IAM Fleet Service topic (Mini Thread)

[bagchucker]

None of us here are fortune tellers, or we would be employed elsewhere making lots more than we do now. What is clear is the writing on the wall. It is a good thing that we have until May 8 to vote. It is clear which way we should vote, but perhaps a few more cards will hit the table in this poker game that will open the eyes of some of the blind out there. Look at the writing... both the Company boss and the Union boss have both alluded to the fact that there is a Merger in the near future to contend with. Our Union boss has a higher beckoning to answer to, a la UA. We are second rate folk in his book if not worse... think he will allow a well constructed T.A. to be given to us with a political agenda deeper than the Nile River. Think again. Lets see some more cards in this poker game. 20 days to go....

 

[700UW]

That is apples and oranges, they have been reducing Vegas for months now and yes with any merger there will be cuts, that is inevitable.

 

[mike33]

700

Since you have all the answers on all the boards about all the work units....answer me this....YES or NO only ( if you can restrain you intellectual

self ). Would you cut service if you were preparing yourself for a merger and had the ability to reroute passengers in order to diminish overlaping routes?

You're foaming at the mouth to answer more than Y or N !!!!!!!!!!!!!

"That is apples and oranges, they have been reducing Vegas for months now and yes with any merger there will be cuts, that is inevitable."

Thats a long yes............. Wipe the foam away

 

[Tim Nelson]

Your info is misleading the T/A has nothing to do with the layoffs in LAS, they have cut service there, just like they can cut service anywhere and reduce the headcout.

Wrong. This new contract has everything to do with these and future layoffs.
These layoffs will come under 'reduction in force' measures that restrict part-time recall IF this contract is ratified. 700 stop trying to manufacture something I didn't say. A company can lay people off but that was not my point as you know.
I'm talking about rights in regards to 'reduction in force'. do you understand?
The west contract has much better scope language that allows stations like ICT to stay open. The east contract protects the seniority rights of full timers when it comes to part-time recall. However, this new contract, if ratified, strips these rights that allowed even me to have the opportunity for a part-time recall position in CLT several years ago.


NEW UPDATE: Compare This Tentative agreement with the 2002 & 2003 Bankrupt Agreements

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago
email address: appearances1@aol.com

 

[Tim Nelson]

Update: Contract Update

Item 1: We just finished a Tentative agreement vs 2002 & 2003 Bankrupt contract comparison
This sould open all remaining eyes at the ineptness of this agreement as it is a $114 million concession when compared to our 2002 bankrupt agreement.

Click Tentative Agreement vs 2002 & 2003 Bankrupt Agreements

Kindly Copy, Post, Circulate this new informational flyer EVERYHWERE

Item 2: CLT Committee
The CLT grievance committee is going breakroom to breakroom educating the membership on this rag. Also they are getting the truth about How Mike Fairbanks couldn't support this agreement and then Randy left him off the Negotiations Team.

Item 3: PIT committee
DH resigned as chairman

All the Latest Contract News and System Happenings

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago
email: appearances1@aol.com

 

[libertybell]

Tentative Agreement Update: 100 LAS Layoffs

LAS was just notified of 100 layoffs at that station. In anticipation of a merger, the merger process is already unfounding before our very eyes. Now everyone can also see why Canale agreed with United and US AIRWAYS to eliminate seniority rights to part time recall positions with this tentative agreement. When more layoffs kickoff, those getting laid off will experience 'great pain' with this new restrictive 'reduction in force' language. Ask yourselves, what the hell was that added for since this isn't traditional bargaining?????

PHX will be the dumping ground and could become PHilly West in 6 months. It is VERY unlikely that the less senior workers in PHX will be able to enjoy their $1 raise after the west gives up all their protectioin. It will continue to be "Tuffa Lucka" to the west as Canale tries to secure the interest of the United stockholders which he is sworn to.

Good thing is that we already laid the groundwork of getting rid of the UA board member who continues to attempt to pimp off fleet service to a merger partner. He will not be around after he gets voted out in June. He will be kicked back up to his United Airline board seat.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

Tim
I think your thought on PHX could be the next Philly could be right on for the time being. History will repeat itself once this merger kicks into gear with Denver and SFO being such an intrenched and profitable operation for UAL they will soon downsize PHX and LAS losing Hub status.

A word of advice to LAS folks thinking of PHX relocation you won't be there to long just ask the Dayton,Syracuse,Baltimore,and Pittsburgh
workers.
You guys are Toast!

 

[Tim Nelson]

Contract Update: LAS and CLT committees

Item 1: LAS union reps NG and JM went around explaingin things about the contract but they also had the LAS Hub-director, SR. ground mgr., and a rep from human resources walking around with them. NG told LAS that Mike Fairbanks approved of the contract but didn't want to sign it. This is a bold face lie. Fairbanks was clear to CLT today and IMO I think he now needs to put out a letter since Randy Canale and friends are purposely polluting Mike's name.

Also NG also told LAS that the District is just going to throw the west into the east contract if this is voted down. This is incorrect as the District just can't throw the west into the east contract by bylaw. Neither would they since it would be the most destructive thing to do that labor has ever known. Think about it LAS, even without knowing the bylaws, Canale isn't that destructive even if he could. But Canale's position is clear about trying to stir up fear. They also said the company wouldn't be back to the table. That's what they said last time also. All these guys do is stir inaccuracies. The only one that won't be back is Randy Canale since we already positioned ourselves to eliminate him in June.

OTOH, The CLT committee went around without management.

The LAS Union reps are so tight with management and although LAS already knew that, today LAS is starting to do the math on this rag and how they will be moreso hosed over.


item 2: I put out a new informational piece today that I believe all will find very interesting no matter if you vote yes or no. It's worth you looking at it.
2003 bankrupt vs This agreement brought to you by United Airlines

Contract update page

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago
email address: appearances1@aol.com

 

[orioleman]

Tim,
"He said the message of anger from the September rejection was received and delivered to Management. First off, Randy shouldn't be manufacturing that the message was anger. It wasn't. The message was that we wanted a fair agreement. That message has not been heard or delivered yet. Further, Randy sez we need to do what is best for our families and vote this in because of Skybus [never heard of them], 911, and the stock price went down. WTF?"

Tim correct be if I am a little confused here. Didn't randy put out in his news letter that WE FLEET SERVICE AT US VOTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CIC GRIEVANCE .

now 6 months later is say we voted angerly to send mgmt a message . Which is it randy ???


sidenote: I just love they way randy has the pulse of the membership and KNOWS how and WHY they voted .. NOT

 

[necigrad]

The LAS Union reps are so tight with management

No, only Canales boys are. The only USAirways person (East or West) this is tight with management is JM. He's sitting on 5 grievances of mine, 4 of which were scope violations.

 

[P. REZ]

Tim,

Where can I look at this by-law language. PHX is being told we will go to the east contract if we vote this down. The arguments you make for a no vote are compelling, however as of right now because of no guarantee that Canale will lose vote, which if he wins guarantees same contract 4 to 6 months from now plus the thought of being stuck at $15.20 after a merger for 2 to 3 more years, I still have to look at how the time value of money will affect me and my fellow westies. It it affects the east too.

If this merger is such a given, I ask why the west and east wouldn't want the TA agreement. Tim, surely you don't believe anymore negotiating would be happening? We would all be stuck in our current contracts until the transitions occurred with UA/AA. This would leave us hanging for 2 to 3 more years. I know you are going to write back that we need COC. Tim, when I looked at that language after we merged I predicted a loss in arbitration. Ask any PHX people and they will concur. We have already lost one arbitration and the company will hire the best lawyers (O"melveny and Myers) to smack us around if COC is arbitrated again. Yes, this is a POS contract!!!!!!


Respectfully,

P. REZ

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,

Where can I look at this by-law language. PHX is being told we will go to the east contract if we vote this down. The arguments you make for a no vote are compelling, however as of right now because of no guarantee that Canale will lose vote, which if he wins guarantees same contract 4 to 6 months from now plus the thought of being stuck at $15.20 after a merger for 2 to 3 more years, I still have to look at how the time value of money will affect me and my fellow westies. It it affects the east too.

If this merger is such a given, I ask why the west and east wouldn't want the TA agreement. Tim, surely you don't believe anymore negotiating would be happening? We would all be stuck in our current contracts until the transitions occurred with UA/AA. This would leave us hanging for 2 to 3 more years. I know you are going to write back that we need COC. Tim, when I looked at that language after we merged I predicted a loss in arbitration. Ask any PHX people and they will concur. We have already lost one arbitration and the company will hire the best lawyers (O"melveny and Myers) to smack us around if COC is arbitrated again. Yes, this is a POS contract!!!!!!


Respectfully,

P. REZ

I think the actions of the company speak pretty loud. Hemenway had to come back because he wants the COC now due to the pending merger. That's a big issue and even the IAM admits that the COC gives leverage.

Regarding your opinion that we would just get the same thing in 6 months. I disagree. Our message never got heard and Randy never delivered it. He was the one who is and continues to be angry. I have been in contact with Tom Brickner on occasion of late through email and I think Tom would be willing to work through these issues and also help fascilitate a new negotiations transition team when Randy gets voted out. Randy doesn't have any support so I think it's pretty reasonable to think he will be gone. DEN, ORD, HNL, JFK, and US AIRWAYS are ready to vote him out.

IMO, we vote this contract in and we are stuck in it until 2016. I'd think United wouldn't want to get rid of it, kinda how US AIRWAYS is doign you guys now. Only I doubt United would share the United rampers profits with us if that happened.

Canale never put in writing that they will force the west into the east agreement if this doesn't pass. he can't force that since the bylaws don't give him the authority to do so. Even at US East, when I was a Local Chairman back in 2000. We had a very small item called "lead referendum' that 'at most' would have affected 50 people. We still had to vote on it and Canale couldn't just do a LOA on it since it affected 50 people adversely. That's a fact that you can ask your AGC NG about.

email me and I'll give you a file with the DL 141 bylaws and I'll point the language to you so you can have it on file.

At any rate, in theory, even if Canale could just force the west into the east, he would have to be a madman and the IAM would have to be a mad union also. I'm against Canale but he's no madman.

email me and ill get you the language

Also, Randy pulled his August 10th letter off the site where he said Hemenway wans't coming back. That was a lie but i copied it and saved it so if you want that file let me know.

Contract compared to bankrupt contracts is a $114 million concession

email:appearances1@aol.com

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[roadtrip]

Libertybell looks like US/UAL will be ready to do some plowing out west

View attachment 7433

Question is will FSA let them or not

 

[mike33]

Tim, when I looked at that language after we merged I predicted a loss in arbitration. Ask any PHX people and they will concur. We have already lost one arbitration and the company will hire the best lawyers (O"melveny and Myers) to smack us around if COC is arbitrated again. Yes, this is a POS contract!!!!!!
Respectfully,
P. REZ

P. REZ
We lost the Arbitration because it was rendered on an OPINION from judge Bloch. He ruled such because the the usair stock was cancelled before they came out of BK.

"One begins with the observation that this was a sale of stock, not assets.
The bargained language requires the sale of common stock, which is further
specified 4 as “then outstanding common stockâ€￾ issued and in the hands of
shareholders. In this case, however, all “then outstanding stockâ€￾ of the US
Airways Group that had existed prior to the Company’s emergence from
bankruptcy was cancelled."

P. REZ
The COC is stonger than ever.....there's no ways that either merger partner just cancel their stock if they are not in BK. Especially some one the likes of UA, AA, ??. Our COC language states the following:

"Upon a change in control defined as the sale of all or
substantially all of the assets or common stock of the
Company or US Airways Group in a single transaction (or in
multi-step related transactions) to a single purchaser (or a
group of purchasers acting in concert."

The ruling was base on the fact that the stock became worthless and new stock was issued as LCC ( because of multiple investors after BK )

"For the purposes of this paragraph,
“Common Stockâ€￾ is the Common Stock of US Airways
Group, which are then outstanding and the Common Stock
issuable on exchange, exercise, and/or conversion of
securities of the Company or US Airways Group which are
then currently exchangeable into, exercisable for, or
convertible into such Common stock."

In a merger ( with someone not in BK ) there would be an exchange of stocks with value that trigger a change of some ones control.
Kind of like DL/NW. Someone will get an amout of new stock like 2 for 3, or 1 for 2, or something like that.

 

[roadtrip]

Mike33,

Great research! Good work.

Been trying to explain this to some folks in person I plan on using it next time it comes up

RT

 

[dexter]

Hey Tim- I think a trip out west, face to face with members is in order.
They don't understand because they have no one to back them, no solidarity. These boards are the only info they get. GO WEST YOUNG MAN !