It's official!

[usfliboi]

So,e serious mis-communication going on...you can't blame the company for this mess....

 

[Onestep2flt]

It is time to start preparing for the next steps. We need to put our absolute best foot forward in arbitration. It is imperative that we work together on creating the best possible outcome.
My discussions with the company – and there have been many – have confirmed that they are unwilling to make any moves that would in any way signal to our workgroup, as well as all the other groups on the property, that a No vote would result in anything other than what was promised: arbitration within the parameters outlined in the NPA. I have been pushing for mediation and the possibility of discussing any and all possible relief but the company will only agree to meet to discuss arbitration protocol.

Thanks for posting this. It is timely as I ask a question in one of the other threads regarding this very paragraph. The protocol agreeement states that the parties "Shall" use mediation prior to arbitration. Yet when you read what has been written above and several other letters the union keeps brushing it aside as like it is an option. They are pushing for it but the company only wants to meet to discuss the arbitration. There is nothing to push, it is REQUIRED under this agreement. Also, I do not see any restrictions to the mediation process after failure of T/A. I know what will take place in arbitration, but I do not see anything that prevents the parties from mediating possible changes. If it is there I have missed it. If someone can point out where it states anything please post it. Looks to me that the company is just dragging thier feet to the arbitration date. I am not understanding why the union leadership appears to just be accepting the company stance on this. Meeting to discuss arbitration protocal is not mediating contract issues. These are two different subjects. Again, perhaps I am missing some language from the protocol agreement. Makes no difference if the union leadership is going to roll over and play dead. Does not matter if you voted yes or know, you should all be fighting for proper mediation.

Don't allow this to pass by without continuing to fight. Keep pressure on the leadership. Remember, two days ago it looked like they were not even going to ask for mediation. YOUR protocol agreement calls for it so hold them to it.

 

[usfliboi]

Of course the union would want mediation.....but you can not blame the company for sticking to an agreement that both they and the unions agreed too....

 

[Bob Owens]

Of course the union would want mediation.....but you can not blame the company for sticking to an agreement that both they and the unions agreed too....

Like they did in 2003 and 2011? The flight attendants should threaten years of conflict just as the company threatened to file Bk and then to abrogate. Why should the unions live up to their side when the company hasnt? Thinges have dramatically changed over the last year. If workers are expected to modify agreements one way due to changed circumstances then companies need to do the same. It can't be one way, even though that's the only way they seem to know.

 

[Bob Owens]

No I believe he's saying get the best deal possible. You need to learn that.

do you think a deal that adds more time to the Bk agreement with no profit sharing is the best deal possible. In the meantime the company is reporting billions in profits. So sad to see such low self esteem.

 

[john john]

If the agents ar MIA could get $30/hr and close all non-hubs I'd support it.


Josh

OK you are on the record for outsourcing all outlying stations and you are a supporter of the IAM language to allow this a UA

 

[usfliboi]

do you think a deal that adds more time to the Bk agreement with no profit sharing is the best deal possible. In the meantime the company is reporting billions in profits. So sad to see such low self esteem.

Some will never be satisfied....never.....point taken!

 

[eolesen]

So,e serious mis-communication going on...you can't blame the company for this mess....

 
I don't know how much clearer APFA could have been...  You can't force people to listen to logic over emotion.  Too many experts knew better than the people actually at the negotiating table.
 

Thanks for posting this. It is timely as I ask a question in one of the other threads regarding this very paragraph. The protocol agreeement states that the parties "Shall" use mediation prior to arbitration. Yet when you read what has been written above and several other letters the union keeps brushing it aside as like it is an option. They are pushing for it but the company only wants to meet to discuss the arbitration. There is nothing to push, it is REQUIRED under this agreement. 
 

 
Was a mediator involved in the discussions that resulted in the TA?  If so, then there's an argument to be made that the protocol has been followed.  

 

[AANOTOK]

Some will never be satisfied....never.....point taken!

I want all I lost pre and during BK. Shift Diff, Holidays, Sick time, Vacation, etc....
Then I will be satisfied.

 

[CMH_GSE]

Like they did in 2003 and 2011? The flight attendants should threaten years of conflict just as the company threatened to file Bk and then to abrogate. Why should the unions live up to their side when the company hasnt? Thinges have dramatically changed over the last year. If workers are expected to modify agreements one way due to changed circumstances then companies need to do the same. It can't be one way, even though that's the only way they seem to know.

Bob, this point must be shouted from the mountain tops.
Things have changed dramatically , for the better.
When they changed dramatically for the worse, the company made mighty quick work of our contract redo, IT HAS TO GO BOTH WAYS.

 

[FWAAA]

do you think a deal that adds more time to the Bk agreement with no profit sharing is the best deal possible. In the meantime the company is reporting billions in profits. So sad to see such low self esteem.

I agree with you on the profit sharing; giving away most of the 15% first dollar profit sharing (as the pilots did in their 1113 negotiations) was a very short-sighted decision. Thanks to the me-too provisions, all workgroups saw their profit sharing percentage slashed to 5% instead of the 15% that was in Horton's term sheets. The pilots traded 2/3 of the profit sharing in exchange for a small percentage bump in hourly rates.

Now, that the profits are rolling in, of course the employees wonder where their profit sharing went. I've heard that Parker is opposed to profit sharing and prefers to keep the profits for the executives and shareholders - not the employees. In most areas, he blindly follows Delta, as he has very few innovative ideas of his own but on profit sharing, he doesn't believe in sharing.

Having given away the profit sharing offered by old management, it's going to be extremely difficult to get it back. Especially now that large profits appear likely. Even more so now that fuel prices are dropping, making the prospects of big profits even more likely. The best time to extract an agreement to share profits is before a company turns profitable, like in 2012 when old management offered it.

The APA president wrote the other day that AA is the only airline other than Spirit where the pilots don't have profit sharing. He can thank his predecessor, Bates, for giving it away:

Delta's CEO recently addressed the importance of a "positive employee culture" and "rewarding employees with pay for performance through profit sharing," adding that it "drives revenue growth and better financial returns." American Airlines management evidently believes otherwise. With the exception of Spirit Airlines, American Airlines is the only other airline that does not provide profit-sharing to its pilots.

https://public.alliedpilots.org/apa/AboutAPA/APAPublicNews/tabid/843/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/5181/Managements-Initial-Proposals-Are-Seriously-Lacking.aspx

Good luck regaining a meaningful profit sharing percentage. Huge opportunity squandered.

 

[eolesen]

Personally, I find it interesting that Horton was willing to share profits, yet he was labeled as a greedy, selfish bastard by anyone carrying a union card, and anyone carrying a union card (except perhaps for Bob Owens and a small minority) saw Doug Parker as the altruistic anti-Tom...
 
My what a difference a year makes....

 

[boston]

Bob, I cant stress enough. A huge % of the membership at L/AA did not vote for any other reason than to send a message to the company and rectify the 2003 vote. I implore you to cruse the MIA terminal and ask the FAs what they understood regarding the process, and if they could articulate what they what would be acceptable? My husband ran into a friend of his who happens to be a FA from his hometown, the FA was proud of his vote and that AA is making money he said no to it, that was the only reason. Didn't matter about reserve, scheduling, training pay, double dipping on vacation, paid last seq of the month with pay and credit,
paid for trip if illegal thru no fault, moving expenses. 401k 9.9% contribution maintained 2018  for L/AA if over 50, little less for 40+,purser pay wide body Europe, Deep South&Asia $7.50 per hour, International over ride for those particular destination 3.75 an hour, $3 for all other Int destinations, $2 an hr for all speakers on the aircraft flying to their language destination, all vacations days paid- take a 2 week vacation or a toped out 35 day each day paid at 4.0 hrs of pay including speaker pay, split vaca 9 times.Just a few things in the TA.
 
They didn't like the like or understand the profit sharing equated to 50m, and it was built into the wages.
61m=DAL/UAL/CO worth
 
the combined 111m
additional value of 82m was obtained=193m
 
They didn't believe this wasn't sec 6, over and over it was heard...NO they can go back and negotiate more. They intrepid the "mediation" to mean if this rejected
mediation will be held to work out something better. There was a mediator at the table at all time, so that has already occurred, the word mediation to take place if rejected was to establish protocol, and what will be cut. As said and agreed to all signed off items are done deal. 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

[Onestep2flt]

I don't know how much clearer APFA could have been...  You can't force people to listen to logic over emotion.  Too many experts knew better than the people actually at the negotiating table.
 

 
Was a mediator involved in the discussions that resulted in the TA?  If so, then there's an argument to be made that the protocol has been followed.
[/quote

I suppose you could argue that point. However, that is not what the agreement actually says. It is spelled out in paragraph 4 and 5 in the protocol agreement. Mediation is suppose to settle disputes that arise in regard contract language. They seem to be accepting mediation as some sort of scheduling of what is going to be arbitrated. I don't see any self inflicted restraints laid out as to what is mediated. The company can say they will only discuss the color of the sky, but the languge is there that they must mediate (the contract) before arbitration.

 

[700UW]

Watch this:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yUuAygwIPs&feature=youtu.be