IAM Fleet Service topic

[isthisok]

And you talk about scare tactics!!! PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Correct me if I'm wrong but PHX has been a station in our system for a long time and I've never witnessed a mass exodus there.

I would love to see some philly guys on that tarmac in the summer with temps of 125 degrees......LOL!

If I'm not mistaken, if a US Airways Fleet Service Agent wants to go to PHX you do it as a part timer. A friend of mine years ago transfered there and had to downgrade to part time to do so. I don't think there are full time East in PHX. I may be wrong. I can't imagine anyone wanting to work in that heat.

 

[giantfan]

We all need a raise, but when the T/A will only give you a big enough increase to cover what its going to co$t you to work under the east CBA, that is if you even still have a job with the merger mania coming since the yes vote will eliminate scope that may $ave your job and many others!

The topped out westies will earn an additional $560 in their monthly paychecks. Not including any overtime they may work. This is A LOT more than costs that they will incur if they work under the east CBA. Again, I have family coverage and pay $99/month for it.

Also, this T/A offers job protections for those 18 field stations for the next 3 years. If/when we merge with United, how long do you think those cities will be protected?

There is so much misleading info on these boards it's enough to make one CRAZY! :wacko:

 

[giantfan]

The change of scope alone for the west is huge. Maybe you can get these guys
to explain how that could happen. Nobody I know of has ever gotten an explantion.
I'm not saying one doesn't exist or that their isn't some leagal precident for it.
But to date we have heard zilch other than Canale's carefully crafted statements,
or other less subtle blurts.

BTW if it was taken to the west for a vote it just might pass. That would be a
pretty big loss for a lot of west stations on the list.


I'm assuming your talking about PF. If so he came to our station, made these
kinds of statements about the west into the east, and was asked if he
had some more info as to how this would be possible. He said he'd get
back to us with that info. But It would be very hard to believe that he
doesn't know all there is to know on the subject as we speak.

If you know something else please tell us. But like I say I have never
heard anyone even try to defend this idea with any thing more that
saying it could happen. Mike 33 had a conversation with an LLC neg.
who said it could happen because the value of the Sept TA was greater
than the value of the east and west contract. Or something like that.
It made absolutely no sence to me. BTW PF dismissed this idea.

Bagfather it was not PF that I spoke to. I'm just posting what I was told. But I personally have no other info to go on.

I look at it this way.....say they roll the west into the east....say the east or the union says No you can't do that, so they fight it out.....

Well the co. says to the judge....we offered them two T/A's with payraises for all but they were both voted down so we have no choice....judge says ok.

Sound possible?????????? YES I THINK SO.....

Vote NO= keep our crap bk wages for a lot longer!!!!!

 

[mlr]

well that settles it for me.... I guess I'll have to vote no on this ...... I Have to protect my phx brothers and sisters from a mass exodus of easters migrating to phoenix in case the logical yes vote succeeds ..... of all the arguements for a no vote, that has to be the best one yet.... the threat of the old guys from the east taking over phx with all their seniority, .... but why wait for the vote...just move now. That will show those dam phx guys for even thinking about voting themselves a long overdue pay raise. Maybe if enough of the philly guys do move the philly hub might actually get more efficient......of course then the phx hub would go to hell.....such a dilemma

 

[cltrat]

mlr nothing personal bro but phx has no business questioning how efficient PHL is ...LOL

 

[giantfan]

Maybe if enough of the philly guys do move the philly hub might actually get more efficient......of course then the phx hub would go to hell.....such a dilemma

Philly more efficient..........?????? mlr---that would be the ONLY way it would happen!!!!! LOL!!!!!!!

 

[Edward]

Back to the topic & it's not about stations.

 

[isthisok]

To the West..........This is what you'll pay for insurance in 2008

PART TIME RATES ARE TWO TIMES FULL TIME RATES

PPO 100/80 PPO 90/70 PPO 80/60

Employee 96 65 30
Emp + Spouse 191 130 60
Emp + Child 182 123 57
Emp + Family 316 215 99

DEDUCTIBLES 100/80 90/70 80/60

In Network 225/450 225/450 450/900
Out of Network 450/900 450/900 900/1800

OFFICE CO-PAY

Primary Care 25
Specialist 40
ER 100

PRESCRIPTION DEDUCTIBLES

Retail/ Mail Order

Generic 15/ 30
Formulary Brand 30/ 60
Non Formulary 50/ 100

Sorry if this is a little hard to understand but it is the best I could do. You can find the info here, staring on page 136.

http://www.iam141.org/PDF/US%20Airways/IAM...Plan2-09-06.pdf

 

[P. REZ]

The Bagfather,

Now, if you want me to speculate on whether TWU would have done any different than IAM in these transitional talks, I have to say I don't know. It would have depended on who they sent into these talks. I am not happy with this TA but will not say that TWU could have done better because I wasn't in these transitional talks so I can't compare styles of negotiating. I would love to say I could have done better or this or that person could have done better but that would be pure speculation. I have been a part of two negotiations and they are no picnic. I do think TWU would have continued section 6. BTW, the company offered us the BK contract right after the merger was announced.


Respectfully,

P. REZ

 

[P. REZ]

perserverance,



''p.rez''-
Thanks, now I know if this thing does get voted in and some of us have to
adjust we can maybe go to PHX and be in the top 20 or so some of us will probably
end up top dogs !! and I will feel for those who fell out, but they voted YES. They voted
us there and we voted to stay right where were at. Thanks for the answer I thought it was junior,
I actually have closer to 25 years and if I had to relocate, I'm coming. I could probably get
a bigger home too for the same money.


Come on down, we could use some seniority out here. The most seniority anyone at AWA would have would be 8-83. There are way too many new guys. BTW a 2000 square foot home runs about $300,000. Also, the heat isn't that bad, remember it's a dry heat.


Respectfully,

P. REZ

 

[700UW]

necigrad,



I thought the ATSB loan got paid off moths before the merger and CBA ammendable date both. Paying it off lifted all restrictions.



The scenario was with AWA as a stand alone carrier. The ATSB loan was paid off with financing from the merger.


Respectfully,

P. REZ

No it wasnt, the loan was sold off by the ATSB, then US financed it with GECAS, then borrowed money from other banks and paid off GECAS, the loan is still on the books.

The amended and restated US Airways and AWA loans entered into on September 27, 2005 that had previously been guaranteed by the ATSB. On October 19, 2005, $777 million of the loans, of which $752 million had been guaranteed by the ATSB, was sold by the lenders by order of the ATSB to 13 fixed income investors, removing the ATSB guarantee. At the time of repayment of these loans on March 31, 2006, the total outstanding balance of the loans was $801 million, of which $551 million was outstanding under the US Airways loan and $250 million was outstanding under the AWA loan.

On March 31, 2006, US Airways Group entered into a loan agreement with General Electric Capital Corporation (“GECCâ€) and a syndicate of lenders pursuant to which the Company borrowed an aggregate principal amount of $1.1 billion. On April 7, 2006, US Airways Group entered into an amended and restated loan agreement, which increased the principal amount of the loan to $1.25 billion (as amended and restated, the “GE Loanâ€). US Airways, America West Holdings, AWA, Piedmont, PSA and MSC are all guarantors of the GE Loan.

The GE Loan bears interest at an index rate plus an applicable index margin or, at the Company’s option, LIBOR plus an applicable LIBOR margin for interest periods of one, two, three or six months. The applicable index margin, subject to adjustment, is 1.50%, 2.00%, 2.25%, or 2.50% if the adjusted loan balance is respectively less than $600 million, between $600 million and $750 million, between $750 million and $900 million, or between $900 million and $1.25 billion. The applicable LIBOR margin, subject to adjustment, is 2.50%, 3.00%, 3.25%, or 3.50% if the adjusted loan balance is respectively less than $600 million, between $600 million and $750 million, between $750 million and $900 million, or between $900 million and $1.25 billion. In addition, interest on the GE Loan may be adjusted based on the credit rating for the GE Loan as follows: (i) subject to clause (ii) below, if the credit rating for the GE Loan is B1 or better from Moody’s and B+ or better from Standard & Poor (“S&Pâ€) as of the last day of the most recently ended fiscal quarter, then (A) the applicable LIBOR margin will be the lower of 3.25% and the rate otherwise applicable based upon the adjusted GE Loan balance and ( the applicable index margin will be the lower of 2.25% and the rate otherwise applicable based upon the adjusted GE Loan balance, and (ii) if the credit rating for the Loan is Ba3 or better from Moody’s and BB- or better from S&P as of the last day of the most recently ended fiscal quarter, then the applicable LIBOR margin will be 2.50% and the applicable index margin will be 1.50%. The GE Loan matures on March 31, 2011, and no principal payments are scheduled until maturity.

In addition, the GE Loan requires certain mandatory prepayments upon certain events, establishes certain financial covenants, including minimum cash requirements and maintenance of certain minimum ratios, contains customary affirmative covenants and negative covenants, and contains customary events of default. Under the GE Loan, US Airways Group is required to maintain consolidated unrestricted cash and cash equivalents of not less than $750 million, subject to partial reductions upon specified reductions in the outstanding principal amount of the GE Loan.


On March 31, 2006, proceeds of the GE Loan were used, in part, to repay in full the following indebtedness:

The amended and restated US Airways and AWA loans entered into on September 27, 2005 that had previously been guaranteed by the Air Transportation Stabilization Board (“ATSBâ€). On October 19, 2005, $777 million of the loans, of which $752 million had been guaranteed by the ATSB, was sold by the lenders by order of the ATSB to 13 fixed income investors, for which Citibank, N.A served as agent, removing the ATSB guarantee (the “Citibank Loansâ€). At the time of repayment of these loans on March 31, 2006, the total outstanding balance of the loans was $801 million, of which $551 million was outstanding under the US Airways loan and $250 million was outstanding under the AWA loan. Proceeds were also used to pay $15 million of accrued interest and fees on the US Airways loan, and $8 million of accrued interest and $5 million of prepayment penalty on the AWA loan.

• The $161 million loan entered into as of September 27, 2005 between US Airways and AWA and Airbus Financial Services, for which US Airways Group was the guarantor. At the time of repayment on March 31, 2006, the outstanding balance of the loan was $161 million. US Airways and AWA also had an $89 million loan from Airbus Financial Services entered into as of September 27, 2005. In accordance with the terms of the loan agreements, the outstanding principal amount of the $89 million loan was to be forgiven on the earlier of December 31, 2010 or the date that the outstanding principal amount of, accrued interest on, and all other amounts due under the Airbus $161 million loan were paid in full, provided that the Company complied with the delivery schedule for certain Airbus aircraft. As a result of the prepayment of the $161 million loan

 

[roabilly]

Attention All Fleet Service Members, IAM Officers, and all those knowledgeable…
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We (Fleet) have become so preoccupied with our own Agreement, and the proposed T/A, that I feel we are overlooking something extremely important.

We are going to be involved in M&A activity very soon…probably UA. United Ground Service has a current, and enforceable IAM negotiated contract.

Now…let’s begin to look at the ramifications of United becoming a Successor to US! We need to know what the language their current CBA has in regards to Successorship, Change in Control, as well as general Merger and Acquisition provisions.

If we proceed blindly, into this unknown Merger Abyss with weak Scope Language, weak Merger Protection, and a firm Amendable Date in 2011, we will be disadvantaged if the UA IAM counterparts have any one of these afore mentioned categories covered in their own CBA.

I will extend this request to all who read this forum…let’s obtain a current copy of the United Airlines Ground Handler’s IAM Contract. Copy and paste all applicable language such as all M&A and COC (If so contained).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And …700UW…

before you counter post with the LCC being the Successor scenario…which by the way… I am not disputing as a possibility…this language in the UA Agreement will still of considerable value to us.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And … Freedom…

As a man of self proclaimed conceptualization talents…help us to objectively present this argument to this board. Wrap your mind around the concept of UA’s M&A language superseding our own. Oh… I almost forgot… I commend you for your passion, tenacity, and convictions, even though they may not reflect my own.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And…Farce… I’ll get with you later in this forum!

 

[perserverance]

''gf'', though you may feel a East exodus is a please!!!! issue what would you have us
do if our jobs are threatened and we look to retain employment. You went to FL and if
I had to choose I'd rather go to PHX to see my sen. would put me close to if not at
the top in PHX. You can call it what ever you like (tactic) I'll just wait and see. This may
become a reality. Also your quotes recently don't have the posters monicker, in o-man's
quote, looked to be from JPN. Are you trying to find a kink in his posts'. He's one of the posters
who tells it like it is and yet you seem to be looking for something. Just ask him for his faults
I'm sure he'd let you know. One of mine is apparently pointing out others. also as far as temps.
go how about PHL in Jan/Feb low digits and ice, snow, sleet with 20+mph winds, remember no
walls outside at an airport and then 90+ days all summer, heating bills, remember one of the
arguments is the price of oil well I have oil heat.

p-rez, thanks for the info and no I don't need a 2000 sq. foot house. I currently live in a row
home (2 bedroom), let me know if you don't know what a row home is but its' not at all
considered large. Thanks again for the info, it was all the talk today at work.... :cold: rainy
and in the upper 40's.

Thanks

 

[P. REZ]

perserverance,

p-rez, thanks for the info and no I don't need a 2000 sq. foot house. I currently live in a row
home (2 bedroom), let me know if you don't know what a row home is but its' not at all
considered large. Thanks again for the info.

I can't say I know what a row home is. I have lived west of the Mississippi since age 10 and Fla. before that. Sunny and a mild 96 degrees today.

 

[roadtrip]

To the West..........This is what you'll pay for insurance in 2008

PART TIME RATES ARE TWO TIMES FULL TIME RATES

PPO 100/80 PPO 90/70 PPO 80/60

Employee 96 65 30
Emp + Spouse 191 130 60
Emp + Child 182 123 57
Emp + Family 316 215 99

DEDUCTIBLES 100/80 90/70 80/60

In Network 225/450 225/450 450/900
Out of Network 450/900 450/900 900/1800

OFFICE CO-PAY

Primary Care 25
Specialist 40
ER 100

PRESCRIPTION DEDUCTIBLES

Retail/ Mail Order

Generic 15/ 30
Formulary Brand 30/ 60
Non Formulary 50/ 100

Sorry if this is a little hard to understand but it is the best I could do. You can find the info here, staring on page 136.

http://www.iam141.org/PDF/US%20Airways/IAM...Plan2-09-06.pdf

So if a guy on the west that has a family needs insurance and is now making 12 bucks and hour going to say 14 bucks an hour if this TA is ratified he will make an extra 320.00 a month. Then the company insurance costs you 316.00 bucks, the westie ends up with a whole 4 dollar raise!

WOW what a good deal!