 'all we have left anymore'?

This may have been the feeling after you went BK, but I thought you guys just ratified a CBA WITH 80-some% voting yes? That would lead me to believe you're happy with the current agreement, and that would make seniority not one of the 'only things left anymore'.

blue,
 
This job has been, and always be, ruled by seniority. By the way you bid your vacations, shifts and days off, to your pay. If you are in a union, all of these things are or should be spelled out in your respective contracts. It just so happens that in our CBA, it states that we board by D.O.H. for on-line non-revenue space availabe travel. For this company to totally disregard that contractual language is appalling. Who's to say that the next contractual vioaltion will be that you bid your vacation and shifts/days off by a FCFS basis. Would that be fair? So yes seniority is all we have left anymore, it rules our everyday lives at work. So are you saying that is is ok to violate the CBA?

 

[pjirish317]

It all boils down to what the arbitrator will rule. If he rules that we stay with FCFS, then so be it, if he rules that D.O.H. boarding is the way it will be, then so be it. But ultimately, the bigger problem is that parker and company have violated the CBA's of both Fleet and Customer Service agents at LUS, with this policy change. And for you all to take his side when you are all represented employees yourselves is shameful. The next time parker and company violate your respective CBA's I guess you should just deal with it then huh. Because that is exactly what you are telling us to do here, is to just "deal with it".

 

[AANOTOK]

It all boils down to what the arbitrator will rule. If he rules that we stay with FCFS, then so be it, if he rules that D.O.H. boarding is the way it will be, then so be it. But ultimately, the bigger problem is that parker and company have violated the CBA's of both Fleet and Customer Service agents at LUS, with this policy change. And for you all to take his side when you are all represented employees yourselves is shameful. The next time parker and company violate your respective CBA's I guess you should just deal with it then huh. Because that is exactly what you are telling us to do here, is to just "deal with it".

Nope, we will grieve it just like your union did. Nobody said it was wrong for your union to file a grievance, what I'm saying is I and the majority of the NEW AA employees prefer FCFS. Let me ask you a question irish. I did not have the opportunity to vote on your contract that allows you to bump me off a flight because of your contract. Why in the world would I need to honor a contract that does not even pertain to me. To be honest, if it were to be settled right, you guys/gals who once worked for US should honor your contracts among yourselves. Board by seniority if that is what your contract calls for. But in no way, shape or form should I have to honor your contract when I had no say in it. Where I worked and still work, AA, it has been a non contractual privilege and continues to be one. Again, to be fair, if it were done right, you and I show up for a flight, we board by FCFS because your contract means nothing to me. If you and another former US employee show up, go by your contract and board by seniority.
 
And I would almost bet the farm that you will never see that DOH boarding scenario in use ever again.

 

[pjirish317]

Nope, we will grieve it just like your union did. Nobody said it was wrong for your union to file a grievance, what I'm saying is I and the majority of the NEW AA employees prefer FCFS. Let me ask you a question irish. I did not have the opportunity to vote on your contract that allows you to bump me off a flight because of your contract. Why in the world would I need to honor a contract that does not even pertain to me. To be honest, if it were to be settled right, you guys/gals who once worked for US should honor your contracts among yourselves. Board by seniority if that is what your contract calls for. But in no way, shape or form should I have to honor your contract when I had no say in it. Where I worked and still work, AA, it has been a non contractual privilege and continues to be one. Again, to be fair, if it were done right, you and I show up for a flight, we board by FCFS because your contract means nothing to me. If you and another former US employee show up, go by your contract and board by seniority.
 
And I would almost bet the farm that you will never see that DOH boarding scenario in use ever again.

AANOTOK,
 
You are absolutely correct, you shouldnt have to honor our CBA. Just like we shouldnt have to go by FCFS, because contractually we board by D.O.H. I agree with you. This falls squarely in parkers lap. What ever the outcome, I have no doubt that you and I will adapt to whichever system is put in place. And it may not be put in another CBA ever again, but what is the company going to be willing to give us to get it out? And what are we going to be willing to accept? Those are the questions. But, yes, I agree we should have remained seperate for Non-Reving until we are actually one airline and all this was settled in JCBA talks and all that. But to elaborate on your scenario, You and I show up for a flight on AA metal, we board by FCFS, We show up for a flight on US metal, we board by D.O.H., or better yet, don't let the LAA employees enjoy travel on LUS, and vice versa.

 

[blue collar]

blue,
 
This job has been, and always be, ruled by seniority. By the way you bid your vacations, shifts and days off, to your pay. If you are in a union, all of these things are or should be spelled out in your respective contracts. It just so happens that in our CBA, it states that we board by D.O.H. for on-line non-revenue space availabe travel. For this company to totally disregard that contractual language is appalling. Who's to say that the next contractual vioaltion will be that you bid your vacation and shifts/days off by a FCFS basis. Would that be fair? So yes seniority is all we have left anymore, it rules our everyday lives at work. So are you saying that is is ok to violate the CBA?

I'm not questioning seniority, I'm questioning your phrase 'that's all we have left anymore'. You still have a pension and you're insourcing work, so I disagree that seniority is 'all you have left'.
I agree that the union should've filed a grievance, but your CBA is contradictory in that it says you will board by DOH, and also you will use the same method as everyone else. Your CBA can't impose a system to be used by all, so which one of your two articles will be violated? The DOH, or the 'same as everyone'? Isn't violating one just as bad as violating the other? As far as people siding with the company, it's not that they're doing it because they're 'company people', it's because they don't want your system imposed on them. I would think that someone in that same situation would be more understanding.

 

[pjirish317]

blue,

Our CBA does not contradict itself. It states we get the same priveleges as established for ALL company personnel. That means that one group can't get more than another. For example, the company can't say that Customer Service agents can get 4 Space Positive passes a year, leaving us not getting them. That is what that section is for. So you are saying it is ok for people to side with the company as long as it benefits them, while being a represented employee? That is the issue. What about the folks that do not want FCFS shoved down their throats? In essence, you are saying it is ok for them to side with the company because they don't agree with it. When you bid your shifts/days off, or vacations, how do you do it? By seniority? What happens if the company wants to do that by a FCFS basis? And a majority of people agree but in your CBA it states they can't? Are you just supposed to accept that because the majority want it? And who should be more understanding here, us or them?

 

[eolesen]

And the CBA WITH 80-some% voting yes? has DOH for boarding priority for travel benefits

Somehow, if CWA would have made that an issue, the agent election might have gone a different direction.

It was actually only about 66% voting yes if you consider the 3300 who didn't bother to vote..

 

What happens if the company wants to do that by a FCFS basis? And a majority of people agree but in your CBA it states they can't? Are you just supposed to accept that because the majority want it? And who should be more understanding here, us or them?

Uh, yeah, if the majority were to push to change to FCFS for bidding or vacation, there's a point where guys who didn't agree would have to just suck it up and accept it, especially if the language changed in the CBA or the union agreed to a side letter.

That's how collective bargaining works. The majority dictates. Just ask the mechanics at AA how that's worked out for them over the past 20 years. The overhaul bases got their way, the line guys didn't.

Your present union probably won't agree to a side letter, but come the JCBA, that language will be gone.

 

[pjirish317]

 

Uh, yeah, if the majority were to vote in FCFS for bidding or vacation, the guys who didn't agree would have to just suck it up and accept it.

That's how voting works.

 
I am not talking about voting on a new CBA, I am talking abuot the company just changing how things are done, that are spelled out in a CBA. Those things are negotiated, and then voted on as a whole CBA, not individually, and certainly not while the CBA is in place.

 

[blue collar]

blue,

Our CBA does not contradict itself. It states we get the same priveleges as established for ALL company personnel. That means that one group can't get more than another. For example, the company can't say that Customer Service agents can get 4 Space Positive passes a year, leaving us not getting them. That is what that section is for. So you are saying it is ok for people to side with the company as long as it benefits them, while being a represented employee? That is the issue. What about the folks that do not want FCFS shoved down their throats? In essence, you are saying it is ok for them to side with the company because they don't agree with it. When you bid your shifts/days off, or vacations, how do you do it? By seniority? What happens if the company wants to do that by a FCFS basis? And a majority of people agree but in your CBA it states they can't? Are you just supposed to accept that because the majority want it? And who should be more understanding here, us or them?

Ok- I don't know the exact language in your CBA, so you cleared up the 'same as everyone else'.
I never said it was ok for them to side with the company because it benefits them- I see it more that the company is siding with them. As far as bidding, yes I bid by seniority. Quit thinking that I'm against you, I've already stated that I agree that it should be grieved. I just don't agree with your statement 'seniority is all we have left' as a justification for DOH boarding.

 

[pjirish317]

 

Somehow, if CWA would have made that an issue, the agent election might have gone a different direction.

It was actually only about 66% voting yes if you consider the 3300 who didn't bother to vote..

 

Uh, yeah, if the majority were to push to change to FCFS for bidding or vacation, there's a point where guys who didn't agree would have to just suck it up and accept it, especially if the language changed in the CBA or the union agreed to a side letter.

That's how collective bargaining works. The majority dictates. Just ask the mechanics at AA how that's worked out for them over the past 20 years. The overhaul bases got their way, the line guys didn't.

Your present union probably won't agree to a side letter, but come the JCBA, that language will be gone.

 
How do you know that, that language will be gone? Can you see the future? Truth is you can't. You want it gone, but it doens't make it factual yet. You, nor I can say for certain what will and will not be in a JCBA.

 

[pjirish317]

blue,

My apologies then. Maybe I used the wrong terminology. I just don't get all the hate for us grieving the issue.