IAM Fleet Service topic

[NETOSETONE]

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[orioleman]

neci ,
Tim, you need to explain this one. I don't see anything about management. Not one. Granted I don't know how the tower in PHX works, nor W&B, but here in LAS I can't come up with one supervisor or manager that this would apply to."

I think I can help you out here. ONE of the core principals in a STRONG union is DOH or seniority.. IAM likes to use Classification

seniority . (which in my opinon blows ) but any ways. so this what you got. Randy will not open up the DOH vs Class sen issue

but JUMPS on the company bandwagon and opens his arms to NON UNION .. NO DUES PAYING EMPLOYEES and GIVES THEM ALL

THERE TIME.. IF your a Shift manager and want to go into the fleet group guess what YOU LOSE YOUR TIME . However . Randy

feels its O.K to REWARD those in management in the west towers with ALL THERE TIME BACK.. total B/S . and it goes against

the union prinicpal.

hope that made sense.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Ah yes. I was wondering when someone would seek my council
directly on this weighty matter.

As GF pointed out (which by the way is almost word for
word a sentiment echoed by PF yesterday in SAN) the Company
will easily wriggle out of the COC in a UA merger.
It does seem odd doesn't it?

The company won't have to wiggle out of it since PF gave the CIC to them already. It will be up to fleet service to stop this insanity. This is NOT a transition agreement, this is a merger agreement handed to the United Airline board of Directors by Randy Canale. PF is in the $100,000 club and had no problem running his mouth that the company will 'wiggle out of it'. If that is true then why didn't PF allow the CIC to stay in the contract? Doesn't make logical sense and PF is speaking nonsense.
Remember, Hemenway was 'very serious' about removing the CIC because he didn't want to have to 'wiggle out of it', he knew he needed it out. If the United merger is structured like the DL/NW merger then the CIC is 'spot on' and 100% triggered. That's why the company attorneys changed their position and told Hemenway that United needs that CIC out of the contract.

To be sure, the CIC is leverage. Even though the company didn't think it was necessary to remove the CIC last time, and was right about it, the CIC was still leverage even in losing.

In this situation, if UA/US is structured like DL/NW then the CIC is 'tailor made' and triggered. Will the company dispute it? Most likely but it will lead to increased leveraged position of fleet service. Fleet service will be the only group on the property that had the balls to keep its merger protections.

Furthermore, regardless of the CIC, this contract strips the west of the part-time ratio at a critical time. Why did Canale agree to that???? Why did Canale agree to strip Full timers of part time recall? This isn't a transiton agreement. Those articles NEVER are open in transiton talks. This is a merger agreement where united is going to 'rape' the west and destroy this work group.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[orioleman]

Got a definition for you guys, BF has already experienced it so I think he will back me up here

from the words of the drones (I'm sorry AGC's) "I'll get back to you on that one"

Translation: "I need to call Randy and see what HE wants me to say"

BC and PF both 100,000.00 dollar with infinite wisdom on contract neg. Still needs to call Randy when asked the real questions..


come on . why are WE the membership paying these drones (AGC's) 100,000.00 if they can't answer the question


quote from Nelson "we got morons complete morons neg for us "

sidenote: Do we the membership have to pay Canales cell phone bill . cause I'm thinking its pretty high

 

[RAPUNZEL]

Just to clear up any confusion, West Towers agents and W/B agents in PHX and LAS currently aren't and never were a Management OR Supervisor position...Just lowly little agents from pax or ramp or wherever department they came from...but still lowly agents none the less.

 

[orioleman]

well either you were twu or teamsters or management or clerks. got to be one of those classes. anything other than twu

would have you out of class for IAM ....

 

[RAPUNZEL]

nope, all incorrect...never were part of any of the unions, never considered as management and not clerks, we we're always classified as a totally seperate department that agents from pax/ramp/inflight/whatever could hire into

 

[orioleman]

nope, all incorrect...never were part of any of the unions, never considered as management and not clerks, we we're always classified as a totally seperate department that agents from pax/ramp/inflight/whatever could hire into

sorry for classing you as management . didn't mean to insult . we on the east were always told that the west towers were management

and at one time they were considering or thinking about trying to bring our towers under that......


none the less whatever class you were it wasn't fleet so that would reason that you would be considered out of class.

if the union would go DOH across the board it wouldn't matter . but they have always penalized people that weren't hired in F/S so

why the change of heart for the select few out west ?

anyway .. didn't mean to insult you with the management tag.

 

[RAPUNZEL]

No worries, I'm not easily insulted...but I pose this question to you. 1/2 of the tower peeps in PHX are from pax service, the other half from ramp. everyone with the exception of maybe 3-4 people have been in the department since BEFORE there were ANY Unions on property for pax or ramp...so I can see the confusion over what our seniority should be

 

[Rook]

Sorry folks But i think hint on the insurance thing a few pages back and all of you just ignored me!
Now back to the T/A i am dealing in a station that wants a uniamous yes but i dont like what i am reading so, i'm saying "NO".
Anyways this is just an amendent to the trash bk contract we got now and if you read it,
it will explain about the double time rates and the holiday pay while we here holiday pay is just an extra 16 hours.
Now the double time the wordage says you get double time on the 7th day, in which the shop steward here confrimed that if you worked 8 hours o/t on a schedule work day you only get 8 hrs @ 1 1/2 not 4 hrs 1 1/2 and 4 hrs double time. just me spouting off
L8er
Rook

 

[perserverance]

Sorry about that ''rook'' but I hit on the insurance thing also and let it be
known that anyone with a family will be paying $300+ a month or $150+
every pay for thier insurance. Don't lose sight that a FT worker can become
a PT worker also. If this TA is a Yes than we give up that FT/PT ratio and allow
the company to dictate the hours.

Thanks

 

[mike33]

So you think it might be UA huh.................well if it is and the IAM website has good info than check this out on Ramp/stores agreement. I must admit it says tentative but It's the only one on the site. You have to look at it from the site IAM141.ORG to see it an how its layed out.

Summary Comparison of Company Proposal and Tentative Agreement



Furlough
Protection
"Agreements prevent lay off of any
employee on the payroll as of
1/26/94 for any reason."

POW!!!!!!!!! maybe we can forget about displacing anyone at UA that was on the payroll as of 1/26/94...........FOR ANY REASON

Please.....someone tell me I'm reading this wrong................

 

[wiser bud]

Rook,
Your interpretation of the double time is mostly correct. Any hours over 8 on your first dayoff would also be double time provided you met the 40 hr wkly qualifier.

And yes, this is another instance of this offer being inferior to the first tentative. And if this TA is voted down, if there were to be a third TA, double time will probably be off the board altogether.

Hope everyone elwe gets the point.....1st TA was better......2nd TA offer not as good.......3rd, if at all, well you get the point.

 

[JoeDirt]

MONEY, SCOPE, FEAR AND ANGER
Four simple words. Four simple motivators.
One way or the other these four things combined with the absents of accurate information are what is driving this vote. It doesn't matter if your vote is a yes or no. The reasons for your decision fall into one or more of these categories. Basing your vote on the first two would be a sound, intelligent and rational decision. The last two are very powerful emotions. Do not let these emotions make your decisions for you. The human mind is capable of making sound, intelligent and rational decisions only when you can remove the emotions from the equation and are supplied with accurate information.

 

[mike33]

MONEY, SCOPE, FEAR AND ANGER
Four simple words. Four simple motivators.
One way or the other these four things combined with the absents of accurate information are what is driving this vote. It doesn't matter if your vote is a yes or no. The reasons for your decision fall into one or more of these categories. Basing your vote on the first two would be a sound, intelligent and rational decision. The last two are very powerful emotions. Do not let these emotions make your decisions for you. The human mind is capable of making sound, intelligent and rational decisions only when you can remove the emotions from the equation and are supplied with accurate information.

You're absolutely right Joe..........