robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
Apparently so orgac and i agree with you and with wings...
Feb / Mar 2013 IAM Fleet Service Discussions
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
- Status
ChockJockey
Veteran
- Dec 18, 2008
- 1,393
- 1,350
Most people are uninformed or uninterested in which cities are in-house and which are not. If they're presented with a contract that at face looks like an improvement to them, with only a vague notion that by taking it some positions may be lost down the road somewhere, they're likely to vote for it and not give it a thought.
Now if in the case of this UA TA, if someone were to put on a map those stations facing the chop and the number of positions there, with a grand total (as well as that total as a percentage of union jobs lost, and hence loss in percentage of bargaining power), you'd have a graphical summation that makes clear the consequences of voting for that agreement. So long as people choose to be ignorant or are kept ignorant to the consequences of their vote they will pay them no mind. Of course, the union that negotiated that farce of a contract and is endorsing it can't be trusted/expected to produce such materials that open it to criticism.
Now if in the case of this UA TA, if someone were to put on a map those stations facing the chop and the number of positions there, with a grand total (as well as that total as a percentage of union jobs lost, and hence loss in percentage of bargaining power), you'd have a graphical summation that makes clear the consequences of voting for that agreement. So long as people choose to be ignorant or are kept ignorant to the consequences of their vote they will pay them no mind. Of course, the union that negotiated that farce of a contract and is endorsing it can't be trusted/expected to produce such materials that open it to criticism.
ograc
Veteran
- Jan 30, 2012
- 1,868
- 1,624
I'm going to remain optomistic and hope the membership at UA, by the outcome of the vote, says what the district should have said... Hell No!
ograc
Veteran
- Jan 30, 2012
- 1,868
- 1,624
If it is... then a lot of the membership and especially District 141 has learned nothing from history. They continue to voluntarily conceed members' jobs. A practice that goes against the very grain of unionism. The current path we are on leads to self destruction. An end to good, union represented, Fleet Service careers in the airline industry. The way I see it... TAs, such as the one reached at UA with DL 141, only expedite the process.
Why not DOH for IAM
http://www.iam141.mobi/docs/Javits.pdf
http://www.iam141.mobi/docs/Javits.pdf
ograc
Veteran
- Jan 30, 2012
- 1,868
- 1,624
This is exactly why the District, must act in the best interest of the members, and say "Hell No this proposal does not even warrant a tentative agreement and subsequent vote by the membership." How many times will the district allow themselves to be played? You would think they would have learned by now. In the meantime they continue to lose members and scratch their heads as to why. But, then again... in the meantime none of them are directly affected... so it's OK.
Tim Nelson
Veteran
141 rising approved the following in the United Agreement: 1. Outsourcing of all stations effective 2016, with the exception of 7 hubs. 2. Unlimited part time 3. Unlimited split shifts of full time positions. 4 abolishment of free health care and a shift to the second most expensive health care contribution in the industry [makes US AIRWAYS health care look fantastic]. 5. a signing bonus that goes to the IAM to dispurse as it pleases. 6. a Buyout plan that is not in the TA. 7. a pay raise of only 5.5%-11.5% over the last 4 years. 8. A pay freeze for the immediate 3 years after any ratification. 9 insertion of a 40 hour qualifier for full timers regarding overtime on days off. 10. a refusal to handle seniority until after a ratification so nobody will know what the hell sorta seniority they will have. Instead of using a seniority integration committee and incorporating it, 141 rising opted to hire a law firm and punt seniority to a 3rd party. One only look at the US AIRWAYS pilots to see just how well 3rd parties do. This is now the second contract that 141 rising has signed, i.e., Hawaiian and United contracts and they have their eyes on the prize of blowing up the US AIRWAYS contract now. regards,
Tim Nelson
Veteran
John John, The IAM opted to send the question of seniority to a law firm and have a 3rd party answer the question. Previously, the 141 rising leadership said that a seniority integration team made up of members would handle it then it would be a part of a vote in a ta. Every time their lips are moving, they are lying. Of course, we know what happens to seniority when it goes to 3rd parties if we look at your pilot group. The Teamsters have a few thousand cards signed at United and gaining steam from what I understand. In return, it has put substantial pressure on the IAM which seems to be crumbling so in desperation they decided to make a raid on your group against the IBT/CWA in an attempt to get the IBT to back off of the United ramp. IMO, when one compares the upstairs contract against the suck IAM contract at US AIRWAYS ramp, one can not deny that the IBT/CWA contract is vastly superior to the profit sharingless contract on the ramp. If any US AIRWAYS passenger service members have any questions regarding the IAM ramp contract then please don't hesitate to ask. regards,
Tim Nelson
Veteran
PJ, quit believing lies and quit passing lies onward! Quit allowing your AGC to continue blowing smoke up your %$#^. Those guys are making you a liar. The entire eboard supports the UA TA. Don't believe me, kindly listen to the latest video by your boy Delaney. Entire District Lodge 141 Board supports agreement. regards,
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
I SURE WOULD VOTE NO TO THAT POS UAL CONTRACT..... i will vote no on any contract that has outsourcing period thats a horrible contract
Tim Nelson
Veteran
The problem is that these anti union 141 rising folks build fear by becoming the company mouthpiece and misinforming folks that if they vote no then everyone will lose their job.
ograc
Veteran
- Jan 30, 2012
- 1,868
- 1,624
robbedagain,
I wish just the majority of our members had your insight and fortitude. If that were the case we wouldn't be in the mess were in right now. I see this UA TA as setting the bar for our contract negotiations. If it's ratified I see a light at the end of our tunnel. The light of an oncoming train. One major concern I have with the UA vote though is if the majority vote it down will they have the wisdom to send it back with a strong stike vote. Let's not forget the former CO people have never been union and are very new to the process. Even the mention of the word strike could send many running for the hills. The IAM had better aggressively educate the former CO employees how critical the strike vote is and what it means. The District will do that won't they?
Tim Nelson
Veteran
John John, actually the IAM bosses said otherwise when on the political trail. The video below shows Bartz and Delaney telling members that seniority would be done by a group of members from both airlines and then when they complete that, they would bring it out for a vote. Follow the video and especially at the 3:00 mark. Of course, the exact opposite happened where Delaney opted to restrict the membership from the question of seniority and shift it to a law firm and have a 3rd party determine it with an arbitrator. "Bring it out for a vote" [his words, not mine] . Yet all of the US AIRWAYS AGC"s and their supporters still support Delaney. regards,
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
Orgac the simple fact is people need to read the entire t/a i dont want to speculate on the strike thing but i think a strike vote should be held and if done right way a loud vote for strike should truly send the message enough is enough the company is making money we should too no more outsourcing.. ive been in a station that was mainline... mainline express back to mainline... then outsourced.... i think if most of them folks been in the same boat or similar may be they would understand.... rest assure i will always turn down any contract offer that has outsourcing in it esp to the tune of what ual has.. and as you said its going to be a wait n see approach if the newly co folks run for the hills or else
- Status
