IAM Fleet Service topic

[freedom]

Freedom,
I am glad you are starting to understand about the 60 day . its worthless with the new wording added..

NO I will not will let my brothers/sisters go into the night . that is one of the many reasons I say NO. that language is

rendered useless after OEI . so there is NO protection for anyone that falls under it. Thats why You say NO ... it sux

I’m glad you’ve joined me a in a yes vote brother!!!! Thank goodness , I’m happy to have you on the YES team!

Out of your own mouth springs the yes vote , you’ve said it now brother ! Let’s see you flip flop on this ONE!!!


BTW I expect you to fight for the YES vote as hard as you’ve fought for the NO vote …. Glad to have you on board Brother!!!!


TEXT FROM THE PROPOSED TA

· Effective on date of ratification, the 60 day rule will be eliminated for any furloughs that occur after that date.

 

[pjirish317]

freedom,

You read what you want to read, and hear what you want to hear, PERIOD. You will not change any of our NO VOTING MINDS! Just like we will not change your mind. GET USED TO IT!

 

[freedom]

Brothers and sisters , I tire of this constant bickering and fighting with these people on line …. See them for what they are … people who will twist any situation to suit their ends … of course thou the same can be said about myself , for those of you who don’t know where I come from , it’s the PHX station , I’m a west worker and my pay is down right criminal … I’ll let you know right now that my objective is to secure a yes vote to escape the poverty we live in here , those are my motives . The people leading the NO vote are diverse , its hard for me to pick any one motive out , but overall I’d say their willing to risk it all for more , the problem they have is that too many of them are from the good ole days , and nothing is ever going to be good enough for them , that’s the problem when your constantly look back in time , everything seemed better back then . That kind of mentality makes it hard to confront the reality we live in today , from the bad economy to the weakening unions to the dismal prospect of more cuts in another merger …

For years I and others on here have been fighting these people who think they “KNOW†better , for years they’ve talked down to those of us who told them they would lose the change of control case for which they fought us tooth and claw …. Go back in time on this message board by going to the main screen and then click on the pages … go back until around the time of the change of control and you’ll see how many of these people were wrong then , misinformed , misguided … I said it then and I’ll say it now , for those of you who think the “courts†will be the solution to all of your problems , it sadly just doesn’t work that way for us blue collar workers ….

When they came on this board again to get a NO vote and tried to resurrect the change of control grievance we burned them down …. Then they switched tactics and moved onto irrelevant issues such as “dignity and respect “ and union corruption “ we showed the “masses†what B/S that was and they again switched , this time it’s the merger … now their trying to tell you my brothers and sisters that your BK contract is going to protect you …

I think many of you know better , and I think most of you still remember the last blood letting .

Is it opportunistic of me to remind you of the 60 day clause in your contract? Yes , yes it is , is it also a very real possibility in any merger ? ABSOLUTELY … you know the clause , EVEN if you make it back to the ramp you go back to day one pay scale , DAY ONE!!!

We’ve got guys here in PHX who were on furlough and came back , they’ve worked for us airways for far longer than I have , but to this day I make more money than they do .

That could be you .

Join with us , give yourselves a raise , leave the fear of the 60 day furlough behind you ….

 

[pjirish317]

freedom,

You have "poverty wages" because that is what the TWU NEGOTIATED or you. Now that there is a chance for you to increase those wages, you do so by throwing your brothers and sisters under the bus, all for your "three pieces of silver". As long as you get yours. If you would just state that it's "all about me", maybe you would get more respect, untill then you are a "flip flopper" that likes to hear himself talk. If the union sees fit to let you "yes" voters in PHX vote on airport property, the is should stand to reason that all stations should vote on airport property. Don't you agree. Or should only "yes voters" be allowed to do that? I am voting NO. Will I accept what Fleet Service decides with this vote, yes, be it yes or no, I just hope that when this POS is voted down you still stand with us and not against us.

 

[mike33]

Fleet service is fractured into three different groups , two of them are paid less than the first , as long as this fact exists there will be no “wining “ negotiations

Please explain Freedom. I know why but since you mentioned it I want to see if you know why?

 

[freedom]

freedom,

You have "poverty wages" because that is what the TWU NEGOTIATED or you. Now that there is a chance for you to increase those wages, you do so by throwing your brothers and sisters under the bus, all for your "three pieces of silver". As long as you get yours. If you would just state that it's "all about me", maybe you would get more respect, untill then you are a "flip flopper" that likes to hear himself talk. If the union sees fit to let you "yes" voters in PHX vote on airport property, the is should stand to reason that all stations should vote on airport property. Don't you agree. Or should only "yes voters" be allowed to do that? I am voting NO. Will I accept what Fleet Service decides with this vote, yes, be it yes or no, I just hope that when this POS is voted down you still stand with us and not against us.

i also agree that every station should be allowed to vote on the property , i feel confident that we would easily win if that were the case ...

PJ , question , how would feel if half your brothers and sisters in your station went out on furlough under the 60 day rule ? If you had the chance to aviod that , would you ?

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim, I have been painfully honest with fleet service over the past 6 months and I will continue to do so in this post. I will try to incorporate both of your post under this post. I appreciate the fact that you know I would support a rejection if that was the way the membership chose to go. I would actually admire it if fleet service made it through the risk associated with possibly causing your airline to lose its merger partner. But this whole vote is a direct result of the United merger. Your company had no intentions of negotiating if not for the M & A environment that is being forced on this industry.

Before I answer your questions, I will clarify my position. This tentative is not something to be proud of and it will be used as leverage against our United Airline brothers and sisters when they come to the table in 2009. That's not a proud thing to say but it is what it is because the alternative might be no merger and both airlines in chapter 7.

I have been in this business a long time and I believe that United airlines is not in position to pay fleet service the wages that your merger protections spell out. I also doubt United airlines would want to staff the small west stations or even keep PHX and LAS as hubs. So without a contract ratification, United may think twice about investing in US AIRWAYS. I also believe your company is not a stand alone company and a rejection of this contract will seriously impact 8,000 housholds who may be out of a job. Then where does that leave everyone, at the Lowes unemployment line?

Only a merger makes sense for preserving the jobs of most of our members. We also have a responsibility to make sure those employers who employ our members stay in business. Mergers are never friendly to labor and we realize the ramifications that United may seriously scale back the west side of US AIRWAYS and that a reduced capacity may mean job cuts everywhere, but, the alternative to a merger may mean that neither PHX, LAS, PHL, or CLT are hubs since chapter 7 may very well be around the corner with oil at record highs, stock very low, and other airlines going bankrupt. Does a yes vote make sense yet under these very real circumstances? It makes perfect sense to me to preserve 6,000 households instead of throwing all 8,000 under the Nelson vote no bus.

Now, hypothetically, if I were as smart as you and knew that the United merger and its announcement wasn't being held up by the outcome of this vote, then I'd answer that I would vote no if I could vote.
I'm being fair to your question Tim so don't take this out of context when you know I do not believe a United merger will take place with a rejection. That's all I can say on this matter.

The reason I would vote no is that it would allow fleet service to keep things open where fleet can continue to be a participant at the table during the merger. A ratification will lock fleet service in and silence fleet service for the immediate future. Your ratified contract would then present itself as an annoyance as it will no doubt be used by United as leverage against us when we open up traditional bargaining in 2009 for our United members. However, not in any case do I agree with you that United will shelve US AIRWAYS fleet service until 2016. It's all about M & A activity Tim, you must recognize this. None of us are saying we are thrilled with this tentative but the risks to 8,000 households if United walks away is very real. You don't seem to indicate this as a very real possibility and I think that is unwise.

Again, my positon is that a rejection of this contract may force United to rethink a merger. I think that is a very real possibility that our members must give serious thought to when they chose on May 8th.

District Force,
thanks for your candidness. I also heard that Canale backtracked, while down in LAS, from the 'just shove the west under the east' garbage he was spreading. As with our previous discussions and emails, you know I disagree with you about United backing out, not that I want a merger myself. IMO, I think United needs this more than US AIRWAYS but Darth Parker would do anything so he can get that 200% extra bonus he just signed if we are the number 1 or 2 airline.

At any rate, I truly understand trying to preserve the employers of those we represent but from my perspective, as I mentioned to you privately, I am not swallowing the threat about US AIRWAYS going chapter 7. I hope you do admire us and I'm sure you will because at this point, unless something happens, I forsee at minimal a 65% No vote systemwide. I think United will still merge and I would rather be positioned where fleet service can participate in the merger, instead of being silenced for 10 years and half of us thrown under the bus.
Remember, DF, the majority of United's workers have the no-layoff guarantee [Please refer to the United Airline ramp contract that protects the rampers from layoffs, see letter 94-] so who is going to get laid off if we waive all of our merger protections and scope protections. I agree our numbers might go from 8,000 to 6,000 but if we keep our scope and merger protections it will allow us to be a player where we can negotiate a contract that provides a soft landing instead of United sticking a big 777 up our a$$es.

At this point, this vote isn't at all about the contract since it doesn't matter if it is $20 or $24hr wage if the US AIRWAYS brothers and sisters are going to get hosed over and not be able to participate in the merger, if ratified. Thankfully, everyone now knows what I knew a couple months ago and posted, that United/US AIRWAYS is going to merge. This merger talk is EVERYTHING and is at the top of priorities of why someone would vote yes or no on this contract.

A yes vote will silence fleet service for the next decade. Remember also, if your station isn't one of the 2 dozen ramp stations at United then you're not going with this merger. United PCE works the majority of the ramp stations and with this being fleet service [insert JAX, CMH, etc] you are screwed again. Don't vote to silence your vote, vote NO so you can participate and be a player at the bargaining table. The only one that will not be back to the table is Boss Canale. We will be coming for him to boot him back up to the United Airline Board of Directors......soon enough.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[freedom]

Please explain Freedom. I know why but since you mentioned it I want to see if you know why?

ok i'll be fair about it , i'll answer yours if you answer mine ...


We have three different payscales because first of all the TWU contract remains unamended , it wasn't suppose to continue on for this long ...

You know I’m not completely sure why you have class two cities , I heard that you voted to subjugated your own brothers rather than take a pay cut , and thus that’s why the HUBS make more and the class two lees .

Now it's my turn ....

How would you feel if half of the people you work with in your station went out on furlough under the 60 day rule ? If you could prevent it , would you ?

 

[mike33]

BUT it could also kill the UA deal, and end up being worthless instead. Due to the fact that they are keeping a lid on a formal announcemet until after the vote on 5/8, should be a signal to all that they way this vote goes could have a direct outcome on wheather or not UA follows thru with any type of a merger or not. Just my thoughts here, please feel free to give me your thoughts on these issues.

Fleet is a small entity in this. If they can stop this Merger? I doubt it, but as long as DP and AH have CIC then I will follow their lead. You have to realize that the full value if triggered might not happen as the 4.5% for 3 yrs extention is at the IAM discretion. So we could end up with alot of inhancements, but possible not the whole thing.

 

[freedom]

District Force,

{So on and so forth}


Don't vote to silence your vote, vote NO so you can participate and be a player at the bargaining table. The only one that will not be back to the table is Boss Canale. We will be coming for him to boot him back up to the United Airline Board of Directors......soon enough.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

I feel warm and safe inside knowing that our scope provisions will protect us in a merger …


Anything could happen , I hear talk of downsizing HUBS , CLT for starters ….


Look folks , people ARE going to lose their jobs , there’s no scope that’s going to stop these two companies from downsizing if they merge ,do you understand that ? You cannot shrink two companies by keeping all of your workers … people are going out the door ….

You east guys will go out the door to the tune of the 60 day rule , which means even if you make it back someday , you’ll be at day one pay ..

Oh hey one more thing , while you’ll be coming for RC , UNITED will be coming for you ….

Only the people left get to participate at the table …

 

[mike33]

This tentative is not something to be proud of and it will be used as leverage against our United Airline brothers and sisters when they come to the table in 2009. That's not a proud thing to say but it is what it is because the alternative might be no merger and both airlines in chapter 7.

Just Great.......have us vote yes for this POS and then use us as LEVERAGE in UA Sec 6 Negotiations. Just what I want to do to a fellow union member!!!

I say that I'll make my stand right here and now.......

 

[freedom]

Just Great.......have us vote yes for this POS and then use us as LEVERAGE in UA Sec 6 Negotiations. Just what I want to do to a fellow union member!!!

I say that I'll make my stand right here and now.......

hey mike you haven't answered my question yet


How would you feel if half of the workers in your station went out on invoulntary fulough under the 60 day rule ? If there was something you could do to prevent it , would you ?

 

[mike33]

I'm in SAN. We are probably going to be OK under any scenario.
(UA is a protected station in SAN)

BF

As I understand it, Ua is a protected station under the PCE contract so they might be protected but we aren't. I think the 1994 language applies for them. This needs to be clarified. I could be wrong though.


6-10' on wed
3-5' yesterday
???? today. Jetty southside of Harbor ...Awesome

CU

 

[pjirish317]

freedom,

I'll answer your 3 payscale questions.

1 We on the "EAST" have Class I and Class II payscales because back in 2003 when the BK Judge abrogated our CBA, and pretty much forced a vote on the company's proposal to us, we, Fleet Service were scared of losing our representation, our jobs, we were, it is sad to say ununified, and uneducated in some ways. Sadly this POS BK contract got passed because of that. I do not believe that the Class I cities sold us out, I believe that we sold ourselves out with this decision. That IMO is why we on the "EAST" have 2 payscales.

2 You have a crappy payscale beacuse thats what the TWU NEGOTIATED, and the I'LL ASK MANAGEMENT, agreed with the company that section 6 was not a viable option to pursue, instead they agreed to pursue transition negotiations, knowing full well the company stall tactics. So its not the "EASTS" fault you have the payscale that you have now, just like its not the "WESTS" fault that we have our Class I and Class II payscales. We did it to ourselves.

 

[cltrat]

Freedom if you think zCLT will be downsized before PHX that explains your mindless rants