IAM Fleet Service topic

[Black Magic]

Under the new TA how much will insurance be a month for solo coverage? I believe right now I am paying around $50 a month for UHC choice.

 

[bagchucker]

SO... folks at the station I work at seem to be split over this T.A.... the ones you'd expect to vote yes are doing so, and the ones you'd expect to vote no are doing so. However, there is one burning question that remains a mystery to all and nobody (IAM or Company) seems to be able to provide an honest answer, or one at all for that matter.

Q: Why is it that the Company or the IAM have the arbitrary authority to simply merge/integrate West into East's current BK contract? If this is the case, than why didn't it happen a couple years ago? You can't tell me that the company/IAM wanted to "give us the opportunity to hash out a decent T.A." and are now frustrated they can't so they are going to just make a push to integrate. No one is clear on this authority, and thus, many feel it is simply a scare tactic! What is the legality on this? Sorry I am not more versed in this area, but there seems to be an avoidance of protocol here, no? Somewhere along this process, there would need to be at least one vote if not more (one from each side, IAM and ex-TWU members, no?). All very mind-boggling... something the Company/IAM are probably counting on to get people to vote yes out of being naive, but not surprising seeing who we are dealing with.

Any feedback that is genuine (not speculation) may help sway a few more votes the NO direction....

Thanks!

 

[wiser bud]

Magic

 

[wiser bud]

Oops!
Magic,
Employee only coverage would be as follows:
80% coverage for FT is 30.mo
90% 65/mo
100% 96/mo

I have 80% family coverage at 99/mo........I do nont know what West gets coverage wise, rates, etc....But this isn't as bad as what has been portrayed on these boards.

 

[roabilly]

If US buys UA, then there is no COC, is there?

Got news fer yahh Mr. 700…

This has gone way beyond the COC issue! I’ll tell you right now, that many members I speak with here in CLT will vote NO… simply because they don’t trust the IAM!

We have been educated as to how this agreement was pseudo negotiated behind closed doors, while the rest of the Negotiating Committee was left in the conference room alone.

“Back door†deals will not be tolerated by this membership.

This membership is fully aware of the ludicrous salaries that are paid to the officers and AGC’s that have signed off on this POS… just secure their own future positions, and salary increases. (We have the Bylaw Language to prove it.)

You sir… will witness a new era in IAM history very soon! We will be successful in flushing out the corruption that supposedly leads and represents us. We will then replace these people with people of our own choosing… not the choosing of the IAM hierarchy.

 

[wiser bud]

You sir… will witness a new era in IAM history very soon! We will be successful in flushing out the corruption that supposedly leads and represents us. We will then replace these people with people of our own choosing… not the choosing of the IAM hierarchy.





Billy,
Who gets to choose? Just Branch Nelsonians!

 

[mike33]

SO... folks at the station I work at seem to be split over this T.A.... the ones you'd expect to vote yes are doing so, and the ones you'd expect to vote no are doing so. However, there is one burning question that remains a mystery to all and nobody (IAM or Company) seems to be able to provide an honest answer, or one at all for that matter.

Q: Why is it that the Company or the IAM have the arbitrary authority to simply merge/integrate West into East's current BK contract? If this is the case, than why didn't it happen a couple years ago? You can't tell me that the company/IAM wanted to "give us the opportunity to hash out a decent T.A." and are now frustrated they can't so they are going to just make a push to integrate. No one is clear on this authority, and thus, many feel it is simply a scare tactic! What is the legality on this? Sorry I am not more versed in this area, but there seems to be an avoidance of protocol here, no? Somewhere along this process, there would need to be at least one vote if not more (one from each side, IAM and ex-TWU members, no?). All very mind-boggling... something the Company/IAM are probably counting on to get people to vote yes out of being naive, but not surprising seeing who we are dealing with.

Any feedback that is genuine (not speculation) may help sway a few more votes the NO direction....

Thanks!

Bag
Some of us agree somewhat that they might be able to if they just voted the west employees only to come into the east ...NOT CHANGE ANY LANGUAGE to the east contract. But, they're not doing that because they would have to keep the amendable date of 2009 and the COC would still be in there. They would have to structure the TA ( with the west only voting ) to leave the COC in and leave the amendable date 2009.
So we say to you ....they could possibly fulfill the IAM ART. 13 bylaws as the servicer of the TWU contract but the COC and Amendable date are more important to them..........SO>>>......The COC has teeth....But thats just my opinion.

 

[LuggageJockey]

Tim Nelson can provide all the quotes and bylaws rules he wants but if fleet service doesn't vote for this agreement then you can forget about any United Airline merger and start filling out job applications. Is Tim Nelson going to employ you when you all could lose your jobs if you don't make yourself affordable to a potential investor.

Randy Canale's letter is clear that this agreement puts you in position for the next round of bargaining. More importantly, it provides your carrier with a merger friendly agreement. Now isn't the time to debate as your company has to attract investors otherwise it will end up like Aloha. It will be gone!

United Airlines is considering Continental but its most likely partner will be US AIRWAYS. Everything is set up for United but United isn't going to sign any merger agreement that contains the Change in Control merger protections or West scopes, so it's only a pipe dream if you think your company will be able to attract a merger partner without first removing the Change in Control and the scope clauses of the west agreement. Good luck with American if you run United away. Talk to our TWA members and I'm sure they would tell you NOT to scare away United only to end up with American.

I also think Randy Canale should get more credit from this group. Nelson points to Continental wages as being higher but Continental never went bankrupt. Nelson points to mechanics getting 30% across the board increases BUT you are not skilled labor. And the 200% bonus' for company executives is normal in this industry. Is it fair? No! But compare apples with apples! The alternative is to vote this contract down and close this airline. Fleet service must listen to its leaders who have fought for you at the negotiations table and understand that if this contract is not passed then it will be very hard for US AIRWAYS to attract potential investors.
Mergers are going to happen and you MUST position your company in a way that makes it attractive to investors. We had to give up protections for the west and the east so fleet service will be in position in 2011 for traditional bargaining. Ask yourself and be honest, do you think another airline wants to buy you and then have to negotiate a brand new contract in 2009?
As Randy said, this deal isn't perfect but the one thing it will do is preserve jobs for many of you. Mergers are a necessary evil in this situation and no contract and no union will be able to stop layoffs.

Remember, if your company doesn't merge, NO WAY it will be able to survive the oil crisis. Do your part and support your negotiations team which has worked closely with your company in positioning it for an upcoming merger.

Sorry disrtict for the late reply but you're wrong. Continental did clam bankrupcy.
Do you remember the 80's? When CO was a shitty airline until Gordon Bethune (Spelling) turned it around?

Also why should I make US Airways arrtective to investors? Is there merger senority protection for me? Or you for that matter? US Airways & analists have said that we have billions of cash reserves on hand.

Why would I support a negotating team which for now & three years from now still wants us to be the lowest paid in the GD industry? You got the letter. Are we happy with this agreement Hell No! Then why puut it out to the members at all?

 

[Black Magic]

Bud thanks for the info! In the west for solo UHC choice (mid) we pay I believe $53.

I agree bagchucker the IAM would have put the west under the crappy cba long ago if they could. Its a dirty little secret that that both the IAM/Company are holding back.

 

[perserverance]

''Bagchucker''- I'll tell you what I know. The company has always wanted a new agreement
along with it at the time an extension. Your right, you should have and could have been
brought under the Easts' agreement some time ago but, and its' a big but, the IAM can not touch
your dues to you fall under agreement and the company knows this. The IAM should have went
after Section 6 negotiations to make this happen but instead have focused on what they believed
was the easier route ,a TA. Now years later the IAM is drooling looking at the dues lying in wait
when the West comes under agreement and the company still wants an extension and now the
CIC and Profit Sharing along with other things. You've become the baited group in that thier
selling this TA on the wage increase but in doing so your group will be giving up some things
and in doing so the wage increase will be not as large as it may appear to you.The company
needs us BIGTIME. Also remember the IAM basically paid your union to step aside.....

So, yes your right you should have been under our agreement by now and we all should be
preparing for ''traditional negotiations'' in 2009 but instead were dealing with this. "bagchucker''
ask yourself the question ''Joe Dirt'' and ''Mike33'' and myself along with others have been
asking, ''who came to who and why ??? '' We did not go to the company...I know that.

Thanks

 

[JoeDirt]

Oops!
Magic,
Employee only coverage would be as follows:
80% coverage for FT is 30.mo
90% 65/mo
100% 96/mo

I have 80% family coverage at 99/mo........I do nont know what West gets coverage wise, rates, etc....But this isn't as bad as what has been portrayed on these boards.

Wiser
I don't about your insurance but I just looked at mine and I paid $3400.00 last year for me, my wife and daughter.

 

[roabilly]

You sir… will witness a new era in IAM history very soon! We will be successful in flushing out the corruption that supposedly leads and represents us. We will then replace these people with people of our own choosing… not the choosing of the IAM hierarchy.





Billy,
Who gets to choose? Just Branch Nelsonians!

That “Budâ€￾ …ain’t made yahh no wiser !

 

[Rook]

Wiser bud that is correct but who is going to get 12 or more hrs on thier 1st day off??
40 hr wkly qualifier...... now thier is some words to go by i have been thru this as they ( US) have change some o/t cause i didn't meet the qualifier so folks it is not all it sounds to be.
Make sure u get all the info before u make your decision
L8er
Rook

 

[wiser bud]

Dirt,
Got my pay stub right here. I have 80/20 coverage at 45.69 bi-weekly. Times 26 equals
1187.94 for a family of five

 

[wiser bud]

Its "bud" wiser, NOT "billy" wiser!