IAM/Fleet Service Master Thread Week Ending 11/29

[Tim Nelson]

No union can compel a company into section 6 negotiations. The company only has to negotiate 60 days prior to the amendable date.

A change in representation does not open a CBA for renegotiation, I have posted numerous cases that have proven that fact.

This was already triggered for the west and yes, the IAM can force the company into section 6 for the west since the duration article has been triggered when the TWU triggered it almost 2 years ago. The IAM admitted this also so there should be no dispute to this.

regards,

 

[700UW]

I was replying to JohnJohn's post in regard to UAL.

Not the west FSAs CBA.

 

[lithuanian]

We have friends in Phoenix that have given much to help our cause, as has the East.
We are going to wait the results of the COC! But, there is a "Fuming? that might, result. RLA, or not! Workers in America, might have to help change the STATIS QUO!

 

[necigrad]

I know the answer, but I'll ask anyway.

Can an individual member seek a 30 cooling off period after over a year of no progress in Section 6?

 

[bob dylan]

Does anyone know how to get your hands on a ''dues objector'' card ?
Also, in case anyone hasn't posted it yet bloch@aol.com is Richard Bloch's
e-mail address. These cards seem to be the way to go. They lessen your monthly
dues by only taking the monies needed to keep you as a member in the IAM. You
would not contribute to your local, I believe.

With the dues being talked about, possibly doubling, by the General Council this
upcoming summer (08') I need to look at a way of paying less so that I may take
home alittle more. I do not care of my say in the local, and five or ten dollars is
still five or ten dollars. I do not care about the representation, from the IAM ,as I
feel unrepresented already. Once and if I feel they are doing a better job, sure I'd
pay for it but as of now NO ! If I can keep my job and some money and in return I
lost the IAM representation, so be it. I have to stop worrying about the IAM, for I don't
seem to be a priority for them.

No warnings just advice on what the dues objector card provides, Please.

Anyone with some advice on this would be appreciated...700 / NELSON / ???

bob

 

[mike33]

Bob

I don't know where you can get a card, but be careful. I believe you still have to pay a fee of some sort, which is a % of ur dues amount, but you get no representation if you get in trouble with the company. I don't believe the union can walk you off the property if you pay the Fee. 700 or Tim would probably have more info.

sunofsamsonite

 

[700UW]

There is a procedure in the IAM Journal that outlines how you become a dues objector.

If you become one, your dues are reduced, not eliminated, you also lose the right to attend any union meetings, vote on your CBA, vote on a strike, and vote for any office and hold any office.

They do still get union representation, that is the law, as you will pay what is germane to the CBA.

You will still pay full dues and then get a refund check once a year.

IMO it is not worth losing all your rights to save $7 a month, remember dues are tax deductable.

The International, District and Local lodges will still recieve dues money from you, but each would be reduced.

 

[diogenes]

The M&R CBA did not have "ME Too" Clause.

The 401K was a Letter of Agreement in the M&R CBA.

The letter stated if any unionized group got a 401K match that then the IAM M&R would get the same.

The TWU represented Dispatchers got a 401K match, the IAM filed a grievance as the company would not pay the match, it went to arbitration and the IAM won.

Mr Brickner said otherwise. When asked, "Why isn't there a me-too clause in our contract like the mechanics?" he snickered and replied, "You don't need a you-too clause."

He's resume is a little more impressive than yours.

 

[700UW]

Read the M&R CBA any of them from 1989 and up and show me where there is a ME-TOO clause.

I explained the language from the LOA that established the 401K.

Brickner is a UA Ramper, not a US M&R and was not involved in the M&R Negotiations, he stayed with fleet.

 

[insp89]

All you can do is work by the rules, been there done that.

Better go ask UA and NW's AMTs about the injunctions their companies sought and got when it was shown they were doing a slowdown.

Glass is foaming at the mouth.

When you ask the AMT's at Northwest about the injunctions,

Ask them what they thought of IAM represented employees doing their jobs while they were on strike... :down:

glASS was also "foaming" at the mouth when the IAM put their tails between their legs and re-voted the ill-fated offer
during the bankruptcy proceedings.

 

[diogenes]

Read the M&R CBA any of them from 1989 and up and show me where there is a ME-TOO clause.


I'm merely quoting Mr. Brickner. Are you saying he doesn't know what he's talking about?

I explained the language from the LOA that established the 401K.


M&R got a major contract improvement (401 match) outside of section 6 - an improvement the company opposed. Sounds like me-too!Q

"During the fourth quarter of 1995, the Association of Flight
Attendants ("AFA") filed a grievance against US Airways
contending that the Company has violated certain sections of
the collective bargaining agreement between the AFA and US
Airways. US Airways' flight attendants are eligible to
participate in the Plan pursuant to their collective
bargaining agreement with the Company. The AFA maintains
that US Airways' flight attendants are entitled to receive
company matching contributions based on certain provisions
of their collective bargaining agreement. The Company
recently lost a similar grievance filed by the International
Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, which
represents US Airways' mechanics and related workers, which
resulted in the Company matching the contributions made to
the Plan by IAM participants."

http://www.secinfo.com/dWcTe.8v.htm

Brickner is a UA Ramper, not a US M&R and was not involved in the M&R Negotiations, he stayed with fleet.

Brickner is high enough up the totem pole to stick his fingers in 141, 142 and 143 if Roach says so.

http://www.goiam.org/content.cfm?cID=379

 

[700UW]

This occured years ago, Brickner was not up the totem pole when this occured back in like 1995.

I am telling you read the CBA, it was an LOA in the CBA about the 401k.

I explained the language, is that too hard to understand?

 

[diogenes]

You got the 401k match as a result of a grievance. Or is the SEC lying?

Name any part of fleet's contract that could result in a major windfall outside of section 6.

You can't.

 

[700UW]

It was an arbitration from a LOA in our CBA.

In CBAs there are not blanket ME-TOO clauses, they are specific.

401K match in the M&R, the 5 year furlough instead of the 60 day in the M&R, shall I go on?

 

[lithuanian]

I don't want to insite the members. But, according to all the recent events with the company and possible mergers and the eventual survival of American airlines: When, the results of the COC for Mechanics and Fleet for Both AWA and US Airways come to pass, There will be something for all of us to deal with.
We will be treated like Americans on American soil. We are dealing with people who want to be recognized in the world arena. So, far, we are Peanuts!. But, American workers need to be leaders against world competition. Let's hopefully, think the Parkers and Kirbys' and ISOM' do not create the best airline against American efforts. That! is the end of the American Dream. Anyone read about the Independants running against Dem. vs Reps?