Fleet Service Transition Agreement

[700UW]

The merger was not completed in FEB of 2005, as the grievance as not filed until after the merger was announced and completed the business part.

So it had to go through the four previous steps before arbitration.

And it usually takes nine months to over a year for a grievance to reach arbitration.

Don't let the facts get in your way.

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

The merger was not completed in FEB of 2005, as the grievance as not filed until after the merger was announced and completed the business part.

So it had to go through the four previous steps before arbitration.

And it usually takes nine months to over a year for a grievance to reach arbitration.

Don't let the facts get in your way.

Are you stalking me?

Do you have reading and comprehension problems?

Lets look at a couple examples and heres your latest.

I said "Why was it pushed back to Feb from 2005". So where the heck does this come from...700:"The merger was not completed in FEB of 2005" Where did I say anything about Feb 2005? And please when you answer don't let the facts get in your way.

No how about this one ..you said this

QUOTE(700UW @ Nov 18 2006, 11:32 AM)

The IAM reached an interim agreement which restored 5 additional holidays, double time for OT again, shift differential reinstated, all 757s and 737s to be brought back in-house.

Wages and Pension are still being negotiated.

In which I replied (and you never answered or retracted)

NO restored 5 additional holidays in interim agreement

NO double time for OT again in interim agreement

NO shift differential reinstated in interim agreement

And company will bring in house 757 aircraft for "C" check and 737 series aircraft that are not CURRENTLY (meaning West Aircraft, NOT the currently farmed out East Aircraft) covered under the East CBA.

Agreement

Language

Facts only please.
-----

Hello? Pot meet kettle? Today you dare to say to someone..

Step back and read,

What should have YOU learned today?

1. Don't stalk
2. Learn to read and comprehend YOURSELF before attacking someone else.
3. Don't let the fact get in YOUR way.

What haven't YOU learned today?

1. All of the above.

Class dismissed.

By the way this may be off topic post, I am sure that you will use that ONE again, but when YOU attack and are YOU wrong I will attack your credibility and make it about YOU every time. So go cry to the mods (your standard MO) and don't forget "Don't let the facts get in your way"

 

[700UW]

Don't be surprized if the union sells you out and the "change of control" arbitration case never gets heard. My take is they will settle on a transition agreement and drop the grievance. Why was it pushed back to Feb from 2005?

The case nor the grievance was never pushed back, it has to go through all the steps and third step hearings are usually only scheduled once per quarter and after third step it has to be heard by the review board which only meets a few times a year.

As I said before it can take up to two years for a case to be heard in arbitration.

 

[Richard]

Keep the discussion to the topic, and do NOT let it get personal.

If the sniping continues, the thread will be closed and time off will be granted.

Thank you.

 

[Tim Nelson]

The case nor the grievance was never pushed back, it has to go through all the steps and third step hearings are usually only scheduled once per quarter and after third step it has to be heard by the review board which only meets a few times a year.

As I said before it can take up to two years for a case to be heard in arbitration.

700, I have nothing 'on paper' about the IAM's demands for full restoration of the '22'. Just because there is no proof at this time doesn't mean my source isn't accurate.

And why doesn't the IAM tell its members about the company's latest position instead of putting out rhetoric lambasting company officers? Why don't they stay professional instead of slamming Hemmingway? It shows a weak hand when one has to revert to 'hiding info' and slamming an individual.

Regarding the '22' and dropped charges, I think the proper course is the grievance procedure and arbitration where they should have a reasonable chance, as opposed to holding fleet service entire hostage by getting the '22' their jobs back 'guaranteed' but with big cost.

Regarding the change of control grievance, I applaud the IAm's position of not selling out 'yet', but unfortunately, the IAM's character precedes it and does not permit them to follow through with the grievance. Unfortunately, forecast indicators show a sellout is coming. Delta offers options to misrepresentation once the 10th sellout occurs and if the IAM doesn't solidfy things they will pay a 'painful' price of more lost members.

regards,

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

The case nor the grievance was never pushed back, it has to go through all the steps and third step hearings are usually only scheduled once per quarter and after third step it has to be heard by the review board which only meets a few times a year.

As I said before it can take up to two years for a case to be heard in arbitration.

Ok I'll accept that. This isn't directed at you but if the union would keep membership up to date on whats happening maybe things would be more clear.

On what date in Feb is the arbitration hearing scheduled and is it on one day or several? Is that the final stage before arbitrator(1 or 3 arbitrators?) makes decision. How long after the hearing will the decision come down?

That was a good direct response. I applaud you. No talking down, no smart remarks and no taking it personal type attacks. I look forward to more posts like this from you. It is like night and day. Much more believable and enjoyable to read. Thanks

I don't mean this as a snipe post

 

[700UW]

I am not sure it is probably a two dayer.

Arbitrations are always three members, a union chosen member, a company chosen member and a mutually agreed arbitor.

Basically the aribtor is the one who decides the case and writes the decision as the union member votes for the union, the company member votes for the company and the arbitor is the independant.

It can take a month or it can take six months for the decision to be rendered and written.

 

[700UW]

First, several calls and emails have been received concerning the language in the first “Whereasâ€￾ on the interim agreement and any affect that may have on our change of control grievance. Bill told the callers that this issue was the first issue raised by the transition team to the company. With the entire team taking notes on the conversation, the company agreed this has no bearing on their position of the change of control. We agreed to disagree and let the arbitrator decide the issue. The arbitration is scheduled to be heard by Arbitrator Richard Block (the same arbitrator we had on the Airbus grievance) on February 26, 27 & 28, 2007.

There have been rumors that we are considering trading the change of control grievance in exchange for bringing back utility workers. That is not the case – see above – that case is scheduled to be heard February 26, 27 & 28, 2007.

 

[diogenes]

Let's review some recent history.

In the days after 9/11/2001 US Airways sent many employees home out of seniority order, basing their reasoning on the force majeure contract clause. Every union on the property experienced this injustice.

Every union compiled compelling information to buttress their grievances, and promised their membership they would arbitrate the cases.

Every union dropped the F.M. cases during the BK negotiations, and the membership received bupkis.

So why is it out of bounds to speculate histroy may repeat itself? The fact US can't hide behind a BK judge's skirts is of itself unconvincing. There is a reasonable chance if the company dangles the right new and shiny object before the N.C., the change of control arb will disappear like a fart in a whirlwind.

If anybody is laying odds and taking bets, let me know.

I'd bet the unions find a good 'reason' to drop the case.

 

[longing4piedmont]

There have been rumors that we are considering trading the change of control grievance in exchange for bringing back utility workers.

We? I'm confused.....

 

[Harry Callahan]

We? I'm confused.....

l4pi.....you crack me up.

 

[700UW]

Stirring the pot huh?

Well the update I posted is from the Grievance Committee Chairmen's weekly conference call, it was written by the PIT Grievance Chairman, not I.

FM grievances were pre-petition claims that the members voted on in the CBA to accept the CBA which contained the terms to drop the FM Grievances.

And if you followed the 9/11 FM grievance not one union won one.

 

[insp89]

Let's review some recent history.

In the days after 9/11/2001 US Airways sent many employees home out of seniority order, basing their reasoning on the force majeure contract clause. Every union on the property experienced this injustice.

Every union compiled compelling information to buttress their grievances, and promised their membership they would arbitrate the cases.

Every union dropped the F.M. cases during the BK negotiations, and the membership received bupkis.

So why is it out of bounds to speculate histroy may repeat itself? The fact US can't hide behind a BK judge's skirts is of itself unconvincing. There is a reasonable chance if the company dangles the right new and shiny object before the N.C., the change of control arb will disappear like a fart in a whirlwind.

If anybody is laying odds and taking bets, let me know.

I'd bet the unions find a good 'reason' to drop the case.

diogenes,
While I would like to think that the IAM is SERIOUS about defending the Successorship Language,
I, like you, have my doubts.
Your review of the Force Majeure does not give a member confidence in the IAM's ability to represent the membership in a fair and equitable manner. [Not to mention common sense].
The IAM AGC's that represented Mechanics in PIT. and CLT. could NOT even agree among themselves how to handle the Force Majeure situation..
Instead of getting off their REAR ENDS and picking up a phone and coming to a UNIFIED decision, The AGC's in PIT made a sweetheart deal with the company that resulted in Mechanics being called back to work in a matter of DAYS.
While this was going on, The AGC's in CLT decided to handle it the "Right" way...which meant mechanics in CLT Remained LAID OFF out of seniority for WEEKS while their union brothers in PIT were back to work..
I would like to think that the IAM AGC's learned something from their UNEQUAL representation of the membership. BUT, I doubt it. NO ONE from the IAM has attempted to right this wrong..
So, the same situation STILL exists, The IAM is NOT a Unified union, What we STILL have is [IAM North] and [IAM South]. Sad but True.. :rant:

 

[runner12k]

If you become unemployed you will be able to spend alot of extra time with family

 

[insp89]

If you become unemployed you will be able to spend alot of extra time with family

?? Would you care to expand on your statement? :blink: