swaboeingonly
Member
- Aug 30, 2011
- 80
- 230
I would also agree to such an agreement.
IBT No Show Forum
- Thread starter swamt
- Start date
Thanks,guys. I have talked to several members of the AT committee. They do plan to come to the meeting next week. They will have their local business agent with them not the IBT.They will be tied up with Horizon Aire. The AT committee will also be without their chairman, Pepper Atkinson,he got removed by Don Toney the local IBT president because Pepper called the committee together in January to talk about a possible solution, modification or removal of the fencing to propose to AMFA, if the agreement failed, but did not call Don Toney first,unintentionally,he says.Don Toney has not attended one meeting.Go figure it. Don Toney wants arbitration,the AT mech's don't if all possible.Pepper bucked the IBT and paid for it. The commiittee will also be absent one more member because of a vacation conflict. I have talked to Pepper and he believes the mechanics will go with a 25-30% and or 3-4 year reduction to AT mech's or increase in SWA seniority. If the fences is removed. He says the simpler the better.I hope SWA will propose this and the committee will bring it back to the mechanics to vote on. Can this happen,do you believe you committee will propose this? Hope to be one soon.
grmach1
Advanced
- Oct 11, 2010
- 112
- 171
Most of us are not interested in a seniority boost. I think that is clear. A 30 to 35% seniority reduction by you guys will more than likely get it done.
I would settle on 3.5 to 4 years.
So if you got 16 years senority then 20-25% would be fine in that case.
Hustl3r
Member
- Jan 29, 2012
- 27
- 17
What if u don't have 3.5-4? And why would each individual case matter and be different? A 1 time hit is a 1 time hit and shouldn't vary.
S
Swadl
Guest
Many have talked to our Comte and hopefully they have heard us! But you also need to purpose that to your Comte. Let's get this done and over with. And move on to the new contract!
Hustl3r
Member
- Jan 29, 2012
- 27
- 17
We don't know who actually is on the committee, well I don't actually know. On 1 day off the next
AvTech04
Senior
Look, I have to some what apologize about my earlier posting. I was a little rambunctious and a little under the influence simultaneously, which never ends well. I did mean what I said about the DFW guys, but I didn't need to approach it in such an abrasive manner. For that, my apologies. It's just that I've gotten the opportunity to work with some of those guys and they are good people, undeserving of what's happening to them, but they're understanding about this being a nature of the beast situation, so their humbleness instead of angry made me even angrier for them at the results of the vote. It had nothing to do with Us not having a say in the vote, it was the whole situation that was $hitty. If the tables were turned, I would have been on the fence with my vote as well, but probably would have voted yes. But, it wasn't my vote and there's nothing that can be said nor done about it now, so moving on.
I've already posted the max I'm willing to give, we get a roughly 30% increase in pay thanks to the AMFA negotiations and the company agreement, so using the law of averages and the weight bare and loss to gain benefit for the SWA guys, I will not vote in anything above 30% decrease in AT seniority, with the march 29th LOA being removed for the SWA contract and the TA amended to show pay retroed back to at least SOC, if not even sooner.
30% is the max fairest method to use instead of years. It has the impact on the AT side that AMFA wants and a least impact on the majority of the AT side. Also, it's the average pay rate advantage that we get transitioning over to SWA. So 30% or less is the number if we all agree it's a one time thing, no strings attached. (removal of the LOA's, no fence, and we get the pay in return) but the 30% hit goes back to no later than the purchase date or Date of closing. I would be a 100% yes vote to those terms.
Again, my apologizes to those I may have offended in my earlier post, it wasn't my intention.
I've already posted the max I'm willing to give, we get a roughly 30% increase in pay thanks to the AMFA negotiations and the company agreement, so using the law of averages and the weight bare and loss to gain benefit for the SWA guys, I will not vote in anything above 30% decrease in AT seniority, with the march 29th LOA being removed for the SWA contract and the TA amended to show pay retroed back to at least SOC, if not even sooner.
30% is the max fairest method to use instead of years. It has the impact on the AT side that AMFA wants and a least impact on the majority of the AT side. Also, it's the average pay rate advantage that we get transitioning over to SWA. So 30% or less is the number if we all agree it's a one time thing, no strings attached. (removal of the LOA's, no fence, and we get the pay in return) but the 30% hit goes back to no later than the purchase date or Date of closing. I would be a 100% yes vote to those terms.
Again, my apologizes to those I may have offended in my earlier post, it wasn't my intention.
I am not saying a mixed system.
Ethier you all give up 30-35%, or you all give up 3.5-4 years.
One system or the other.
Also if you dont have 3.5 years now then you obviously would go to the bottom in that system.
You would be better off if it was a % loss.
But the sooner we strike a deal the sooner we welcome you to AMFA and our payscale.
Hustl3r
Member
- Jan 29, 2012
- 27
- 17
Exactly so 20-25% would be fair ?
Fair is different to everyone.
I am not negotiating with you, I am just telling At2001 what I would vote for.
Similar threads
