JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet. **New and improved 2.0 version**

Status
Not open for further replies.
“””I can't put my finger on it for sure, but i believe the AMTs had a starring role in everyone getting raises”””

Put it to you this way. They were Tom Hanks up in lights.

well, according to hollywood insiders, tom hanks' phone has been ringing off the hook for huge parts that will be filmed; just by coincidence - in aa hub cities.

this could be an eventful summer.
 
You have no problem waiting years?? How about those of us who would like to retire before "years"
There are many...

yeah...

shareholders of a bk stock got equity in the new company's stock and the shareholders once again, were the main beneficiaries of the stock buy backs.

there's a common denominator there...'leap of faith' and 'going for great' shirts were seen worn at a hedge fund golf tournament.
 
Update

All the back and forth on MX and Fleet coming out together with a TA will eventually be proven or not. What really matters right now is that Dougie has drawn a line in the sand. Dougie is saying goodbye to 17% of Fleet/MX jobs, goodbye to LUS insurance and goodbye to the LUS pension and here is a 401k plan that will allow the company to pocket even more money off our backs.

We have a choice, stick together or get pummeled. It's that simple. We will choose our outcome in the weeks ahead.

P. Rez


Kev3188,

17000 Fleet, 13000 MX. Roughly 5000 jobs will be cut. FYI, that's a minimum to cut, they want possible other cuts from their scope proposal of "when and where directed" work. Thousands of furloughs will come with the company offer if accepted even though they claim no furloughs.

The company is offering a 5% automatic 401k match and will match 4% if employees contribute 4%. The pocketing comes from the 4% but they charge us as if all employees put in 4% to be matched.

This is a pile of s**t offer. BTW, the company reads posts on social media and people that want to predict what will be voted in need to stfu and keep their predictions to themselves!

P. Rez
P. Rez, so sorry to hear of the cuts/layoffs/rifs.
I also agree 100% on the social media stuff. The guys that are out here in support of the company are just yanking any and all leverage right out of the hands of the unions nego's. Instead they need to get behind their NC 100% and unite for an ILC as promised from the co. in the first place. We did it so far and will continue to do so until we are made full.
Good luck P.Rez and thx for your efforts and work at the nego table, mostly a very thankless job. This I know from personal experience. What also is killing you guys at the table is the "NON-support" from the IAM side within the membership. You guys, I think, need to take a pause, update the membership in full with all the cuts/rifs/layoffs no matter how negative it is you guys need to get the full support of the membership behind the nego cmte. Good luck...
 
i suppose it could work the other way too: give maintenance what they want and outsource everything under the fsc sun.

you say one group can/may get to vote on a TA without the other group having anything. a negotiator answered the query with a riddle; don't tip anyone's hand?

we know the company knows exactly what scenario(s) can play out; otherwise, they wouldn't be paying astronomical retainers to their labor attorneys. i just hope the assoc.'s legal experts aren't the same lot that 'guided' the twu through the equity adventure.

That Negotiator is trying to impart to stop telegraphing to the Company what you would be willing to settle for as they do take all the opinions they can gather and present them in the rooms as proof that maybe our own teams are the ones out of touch.
 
I believe the NMB just did it to us. The union's update said something about "with the help of the mediator" some last minute changes were made and they decided to let the membership decide.
Another slight confusion is they are calling ours a T/A---BUT with other statements like, "they will be working hard to finalize everything to get to a T/A for a vote. So I am still asking myself is it an AIP with no endorsement from the union and NC? And how does it become a T/A if the NC does not endorse it??
A ta can come with a recommended no.
 
Weez when Sito addressed the TWU convention in LAS he said the RLA may require them by law to vote an agreement (with a recommendation of no):



(Proceed to 15:15)

Josh

And the ta would pass. But I would hold sito responsible for the ratification since this is a coalition where we make up only 35%. He would be sacrificing our health care.
 
Absolutely, Possitively. Stupid Management already burned through wasting 10 Billion of partially OUR Money on buybacks to try and prop up the share price. A part of that could have easily have went to make a much better offer than they’re trying to throw at us now.

We should be setting the bar now that others should follow. And like our Mechanics basically said here in MIA shut the hell up about other Airlines Dougie.
Yep don't look at the competition, freaking brilliant
 
If done right, and Early Out can be win-win for the company and labor both, but often it’s used as a shiny object to mask other less desirable items in a T/A (or at least make the offer pass). Let’s hope that doesn’t happen here?

Early outs will happen irregardless of if they are in a Contract offer as a carrot to pass or outside an offer where they belong as early out members will not live under the contract at all.

And the EO absolutely should never be costed in to the deal that those left behind need to pay for.
 
Yep don't look at the competition, freaking brilliant

You look at the competition but you don’t obsess over them. Parker has an obsession with Delta and never stops talking about them.

Besides the Pilots Delta has no Unions so it’s not where I want us to place all of our focus.
 
I believe the NMB just did it to us. The union's update said something about "with the help of the mediator" some last minute changes were made and they decided to let the membership decide.
Another slight confusion is they are calling ours a T/A---BUT with other statements like, "they will be working hard to finalize everything to get to a T/A for a vote. So I am still asking myself is it an AIP with no endorsement from the union and NC? And how does it become a T/A if the NC does not endorse it??

You should actually read it all but absolutely you need to read from page 44 down even if your Union did chose to release the offer for your consideration.

Again the NMB did not/cannot legally force anyone to take a deal. That “could” occur later on in the process when it gets to a PEB.

AC3BC6C9-79E0-4ED7-9E16-2EAE357CA38F.png

http://apps.americanbar.org/labor/lel-aba-annual/papers/2005/015.pdf
 
And the ta would pass. But I would hold sito responsible for the ratification since this is a coalition where we make up only 35%. He would be sacrificing our health care.

The TA again would NOT pass on the TWU side. The wages and Deicing loss would kill it all over the East coast, the MIA President has a problem with the Swaps and OT and wouldn’t endorse so that creates difficulties here and DFW would rally against the economics hard I’m positive.

Plus the $3000 Bonus is insulting to anyone topped out especially since the rumor was floating around for a while of X amount per year of service.
 
That Negotiator is trying to impart to stop telegraphing to the Company what you would be willing to settle for as they do take all the opinions they can gather and present them in the rooms as proof that maybe our own teams are the ones out of touch.

well, if it was that simple...why not have the company create fake AMTs & fscs...etc...etc..and then present those fake sentiments as real sentiments? the assoc. could also do the same.

i understand the point. the point to me is the actual negotiators not making comments about this trade-off or that 'acceptable' concession due to an enhancement elsewhere.
 
well, if it was that simple...why not have the company create fake AMTs & fscs...etc...etc..and then present those fake sentiments as real sentiments? the assoc. could also do the same.

i understand the point. the point to me is the actual negotiators not making comments about this trade-off or that 'acceptable' concession due to an enhancement elsewhere.

It’s not about trying to manipulate the Negotiations completely as it’s also the Company would want the agreements to pass once they’re accepted and released. That’s another reason why they’re releasing publicly now. They were hoping that we liked the deals. And uh lol no one did.

On your second paragraph where have any of them said that in this process? Seems to me at least they have no interests in any concessions or trade offs at all.
 
It’s not about trying to manipulate the Negotiations completely as it’s also the Company would want the agreements to pass once they’re accepted and released. That’s another reason why they’re releasing publicly now. They were hoping that we liked the deals. And uh lol no one did.

On your second paragraph where have any of them said that in this process? Seems to me at least they have no interests in any concessions or trade offs at all.

no...i didn't say that any negotiator has said this trade-off is acceptable or that concession is ok.

i said your point is well taken in regards to negotiators, not tipping their hand.

if the rank & file couldn't express their thoughts here, why would anyone post?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top