IAM grievance hearing today?

[aerosmith]

Didn't the IAM win the HMO & Airbus arbitrations only to have them taken away by the court in bankruptcy?

 

[av60]

Didn't the IAM win the HMO & Airbus arbitrations only to have them taken away by the court in bankruptcy?

The iam win and then sacrifice it for 50 utility?????????

 

[Tim Nelson]

Maybe they can negotiate some of the Outsourced East stations back....Well, it's a good thought anyway.
I can only hope and wish that this would happen.
I can understand the C/S group being upset with what the CWA did, but please remember that your group didn't have 20+ stations outsourced, and that the MLE classification was eliminated. Being that I WAS in Fleet, I would make that tradeoff ANYDAY to still be employed. I, along with many others are out on the street, while our former stations are now staffed with Mainline people inside. There are Mainline people with a fraction of the seniority that I had still working at my former station...Sad, but true..

Before your company went to the bankruptcy court to get the language thrown out, my understanding and opinion was:

The IAM was willing to throw out the grievance and bring the 200+ extra dues payers in the 20 small westie stations under scope protections.
In return, no previously contracted-out east side station would be included under scope, millions of dollars of back wages would be dropped [$20,000 awards for many], wages would be boosted up only to $19 as opposed to $22hr-$24hr, sick time partially restored, one extra holiday. But I understand the union and company were sticking over overtime pay rates. The IAM wasn't going to permit a vote on the matter, and it was going to say the compromise was needed because 'nobody really knows what the arbitrator will do'.
I am not on the negotiating team but IMHO I believe the framework above rightly represents the previous situation. Hopefully the IAM will finally stand up for justice and not pimp the workers 'mega million' lotta ticket for its selfish membership gains.

regards

 

[awausairtech]

No greivance should ever be NEGOCIATIED away. unless you are NOT A WORKING MAN.

Trust me ARIZONA MATH IS IN HERE SOME PLACE!!!! :unsure: :unsure:

 

[av60]

Trust me ARIZONA MATH IS IN HERE SOME PLACE!!!! :unsure: :unsure:

Yes the Idiots Against Mechanics will find some way to screw this up?

 

[700UW]

The HMO grievance was won back in the 90s and paid just like the 401K grievance, the company did use the bankruptcy court to get out of paying the airbus arbitration.

 

[allstrike]

Trust me ARIZONA MATH IS IN HERE SOME PLACE!!!! :unsure: :unsure:

Ya but the LEE's of VIRGINIA have delt out some Suth'n Justice. LOL hahahaaaa.

thankyou IAM

this is going to leave a mark oouchhhh.

 

[smallstFSA]

The contracted out east stations are just that GONE but any decent contract that might be hammered out should get rid of the 60 day pay seniority rule. If and when that happens it should cover the 2005 furloughees.

Before your company went to the bankruptcy court to get the language thrown out, my understanding and opinion was:

The IAM was willing to throw out the grievance and bring the 200+ extra dues payers in the 20 small westie stations under scope protections.
In return, no previously contracted-out east side station would be included under scope, millions of dollars of back wages would be dropped [$20,000 awards for many], wages would be boosted up only to $19 as opposed to $22hr-$24hr, sick time partially restored, one extra holiday. But I understand the union and company were sticking over overtime pay rates. The IAM wasn't going to permit a vote on the matter, and it was going to say the compromise was needed because 'nobody really knows what the arbitrator will do'.
I am not on the negotiating team but IMHO I believe the framework above rightly represents the previous situation. Hopefully the IAM will finally stand up for justice and not pimp the workers 'mega million' lotta ticket for its selfish membership gains.

regards

 

[wings396]

Before your company went to the bankruptcy court to get the language thrown out, my understanding and opinion was:

The IAM was willing to throw out the grievance and bring the 200+ extra dues payers in the 20 small westie stations under scope protections.
In return, no previously contracted-out east side station would be included under scope, millions of dollars of back wages would be dropped [$20,000 awards for many], wages would be boosted up only to $19 as opposed to $22hr-$24hr, sick time partially restored, one extra holiday. But I understand the union and company were sticking over overtime pay rates. The IAM wasn't going to permit a vote on the matter, and it was going to say the compromise was needed because 'nobody really knows what the arbitrator will do'.
I am not on the negotiating team but IMHO I believe the framework above rightly represents the previous situation. Hopefully the IAM will finally stand up for justice and not pimp the workers 'mega million' lotta ticket for its selfish membership gains.

regards

It was my understanding that elimination of the 60 day furlough rule was part of this as well. I recently spoke to someone within the IAM-Fleet local, and was told the same. I figured that getting any of the outsourced East stations back would only be a dream. I must say that I don't agree with protecting the small West stations on the backs of those who suffered in the East. If the IAM is going to work out ANY deal with the company, it SHOULD somewhat favor those in the East who have suffered the most. The outsourcing of the East stations along with the 60 day furlough crap took place under the IAM, and they should do all possible to make good on what they can while they have the upper hand over the company. It is in the best interest of ALL to eliminate the 60 day furlough language, as you never know what is coming your way in the future.

 

[Tim Nelson]

It was my understanding that elimination of the 60 day furlough rule was part of this as well. I recently spoke to someone within the IAM-Fleet local, and was told the same. I figured that getting any of the outsourced East stations back would only be a dream. I must say that I don't agree with protecting the small West stations on the backs of those who suffered in the East. If the IAM is going to work out ANY deal with the company, it SHOULD somewhat favor those in the East who have suffered the most. The outsourcing of the East stations along with the 60 day furlough crap took place under the IAM, and they should do all possible to make good on what they can while they have the upper hand over the company. It is in the best interest of ALL to eliminate the 60 day furlough language, as you never know what is coming your way in the future.

yeah, the 60 day was suppose to be eliminated. The 60 day, together with other "IAM exclusive" issues has really set the IAM members behind the industry standards. It also has severely impacted the ramps of Continental and Delta from even considering a union that will take the non union 3 steps backwards like it did all US fleet.

The 60 day rule was the IAM's doing, not any other union. IMO, the 60 day rule agreed to by the IAM was the equivalent of 'genocide' as it 'cleansed' the high seniority for the sake of pimping dues and protecting PHL from higher senior workers. Anyone that thinks the '60 day rule' was not intended and pushed for by PHL reps is not considering things. PHL hates 'out of towners with seniority' comuting to their station. No hospitality there, that's for sure.

Unfortunately, even with a windfall of the 'mega million' lotto ticket, IMO, the IAM will once again pimp the working man because of the 'full blown' liberal institution it is. I'm sure time will see this through. Man I hope I'm wrong, I really do!

regards,

 

[700UW]

The 60 day rule was not agreed too by the IAM, it was in the final offer the company gave to the IAM Fleet after the Judge abrogated the CBA and your own Fleet Brothers and Sisters ratified it.

 

[diogenes]

I disagree. The IAM agreed to it for fleet. IAM M&R, CWA, ALPA and AFA maintained their historic furlough language regarding seniority - language that was in fleet's contract.

The change to 60 days was not revealed to fleet until the IAM called all the chairs in just a few days before the vote. They glossed right over it, too. They tried to pin it on the company, but that was a less than convincing argument, seeing as how Canale and Armedio spend half the meeting bragging about how they had 'improved' the final offer.

It certainly passed the rigged vote, because the contract pandered to class I stations. Principle got thrown under the bus, along with the class II stations.

I find it of interest this is now back on the table at the same time the company is mailing an offer for something already agreed upon (pass benefits) in exchange for a furlough waiver.

Thoughts?

 

[700UW]

I was at CCY till late in the night upon the abrogation, I was in contact with the Fleet Committee, I guess you forgot there was not an agreed to concessionary contract.

The judge abrogated and the company gave a final offer which you all ratified.

 

[delldude]

Don't forget....the only way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time....and savor the flavor!

 

[allstrike]

They tried to pin it on the company, but that was a less than convincing argument, seeing as how Canale and Armedio spend half the meeting bragging about how they had 'improved' the final offer.

Thoughts?

Dont get me wrong Im looking for some clarification,are you saying the final offer was negotiated.Or were the improvements just BS or smoke&mirrors.

And Im still looking for an article were the judge threw out the contracts,cant find it.I can find were he said he would if we didnt reach an agreement,but I cant find were he did.

Dont want to spin anything not true here,just looking for the truth.