IAM topic of the week

[Tim Nelson]

Today we picketed and Canale and Rich Johnson were there to support and Canale testified (with anger) the demoralizing result of the negotiation. He did seem to have said all this in Earnest. But you still have to think, it is Too Little, Too Late!

Rich also had a not-so-nice remark for Tim when it was brought up about a possible sidebar law suit against the Section 6. We just gave them a head' up.

Over 300 showed up. Well orchestrated. Gotta give those pilots credit. Very professional. Should be lots of video and newscoverage. Dawn Gilberson had an article on the newswire before it even happened.

Now! What' Next.

Looks like the CEO is BAFFLED! The latest comments from the BizJournal say the industry is going down. Guess we are one of the leaders in that respect.

Something gotta give. The company's transition talks have left no evidence that a transition can be worked out. Therefore, a rightful interpretation is to recommence section 6 alongside any potential transition talks. Rich J is concerned with dues and INTL concerns and is most likely under the pursuasion to merge west into east so the escrow account can be reaped. Thankfully, our negotiations team didn't listen to Rich's initial advice to go back and reason with AL over unreasonable profanities.

I'm sure Rich J feelings are hurt when I talk about section 6 DFR filings. I'm thinking that Randy himself might finally understand though that section 6 is the way to go. We've been telling Randy this for 2 years so hopefully hemenway's latest offense will help pursuade Randy to reconsider.
If so then no DFR is needed and Rich neednt worry. But make no mistake, agreeing with Hemenway to cease section 6 was a poor decision that did not protect the interest of the west. But it's never too late to revisit the issue. What can it hurt? And what is Rich J, and Tommy R's alternative to a greedy company? Just mergin the west in with the east is unacceptable and maybe Rich J needs to go visit SAN and LAS and see how they feel and then visit PHL and CLT since this involves everyone.
Our fight isn't with INTL reps but The INTL reps need to listen to the masses, recognize the solidarity on the property, and develop a plan that is more than 'rah rah get togethers' and more than transition talks. I myself am open to a solution but thus far I am not pursuaded that anything other than section 6 will protect the interest of fleet service. I'm not the smartest guy in the world so if there is another way then we need to hear it.

Please Post this in all Locals

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[Tim Nelson]

Seeds of Transition

Oftentimes we see how certain seeds sprout up quickly and we call those seeds weeds. There isn't really nothing you have to do, you don't have to water them much at all. They just keep coming back.
OTOH, there are other seeds that you plant that take some time. You have to till the ground, water them, and after time they begin to show themselves. Many of us did this in our grade school milkjugs.

At any rate, the company is trying to sow seeds of weeds, but the network of solidarity is sowing seeds of justice. Hang in there people. We started this back in November by voting in new Local Chairman and changing out some negotiations team members that were not useful to us.

We also put political heat on Canale to limit any more damage he could do, all in hopes of advancing fleet service with an agreement that includes dignity and respect. The seeds are not mature yet and we are aware that the weeds are trying to choke them, nonetheless we are still watering and laying down the groundwork needed for the seeds to mature.

Please Post THIS in all Locals

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[wings396]

So now its' "Modification" of the 60 day rule, not ELIMINATION for ALL..............Great :down:

 

[Tim Nelson]

So now its' "Modification" of the 60 day rule, not ELIMINATION for ALL..............Great :down:

I hope the final agreement, if there is such a thing, reflects the sacrifices of those who are gone but not forgotten. My reading of the 60 day rule, according to the union proposal, reflects this and restores those who are gone to the pay seniority they had when they left.

As a side, amazing how Al gets out of his comfort zone in one negotiations session, and he sings like a canary by having his managers post his rambling thoughts in the breakrooms today. My only question is if Jerry Glass told him to do it.

Take it easy and relax Al, things will work out for you once you redo the math on the september rejection. Nobody is flippn out on our side, just good honest people who dont want to get insulted.
Otherwise, see you in 2009 and enjoy the section 6 west negotiations that I hope will start up....soon enough.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[JoeDirt]

So now its' "Modification" of the 60 day rule, not ELIMINATION for ALL..............Great :down:

Wings
The unions proposal did eliminate the 60 day rule completely for involuntary furlough. Even those that have returned to work under the 60 day rule.

 

[pjirish317]

After looking over both proposals. Why didn't the union ask for more in their proposal to the company? Lets find out what AH offers when there someone interrested in merging with us. I say throw our original 1999 agreement on the table. With no extension. And fix what is wrong with that agreement in 2009. If the company wants our profit sharing, and coc language, to pay for our raises, then they better bring their proposal up to, and possibly beyond industry standards. Anything less would be uncivilized.

 

[diogenes]

The 1999 contract was set to expire in 2004. Now's it 2008 and fleet is worse off than they were in 1995.

You can see the company's game -string it out and run out the clock.

They'll do it another 10 years if you stand still for it.

Good to see the membership organized. A pity IAM did not welcome fleet in 1999 with open arms, and build a grassroots network - what a machine fleet and mechs would have made united! It says a lot about IAM leadership when 13 years after they were certified to represent fleet, mechs and FS are still run as separate concerns. "An injury to one..." is just boilerplate.

Due to IAM neglect, the grassroots is being built outside of established channels. It's simple justice for the leadership to be held, finally, accountable to the membership.

I'm rooting for you guys.

 

[Tim Nelson]

To Rich J, Tommy R

listen to the membership. get the TWU negotiations files and Direct Randy Canale back into section 6. What other plan can there be? It's inequitable to just sit and do nothing for the west until 2009, and inequitable for the east to do anything less than what Randy offered the company a couple weeks ago.
C'mon it's a reasonable question. I can assure you of one thing, the support exist to file a dispute in District court, and you and I know the case would have merit and possible damages. That is not the preferred path and nobody wants to have to do that if DL141 can finally develop a proactive plan to protect the interest of its members. Our patience has been more than adequate, but close to 3 years and nothing, not even a nibble from the company.
Rich J, you need to realize that merging the west in with the east without the necessary compensation for the east will never happen unless you decide to do so in an undemocratic fashion. Let's get this done and let's stop holding things up on the section 6 talks. Section 6 talks will also be a visual display of the company's inabilitiy to address its glaring labor problems. I certainly hope there was no 'deal' between the IAM and the company to cease section 6 talks for good.

Click here for strategy
Click here for letter back to AL
Regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[diogenes]

Tim,

I am nowhere near current on the byzantine ins-and-outs, but given the dreadful nature of West's contracts, why can't it be brought up to par with East's with some minor modifications (such as keeping the CoC language and ditching the various outsourcing mechanisms)?

OTOH, D141 agreed to major outsourcing provisions in 1999, well before any thought of 9/11 or BK, so y'all have got your work cut out for you.

 

[lithuanian]

Please explain exactly what Section 6 is for anyone never having been union. And, what exactly is the 60 day rule, also. Thank you.

 

[JoeDirt]

Please explain exactly what Section 6 is for anyone never having been union. And, what exactly is the 60 day rule, also. Thank you.

The 60 day rule is pretty simple. It stated anyone on furlough for 60 days or more would be placed at day one seniority as far as rate of pay. They would retain seniority for bidding purposes but would drop back to the beginning of the pay scale.

 

[JoeDirt]

Someone else will have to explain Section 6. Golden are you up to it?

 

[diogenes]

Transportation unions (organized under the RLA) are a different animal than say UAW or USWA (organized under the NLRA). UAW contracts expire on a date certain, and if a new one is not negotiated by that date, workers are immediately considered on strike.

Transportation contracts become amendable at the expiration date, and employees continue work under the old contract until a new one is ratified. It is much more difficult to go on strike under the RLA, and the President can always interfere. When a transportation contract 'expires', parties enter 'Section 6' (routine) negotiations.

Supposedly, these roadblocks are to insure "vital transporation" continues.

More likely, to cut into what little labor power there is. No sooner did FDR try to even the playing field a bit, than a GOP congress overrode Truman's veto of Taft-Hartley.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft-Hartley_Act

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_Labor_Act

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,

I am nowhere near current on the byzantine ins-and-outs, but given the dreadful nature of West's contracts, why can't it be brought up to par with East's with some minor modifications (such as keeping the CoC language and ditching the various outsourcing mechanisms)?

OTOH, D141 agreed to major outsourcing provisions in 1999, well before any thought of 9/11 or BK, so y'all have got your work cut out for you.

To begin with, the bottom of the barrel is not the west, contrary to thought. The second class east stations have the worst pay/benefit combo than anyone. Further, Class one stations need to benefit just like everyone else. I think the last contract vote was a good voice from CLT, PHL, PIT and alot of second class stations that also voted it down in a big way. Many west stations voted the contract down also. And today the west is even stronger and understands that the last contract was poison for many jobs and benefits.

I think you start with the contract that was voted down and go upwards from there. The union's latest proposal is useful, reasonable, and recognizes the sacrifice of all the members. Certainly the network of solidarity wont' campaign against it. The only 'tweak' is that it should contain some wage boost for steps 1-9. The problem isn't that the union is unreasonable but rather the company doesn't want to recognize fairness.

The question now is, 'what is the IAM"s strategic plan'? Al Hemenway's action of insult showed us explicitly where he's at and that he really doesn't want a transition. His fanning the negotiations in the breakroom suggest to me that he has misread the resolve and solidarity of the members behind their union. Sure, we have some internal squabbles but we are all soidly behind our union's latest actions and this new negotiations team.
Now the west knows where Al's coming from so why waste more time at a table when there is an insult of intelligence?
That big elephant in the room that the IAM doesn't want to talk about is called section 6 negotiations. Certainly the company doesn't want to do section 6 as it is quite an embarassment and poor reflection of this management team. Certainly the IAM is looking at the escrow accounts. But it makes 'good sense' for all of us union people to come and reason together among ourselves and agree to reopen section 6 and move that alongside transition, presuming the company has a change of heart. Over 2 years of trusting AL has gained nothing.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[Theo Corner]

Tim Nelson is not a Local Chairman, he's not even a member in good standing. But him and some east leaders in PHL and CLT don't understand that the best solution is to merge the west into the east. Unfortunately there is now division on the negotiations team that will not allow Randy Canale to merge the two groups.

I so love when DistrictForce is here talking more things they do not know. Yes he is the Local Chairman and yes he is a member in good standing. If they cannot even get something this simple correct, then what makes you think they can have any knowledge of anything else?

h34r: