IBT/UAL contract rejection, what does it mean to us at AA?
- Thread starter Bob Owens
- Start date
Roadking5560
Advanced
- Oct 30, 2013
- 169
- 207
We're so lucky to be graced with your mere presence on this forum. Your arrogance amazes me.
conehead777
Veteran
- Dec 8, 2014
- 829
- 811
this contract was signed in 2014 not last week thats the facts and truth . but you can't handle the truth. as far as Boeing cutting its starting in management and volunteer layoffs . there also looking at designing a new airplane a 757 replacement maybe. but the iam agreeing to freezing the pensions happened in 2014 when Boeing was making money . so your cost cutting has nothing to do with the freeze in the pensions that was to keep the 777x in Washington state. you fail again with your facts.
ThirdSeatHero
Veteran
700UW said:
" facts,truth and reality " ???
Now that's funny coming from someone who just got caught lying about UAL negotiations and section 6
conehead777
Veteran
- Dec 8, 2014
- 829
- 811
the locals wanted to reject it the Intl wanted it passed it passed . That pos should of never been brought back for a vote . They were in a contract. The leaders are responsible for accepting that and bringing it back for a vote. The leader should of never gave up the pension in a non bk contract. In bk it's up to the court. It was a 51 to 49 percent . I still blame the union not the members for 2 reason one they should of called Boeing bluff it would of cost Boeing a lot more money to build in a non Union state first building new factory as big as the one in Everett the wings may be composit but the fuselage is the same there already tooled in evertt re tooling is expensive . They have trained folks already 777 experienced in Washington . If they did it in South Carolina they still would need a bigger factory . Number 2 the iam dose not care about there pension because the iam leaders did not have theirs frozen so it's no sweat off there back. But all they could see is losing dues.. But they should of done what the due paying members paid for to fight Boeing . So the twu is responsible for the b scale . The iam is responsible for frozen pensions in non bk contract . . Your a typical iam official saying you voted it in. Don't tell me your not as much time on here as you are defending the iam. Let me give you a clue if the iam was any good you would not have to defend them.700UW said:
conehead777
Veteran
- Dec 8, 2014
- 829
- 811
Boeing’s workers in Washington State voted down an eight-year contract extension in November, Boeing wasted little time in soliciting offers from other states to build its new 777X aircraft.
Within weeks, 22 states made proposals to Boeing, with some offering billions of dollars in subsidies to lure a project that would mean thousands of jobs and the prestige of having such a prominent manufacturer.
All this so alarmed the leaders of the main union representing Boeing workers, the International Association of Machinists, that its president has brushed aside the objections of the local union and ordered a new vote — scheduled for Friday — on a slightly revised version of the contract.
The dispute highlights a rift within the union, one that reflects the varying priorities of its leadership. Union officials in Washington State want to preserve gains hard won from a company that has surging profits and record plane orders. But the international leadership sees a different threat — the possibility of losing a large manufacturing center and more than 10,000 union jobs to a right-to-work state where it would be difficult to win representation. And that could mean a big loss in dues — Boeing workers in the Puget Sound area paid $25.5 million in dues to the international union in 2012.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/02/business/vote-on-boeing-contract-highlights-rift-in-machinists-union.html?_r=0
Within weeks, 22 states made proposals to Boeing, with some offering billions of dollars in subsidies to lure a project that would mean thousands of jobs and the prestige of having such a prominent manufacturer.
All this so alarmed the leaders of the main union representing Boeing workers, the International Association of Machinists, that its president has brushed aside the objections of the local union and ordered a new vote — scheduled for Friday — on a slightly revised version of the contract.
The dispute highlights a rift within the union, one that reflects the varying priorities of its leadership. Union officials in Washington State want to preserve gains hard won from a company that has surging profits and record plane orders. But the international leadership sees a different threat — the possibility of losing a large manufacturing center and more than 10,000 union jobs to a right-to-work state where it would be difficult to win representation. And that could mean a big loss in dues — Boeing workers in the Puget Sound area paid $25.5 million in dues to the international union in 2012.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/02/business/vote-on-boeing-contract-highlights-rift-in-machinists-union.html?_r=0
conehead777
Veteran
- Dec 8, 2014
- 829
- 811
the members turned it down in November , the international should of went with there vote but no they get a re vote . See you didn't tell the whole story . Just like in 03 the aa flight attendants voted down the pay cuts there Union did the same thang got a re vote . And it passed because the unions made it passed.
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Oct 20, 2007
- 23,579
- 5,263
