IAM 141 TA discussion

[freedom]

Here is the 2 options that I see playing out.
Option 1- The same T/A with the IOU's on the front end, no waiting 6 months to get our raises, and we stiil have to give back profit sharing, and still $19.00 an hr.
Option 2- The I'll Ask Management sez that no agreement could be reached, more talks being scheduled.

JMO though

Option 2 is not an option :rant:

 

[Tim Nelson]

everyone seems to think that where going to get to vote on this, I think the union is going to shove this T/A down our throats!

IMO, you will be voting on a new TA because it would be a political disaster for Canale to bring back a TA without a vote. Him and his whole ticket would lose in a mighty way if that happened and he knows that. So I certainly think you will be voting. Remember, this is election year and Canale's term is up, and a 'solid' team is running against him and his slate. Competiton is good.

Any TA without a vote would 'doom' his slate. The good thing is that there is fire under his butt and my foot is so far up his butt that I can't seem to get it out. So I know he'll bring it back for a vote.
In conclusion, political suicide for him to bring back a TA without a vote. That being said, I have heard that is exactly what he's telling the west, but remember, when his lips are moving, he's lying. Expect a vote and if he does otherwise, 'he and his stooges gone'....'soon enough'.



regards,

Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chair, Chicago

 

[necigrad]

There is only two ways/perspectives this TA can be "shoved" through. One is for the TA to be "OK, we'll just merge the West guys to the East contract. The second way is for the TA to be substantially East favored and for the East to support it. Any other type of agreement won't go through unless it's reasonable. Any "substantial" change requires a vote. Any agreement that doesn't give substantial favor to the East won't get passed either. Persoanlly I'm expecting a similar but slightly poorer TA then the last.

 

[pjirish317]

Option 2 is not an option :rant:

It very well could be. So get ready for either one.

 

[Hey.. Chill Out]

Here's an update from Canale. No strike until 2009 he says:

http://iam141.org/usairway.htm#usa.11.15.07

(we advised the company IAM Fleet Service Members will be eligible to receive 2007 profit sharing in accordance with our current contract). With that, the company then submitted its post “Change in Control" proposal to your negotiating committee, reflecting a substantial reduction in value from the rejected tentative agreement.

There you have it. There's what your COC got us. The sad reality is that they company would still low ball even if it was won.

involved. In exchanging proposals with the company, our proposal in fact reflected those goals. However, it is crucial that the membership understands that the IAM and US Airways are not engaged in traditional negotiations. These transition negotiations were prompted by the US Airways-America West Airlines merger and the necessity to have everyone in a particular employee group working under a common agreement.

So what they are doing, as Ron Roth stated, is trying to get AM WEST under the east bankruptcy contract. Ron posted info on the union board in the breakroom that he was trying for this. Good for the west, but overall bad because they will throw some slop at us that the west will overwhelming vote yes on and the rest of the system craps on.

The option to strike will not be available until we complete the prolonged negotiating process prescribed in the RAILWAY LABOR ACT, the law governing airline labor negotiations. This process will not start until the end of 2009 (November) and since there is no timetable for negotiations called for in the ACT, it can take years from that point before a strike can occur.

Anybody care to explain how new union reps will prevent this?

 

[necigrad]

Wow, it took the IAM all night to come up with a release that said "US Airways cut down their previous offer, it's gonna take a long time to reachan agreement, and here's our excuse."

 

[pjirish317]

WHAT THEY FAILED TO MENTION THOUGH, IS THAT THEY SHOULD BE IN TRADITIONAL RLA TALKS WITH THE COMPANY FOR THE WEST. SHOULD HAVE BEEN SINCE 2005. AND THAT THEY COULD HAVE PETITIONED THE NMB FOR THE COOLING OFF PERIOD SO THAT A STRIKE FOR THE WEST WAS POSSIBLE. JUST MORE BS FROM THE I'LL ASK MANAGEMENT NEGOTIATING TEAM. NOW IS THERE ANYBODY FROM THE WEST THAT WOULD LIKE TO FILOE A DFR NOW? BECAUSE THEY CLEARLY HAVE REPRESENTED YOU.

 

[Hey.. Chill Out]

Lead the way easties! Get your lawyers and non-rev out here, I'll put my signature on it haha!

 

[pjirish317]

Lead the way easties! Get your lawyers and non-rev out here, I'll put my signature on it haha!

WELL RIGHT NOW IT MAY BE THE WEST'S ONLY OPTION BEFORE THEY GET FOLDED INTO OUR POS BK CBA FOR 2 TO 5 YEARS BEFORE WE GET A DIFFERENT CBA.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Wow, it took the IAM all night to come up with a release that said "US Airways cut down their previous offer, it's gonna take a long time to reachan agreement, and here's our excuse."

I read it to mean Canale is going to bend over again. Instead of talking about the demands and needs of fleet service, once again he decides to spend most of his letter being a company mouthpiece. Fleet service isn't desperate and if the TA isn't boosted from last time then Parker won't get what he needs.

Also, even though I believe the company needs a transition to take from fleet, I may be wrong. It has been 2 years so Parker isn't hellbent on one. That is why goofball should have anticipated over the last 2 years that Parker really wants to stall section 6 negotiations for the west. Again, any west sider who is tired of the pain, I will help file a DFR for you and submit it to the OLMS to force Canale to uphold your contract which already triggered section 6's. Bottom line....either Parker needs a transition or he is avoiding the west side section 6....and Boss Canale has been played like a novice. Parker wants to offer a transition that is profane, and steals the socks off of fleet service without taking shoes off. Screw that. Keep your head up fleet service, continue being professional and avoid working unsafe.

Further, Canale is wrong about a strike. The west is already in process [a process that Canale stalled intentionally] and once that process is allowed to continue and culminate in a strike [or fair agreement] by the west, then the East can honor it by not crossing lines [it's in the east contract], in essance, similar effects of striking.

regards,

 

[Hey.. Chill Out]

Lol. Trust me, the west only understands WAGES. We all see your contract as a great opportinuty to get more cash. Ron put 2 copies up. One that illustrates what we currently have, and what we could have under your contract. Trust me, it's better haha!



Tim, seriously, you need to get an entourage out here and explain this to us at the next rally. It seems as though we have a change in plans again!

Now what's going to happen is the west will be put under the bankruptcy contract so they have free reign to seek a consolidation with another airline. Hey, now we are 1 workgroup right? We are being sold out, and I hope the West doesn't vote yes, or allow the IAM to do this.

 

[Tim Nelson]

WHAT THEY FAILED TO MENTION THOUGH, IS THAT THEY SHOULD BE IN TRADITIONAL RLA TALKS WITH THE COMPANY FOR THE WEST. SHOULD HAVE BEEN SINCE 2005. AND THAT THEY COULD HAVE PETITIONED THE NMB FOR THE COOLING OFF PERIOD SO THAT A STRIKE FOR THE WEST WAS POSSIBLE. JUST MORE BS FROM THE I'LL ASK MANAGEMENT NEGOTIATING TEAM. NOW IS THERE ANYBODY FROM THE WEST THAT WOULD LIKE TO FILOE A DFR NOW? BECAUSE THEY CLEARLY HAVE REPRESENTED YOU.

I have offered my assistance in this matter, a matter that I have been successful with before against this district. Canale is hosing the west by not following the path that unions fought for, instead he's following the path that Parker pursuaded him down. Parker has been saying he wants a transition agreement but it's been 2 years. Yet the arrogant UA board member still refuses to engage in section 6's and Roth supports him. There's nothing wrong with section 6 negotiaitons alongside transition talks, and in the meantime if there's a fair transition deal then great.

regards,

 

[pjirish317]

THERE WILL BE NO VOTE IF THE CBA IS NOT EXTENDED OR NO MAJOR CHANGES. CANOLI AND DOUGWEISER CAN DO IT WITHOUT THE WESTS SAY SO. IF THAT HAPPENS GET READY FOR SOME WEST PEOPLE TO BE FURLOUGHED. GET READY FOR A CRAPPY BENEFITS PACKAGE. AND CRAPPY WORK RULES. YOU BETTER HOPE THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN.

 

[pjirish317]

LOOKS LIKE THE WINNER WAS OPTION 2. THE I'LL ASK MANAGEMENT TAKING DOUGWEISERS SIDE AGAIN!

 

[freedom]

This is what I inferred from the union posting …..

The company has made the same offer as before , we have asked for some minor changes ….

As long as those changes include JOB PROTECTIONS !!!!!! and possibly sick days or either holidays , then they got my vote ….


I agree that the economy is in a downward spiral , we will not achieve unreasonable demands …but on the other hand , this company must not believe that it can fleece the employees again …No more sand paper!!!!!


For those of you who think we’re just going to be slid into the East’s contract , I find that to be HIGHLY doubtful … it would be fool hardy to attempt to pacify the west without doing so to the east … it would be illogical and wasteful …