Fleet Service Goes from Bad to worse (MERGED TOPICS)

[Jester]

Mr. Nelson,

I am a newbie to the Board and appreciate your stated efforts to other ramp agents over the decades. I am a part-time ramper at one of the two West hubs, so allow me to take what is most of our point of view as to a new contract.

First, what you call a "east sides bankrupt contract" looks pretty damn good to those on the West. For many it would mean a near 50% increase in hourly pay, and no surprise that PHX and LAS voted in favor of it.

Second, if the last vote was over change in control, why was the West voting on the matter since this had to do with the East and what they signed during bankruptcy?

Third, why should East care if West gets the same existing contract? Why would East begrudge wage equality and why should East be allowed to vote on it? I would be very happy if "Boss Canale" and Parker agreed to something along these lines and force it without a vote. They can "force" my pay up on their own any time as far as I am concerned.

Fourth, while you say "screw the transition until it gives fleet service workers everywhere a fair and equitable contract", you are screwing the West ramp agents in the process. Because we continue to work under an awful TWU contract which takes six years to earn $10/hour and in the meanwhile, Easties are doing far better with their wage scale relative to West and will continue to so until this entire issue is resolved perhaps years later.


For all the calls of unity, what I am seeing is a majority (East) looking out for itself as the expense of the minority (West). While I understand the East voting against the TA as there was the carrot of a huge payoff of a favorable CIC ruling (which by the way, I think the IAM will lose) and the option of a small increase in pay vs. the roll of the dice for a CIC, the East had little to lose by voting "No." Make the CIC ruling conditional that if the IAM loses the CIC then East must assume the current West TWU pay scale and there would be overwhelming vote in favor of TA ratification!

Please explain why you are against West receiving the "bankrupt contract" especially if the West desires it? This doesn't change the Company's need for a unified work force, nor does it affect the existing CIC issue, nor does it effect future contract negotiations. If nothing else it appears to be at worse vindictive and petty and at best to be a lever of many angry Westies against Parker, but West knows who voted against the TA when offered and who seems to be against wage equality within your own statements without a requirement of quid pro quo for Easties. I know that I feel as if I am a tool to East to get what they can for their own benefit, and if I just happen to get a piece of the action, then I guess that's okay with them. What makes me nervous is what I'll call "The Son of Class 2 Stations" where a majority can sacrifice a minority for the majority's benefit within the union while calling for Unity.

Before I am dismissed as either an IAM or corporate flunky or someone who new to the ramp, I am not part of either IAM except as rank and file member, nor ever held any management position within the Company, and I have been a ramp agent for nearly a decade.

Jester

 

[orioleman]

Jester,
You say you have been a ramper for more than a decade.. SO you must have had a vote in your TWU election to bring you these crappy wages

. I feel for ya .. but don't begrudge the east for voting down a crappy contract .. just so you can benefit from a better contract . that you voted in to begin with ..

 

[Tim Nelson]

Mr. Nelson,

I am a newbie to the Board and appreciate your stated efforts to other ramp agents over the decades. I am a part-time ramper at one of the two West hubs, so allow me to take what is most of our point of view as to a new contract.

First, what you call a "east sides bankrupt contract" looks pretty damn good to those on the West. For many it would mean a near 50% increase in hourly pay, and no surprise that PHX and LAS voted in favor of it.

Second, if the last vote was over change in control, why was the West voting on the matter since this had to do with the East and what they signed during bankruptcy?

Third, why should East care if West gets the same existing contract? Why would East begrudge wage equality and why should East be allowed to vote on it? I would be very happy if "Boss Canale" and Parker agreed to something along these lines and force it without a vote. They can "force" my pay up on their own any time as far as I am concerned.

Fourth, while you say "screw the transition until it gives fleet service workers everywhere a fair and equitable contract", you are screwing the West ramp agents in the process. Because we continue to work under an awful TWU contract which takes six years to earn $10/hour and in the meanwhile, Easties are doing far better with their wage scale relative to West and will continue to so until this entire issue is resolved perhaps years later.
For all the calls of unity, what I am seeing is a majority (East) looking out for itself as the expense of the minority (West). While I understand the East voting against the TA as there was the carrot of a huge payoff of a favorable CIC ruling (which by the way, I think the IAM will lose) and the option of a small increase in pay vs. the roll of the dice for a CIC, the East had little to lose by voting "No." Make the CIC ruling conditional that if the IAM loses the CIC then East must assume the current West TWU pay scale and there would be overwhelming vote in favor of TA ratification!

Please explain why you are against West receiving the "bankrupt contract" especially if the West desires it? This doesn't change the Company's need for a unified work force, nor does it affect the existing CIC issue, nor does it effect future contract negotiations. If nothing else it appears to be at worse vindictive and petty and at best to be a lever of many angry Westies against Parker, but West knows who voted against the TA when offered and who seems to be against wage equality within your own statements without a requirement of quid pro quo for Easties. I know that I feel as if I am a tool to East to get what they can for their own benefit, and if I just happen to get a piece of the action, then I guess that's okay with them. What makes me nervous is what I'll call "The Son of Class 2 Stations" where a majority can sacrifice a minority for the majority's benefit within the union while calling for Unity.

Before I am dismissed as either an IAM or corporate flunky or someone who new to the ramp, I am not part of either IAM except as rank and file member, nor ever held any management position within the Company, and I have been a ramp agent for nearly a decade.

Jester

Each of your questions are outstanding and well thought out. Thanks for asking them. Today is a family day for me. I'll answer your questions tomorrow. Interesting discussion indeed.

regards,

 

[phlforce]

Hi Everyone,
All I have to say is I hope the police will be present Oct.2nd

 

[Harry Callahan]

Hi Everyone,
All I have to say is I hope police will be present Oct.2nd

What did I miss?

 

[phlforce]

What did I miss?

All the big shots from the IAM will be at PHL union hall oct 2nd. WE HOPE!!!!

 

[phlforce]

Tim,
I think we will be UNITED AIRWAYS by the end of 2009. Do you think that deal is in the works? Would it be good for us?
United / Usair merge?

 

[phlforce]

:blink:

 

[Henderfuzz]

Jester I think that many of what you state is very good and I fully understand why you feel left out.
Look the guys in the East hubs took control of this vote and made sure it would go down in flames.
As an east class II guy Im truly tired of the way they treat us as well. They made sure they voted in this junk contract in the first place that created the 2 pay scales than just when we had a chance to reagain some of the money we lost they screwed us again.
I really dont think that the IAM sold us out on this deal as is being spouted on this forum but there are many people here who just cant wait to see the IAM go. I work side by side west guys in my station and I know what they have suffered thru over the last few years and it would have been a welcomed change for them had this gone thru.
You see most guys in the hubs have no clue what the medium size cities deal with.
We do twice the work they do and yet get less pay and yet they still feel we dont desreve it.
Tim speaks of a fair and equitable contract. Im not sure what exactly he means but just remember
every item in a contract has a money value know matter what it is thats why you cant just get everything you want.
The offer we got was fair considering what we have now and by the time the CIC is overwith it will be 2012 before we have a new one anyway.

 

[orioleman]

fuzz,
you say the hubs screwed you out of this and out of that .. WE DIDN'T come up with the class II status .. THE IAM AND COMPANY DID.
YOU continue to say the HUBS screwed the class II.. ISN'T that what YOU are doing by voting YES and allowing the CO to contract your beloved class II cities in 2011.. I really wish you would stop blaming everybody else that doesn't agree with you .. its getting real tired
if you can't come to the table with something other than the hubs screwed me . the go read a book or something.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Jester, I will answer your questions in blue ink.

Jester sez, "... if the last vote was over change in control, why was the West voting on the matter since this had to do with the East and what they signed during bankruptcy?
The last vote was not over a COC. If it was over the COC, which is a grievance, then you would have no business voting. Period. You voted because the TA was not a vote for or against any east side greivance. The IAM has repeatedly lied to you folks when they said this was a vote for or against the COC. Look at the PIT town hall and listen to what the IAM negotiator said in front of his PIT members when talking about the 'vote'. The IAM sez one thing to the east siders, then sez something entirely different out west. The IAM puts forth this big image of the COC in an effort to divide east against west and deceive you in a devilish scheme as it appeases Parker with the transition agreement he desperately needs. Remember, the IAM gets nothing in a COC and also lost its newly coveted and negotiated positive space travel when the TA got voted down. Parker appeased the IAM and the IAM appeased Parker.

Here are the facts about the COC. Unlike what the IAM is telling you, the COC does involve the west. I'll say it again, it does involve the west. The reason is that if the COC is won then Parker still needs to transition the west into the east contract. Parker himself acknowledged this in the PHX town hall meeting. Watch it again, but listen this time. Explicitly, he rightfully recognizes the worth of the COC grievance at $625million [specifically $627million] and includes the west as participants in this grievance award through a transition agreement. Notice, the COC is worth only $439million when the 'east' fleet service & Mechanics are included, BUT when the west Mechanics and fleet service are added to the award the number swells to $627million. This is a fact and was presented in the official court documents. So the question is, why does Parker need a transition agreement?
Parker said it best in the PHX town hall meeting, "We need to get to one contract for the company well being." The problem for Parker, without a transition agreement, is that it becomes extremely difficult to raise future investment in the company, i.e., merger, etc. Boss Canale even understands this and said, "“US AIRWAYS can not participate in another merger until it has agreements in place with the machinists union.â€
But you may ask, "Tim, Parker didn't transition us and still went after Delta, so what's keeping him from going after United or vice versa?"
Even with the Delta bid, Parker was asked about transition and he said on December 7, 2006 regarding the Delta merger, “…the synergies [cost savings] are best when operations combine…one set of labor contracts…â€
My point is that Parker needs a transition and if the COC is won, then the only way he will get a transition is to transition the west into the east pay rates, or if the IAM agrees to another 'deal'. So a COC win, deeply affects the west as it increases the leverage bigtime. Again, Parker recognizes this in court documents and also his statements in the PHX town hall meeting. It was no slip of the tongue, if he didn't think you had a stake in the COC, HE WOULD NOT HAVE INCLUDED YOU IN WITH THE MONETARY NUMBERS. Watch the tape and understand what the numbers represent that he rattles off. Parker knows he needs a transition in the worst way, you should too. That's why I say screw transition until there is an equitable agreement.

Jester sez, "why should East care if West gets the same existing contract? Why would East begrudge wage equality and why should East be allowed to vote on it? I would be very happy if "Boss Canale" and Parker agreed to something along these lines and force it without a vote. They can "force" my pay up on their own any time as far as I am concerned.
The TA had what I call 'wage bait' in it. There was a hook in that wage for the westies. If the west would have bit then the geographic pay would have been lost, shift differ lost, holidays lost, double time gone, Holiday pay gone, 19 stations gone through time bomb negotiations, section 6 gone, sick pay gone, insurance spikes, profit sharing gone, COC gone, and about another half dozen things.
Why would east care? Because the east/west have the transition card in their hands right now and to lay down that 'solid' card for some gains and alot of losses is the equivalent to treason against all workers. East doesn't begrudge wage equality. I know many east siders who top out at $15.60 and still voted against the contract because the contract sucked. ORD voted against it 85% and they aren't making any more than topped out workers in PHX. There are 1,000 east siders who are on the second class wage scale. As you know, the TA was about alot more than wage equality.

Jester sez, "Fourth, while you say "screw the transition until it gives fleet service workers everywhere a fair and equitable contract", you are screwing the West ramp agents in the process.
I'm not screwing the west, the IAM's screwing you guys over. You want to talk about a fair and equitable contract then you do your part and start forcing the IAM to enforce section 6 over there, instead of allowing the IAM to sit on its deadwood butt like it's been doing over there out west for 18 months now. What is a fair and equitable contract? It has everything to do with context and in this context your company has the NUMBER 1 profit margin in the airline industry over the past 12 months. It is on a pace that could clip close to $1billion pre tax. It has 3.5 billion in the bank and is so filthy rich that it was going to buy Delta airlines. It just brought on 3 more VP's. The IAM also just hired some more AGC's in the $100,000 club and is taking care of itself. Don't you think you deserve some respect and shouldn't lose anything in these times? You should gain in these times! That's why the whole fleet service group, collectively, sent Boss Canale back to his Boss, Parker with a big voice saying, "Stick this cheesy, no good, piss clam agreement, where the sun doesn't shine."
That's why I say screw transition, because it was unfair and until Parker/Canale gives workers what they rightfully deserve then Parker isn't going to have a transitioned company. Do you think Fleet service gives a rip about transition if there's not much in it for them? Hell no they don't.
Fleet service isn't compelled to vote on ANY transition without at first obtaining a fair transition.

I can tell you this, a fair and equitable transition in this context means that you start by protecting what is already yours. You don't agree with Parker to time bomb protections that turn over the hour glass on 19 west coast stations. You don't agree with Parker to give out IOU snapbacks you don't receive, you make sure you receive your snapbacks upon signing. IOU's are just that. You sacrificed because your company was in a time of need. Now is the time to make the sacrifces whole again. You don't agree to throw away things you already negotiated that have worth...keep things of worth that you already negotiated like the profit sharing, the COC, this stuff has already been negotiated and it should be non-negotiable. You don't agree with Parker to stretch the wage scale to 12 years like the IAM did. Only a punk would do that in this context. You keep the duration intact instead of extending the duration 2 more years. So that's a starting point then you start from there and start adding, start with the wage. If Parker doesn't want to work out these items then to hell with transition. Know what I mean?

Jester sez, "Please explain why you are against West receiving the "bankrupt contract" especially if the West desires it?


I believe the american way is to vote on it. That's what I believe. If you or the IAM want to use the east siders as 'cut out figures' and not have a vote then I think that is not only profane but incredibly unfair.

regards,

 

[Henderfuzz]

fuzz,
you say the hubs screwed you out of this and out of that .. WE DIDN'T come up with the class II status .. THE IAM AND COMPANY DID.
YOU continue to say the HUBS screwed the class II.. ISN'T that what YOU are doing by voting YES and allowing the CO to contract your beloved class II cities in 2011.. I really wish you would stop blaming everybody else that doesn't agree with you .. its getting real tired
if you can't come to the table with something other than the hubs screwed me . the go read a book or something.

Excuse me but did you vote yes on the current contract? If you did than you and everyone who did voted to cut my pay more than you in the hubs you also made sure we could get contracted out.
As far as the T/A that would provide the company to contract out more cities if we win the airbatration this current contract will remain which means since the company would accrue more cost than I dont think they would hesitate to make good on those cities in there and begin contracting them out. What would stop them its in this contract that we will keep.
Do you really beleive that if we win and gain better pay that the company is going to come running to us to get a new contract. I doubt it, this current contract saves them money even with higher pay.

 

[dbcooper]

All the big shots from the IAM will be at PHL union hall oct 2nd. WE HOPE!!!!

Is that true that they will be at the union hall, or will they be encamped in a hotel with tight security that will screen those that do show up? Anyone know for sure what the arrangements are?

 

[orioleman]

Excuse me but did you vote yes on the current contract? If you did than you and everyone who did voted to cut my pay more than you in the hubs you also made sure we could get contracted out.
As far as the T/A that would provide the company to contract out more cities if we win the airbatration this current contract will remain which means since the company would accrue more cost than I dont think they would hesitate to make good on those cities in there and begin contracting them out. What would stop them its in this contract that we will keep.
Do you really beleive that if we win and gain better pay that the company is going to come running to us to get a new contract. I doubt it, this current contract saves them money even with higher pay.

to answer your question.. I voted NO . You know may position , reread your own message . you contradict yourself " IF you did than you and everyone who did voted to cut my pay more than you in the hubs you also made sure we could get contracted out".. DUDE your the one who said you were the only one in your station that voted YES.. IF you read your current contract vs what was proposed the cutting of more citys would only occur if the number of flts decreased . and with the new proposal that number of flights is less. Your right about one thing the company won't be running back to get at t/a they will be sprinting. because they don't want to pay 21.00 an hr for the next 2 or 3 yrs. so there will be back to try and lower that hr rate.. Break down the difference between what the "company is saving with this current contract with higher pay vs the b...s... t/a they proposed. I would be interested to see your spin on this..

 

[lithuanian]

I know Brickner as being a 35 yr employee of the IAM. I have gotten mail from him and he says the locals have to report their results to him. He is probably the AFL-CIO Airline Co Ordinate. He is the International' head person into relations with airlines. I never thought we'd have to dig this hard. I also think America West Airlines are now becoming nothing at all special. We will have to fight to NOT become nothings into and after the COC.