JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[NYer]

So in your opinion what happens Sept 13 2018 if there is no jcba? Take ATL for example, currently they fall 201 flights under, and lus is there too. Does the TWU get booted and IAM possibility bring in more to cover the operations? I'm only asking because they just posted 2 FT positions there and I'm thinking of putting in for it, would I be adding 1 layoff to my would be 5 stations in 30 years?

Maybe nothing happens other than they use those possible closures for leverage purposes.

But if the Company plans on having a Scope language that would eventually close any of those stations, they may just close them. If they intend on keeping the Scope at around 10 flights, they may stay open. If they plan on staying with 15 or more, then they could close. What happens to those stations will depend on where the Company wants to go in the JCBA.

What if the Company doesn't want this to get dragged out in Section 6, could they mount the pressure on the IAM by threatening on closing those stations to the TWU, per our CBA, and then hire IAM members to work the flights. Would they do that? Even if they don't actually do it, would the threat be enough to cause a reaction?

 

[WeAAsles]

Steve read through this language and assume at least some similarities to it as a minimum. And no the IAM will not accept our Station Staffing language or anywhere near it actually. And they ABSOLUTELY shouldn’t either.

https://www.cwaagents.org/system/files/cwa_ibt_assoc_ta_pt_1_0.pdf

 

[B737 driver]

Maybe nothing happens other than they use those possible closures for leverage purposes.

But if the Company plans on having a Scope language that would eventually close any of those stations, they may just close them. If they intend on keeping the Scope at around 10 flights, they may stay open. If they plan on staying with 15 or more, then they could close. What happens to those stations will depend on where the Company wants to go in the JCBA.

What if the Company doesn't want this to get dragged out in Section 6, could they mount the pressure on the IAM by threatening on closing those stations to the TWU, per our CBA, and then hire IAM members to work the flights. Would they do that? Even if they don't actually do it, would the threat be enough to cause a reaction?

That sounds like a conflict in language, can they do that without a JCBA ?

 

[Steve Walegir]

Maybe nothing happens other than they use those possible closures for leverage purposes.

At this point, I personally feel anything and everything is on the table as far as tactics the company will use. Unless something radical comes up we won't be getting a jcba in 2017,18 and possibly 19. These are the same company people who let the pilots mess happen at US/ HP, sure they'd like to get rid of the IAM medical but if they are only paying it to a relatively small group and they insist on outsourcing to be a part of a jcba, and the IAM determination to hold onto what they have equals no deal anytime soon, imo. Could the claws come out and they really push one union against the other then the TWU ultimately will be the biggest losers.

But if the Company plans on having a Scope language that would eventually close any of those stations, they may just close them. If they intend on keeping the Scope at around 10 flights, they may stay open. If they plan on staying with 15 or more, then they could close. What happens to those stations will depend on where the Company wants to go in the JCBA.

What if the Company doesn't want this to get dragged out in Section 6, could they mount the pressure on the IAM by threatening on closing those stations to the TWU, per our CBA, and then hire IAM members to work the flights. Would they do that? Even if they don't actually do it, would the threat be enough to cause a reaction?

 

[Steve Walegir]

At this point, I personally feel anything and everything is on the table as far as tactics the company will use. Unless something radical comes up we won't be getting a jcba in 2017,18 and possibly 19. These are the same company people who let the pilots mess happen at US/ HP, sure they'd like to get rid of the IAM medical but if they are only paying it to a relatively small group and they insist on outsourcing to be a part of a jcba, and the IAM determination to hold onto what they have equals no deal anytime soon, imo. Could the claws come out and they really push one union against the other then the TWU ultimately will be the biggest losers.

 

[Steve Walegir]

Steve read through this language and assume at least some similarities to it as a minimum. And no the IAM will not accept our Station Staffing language or anywhere near it actually. And they ABSOLUTELY shouldn’t either.

https://www.cwaagents.org/system/files/cwa_ibt_assoc_ta_pt_1_0.pdf

Agreed, the mess will continue. So who's gonna be who in this US east pilots vs. HP west pilots in our fiasco?

 

[WeAAsles]

At this point, I personally feel anything and everything is on the table as far as tactics the company will use. Unless something radical comes up we won't be getting a jcba in 2017,18 and possibly 19. These are the same company people who let the pilots mess happen at US/ HP, sure they'd like to get rid of the IAM medical but if they are only paying it to a relatively small group and they insist on outsourcing to be a part of a jcba, and the IAM determination to hold onto what they have equals no deal anytime soon, imo. Could the claws come out and they really push one union against the other then the TWU ultimately will be the biggest losers.

Ok your Rocket Ship just veered off and got lost in Space with Doctor Smith and the out of control Robot.

Sigh.

 

[Steve Walegir]

Ok your Rocket Ship just veered off and got lost in Space with Doctor Smith and the out of control Robot.

Sigh.

It's just one of those days today

 

[Insatiable]

I am sure the Association has all of our best interests in mind for negotiations this week.

 

[NYer]

That sounds like a conflict in language, can they do that without a JCBA ?

Conflict?

 

[NYer]

At this point, I personally feel anything and everything is on the table as far as tactics the company will use. Unless something radical comes up we won't be getting a jcba in 2017,18 and possibly 19. These are the same company people who let the pilots mess happen at US/ HP, sure they'd like to get rid of the IAM medical but if they are only paying it to a relatively small group and they insist on outsourcing to be a part of a jcba, and the IAM determination to hold onto what they have equals no deal anytime soon, imo. Could the claws come out and they really push one union against the other then the TWU ultimately will be the biggest losers.

In a JCBA, the membership that will need to brace for the most significant changes would be the IAM. They seem to be in a position where there will be changes to the medical and their current scope language and they'd go backward. The TWU members are eager for a JCBA because we would be going, mostly, forward.

If the Association can leverage keeping other items as they are or enhanced, I believe the IAM can see the writing is on the wall with their medical and it will be a question of what they can get for it. Don't see this moving into a Section 6 scenario because that may be a worse alternative for the IAM than the current process as far as a return in exchange for other items.

 

[WeAAsles]

I am sure the Association has all of our best interests in mind for negotiations this week.

They have 4 major pieces left. SCOPE (was already under discussions) Medical percentage costs, Retirement (seems they did offer something decent on that already) and finally wages (shouldn’t be a long conversation)

Kind of hard for me to fathom it still taking years when even CB said they were told to schedule rooms through the weekend this week?

 

[Jester]

Steve not sure who you’re asking this opinion of but # 1 that date is almost a full year from now. Do you really expect us not to have a TA before then?

# 2 If the Company still has to continue to staff the location with well paid IAM members anyway, why would they push the TWU group out?

Don’t you think even if the doomsday scenario happened for TWU Members, on the clock IAM members would transfer in to fill the void. And those TWU Members would wind up in DFW more than likely anyway. So the Company wouldn’t gain any cost savings.

The Company closing any TWU locations prior to the language of a JCBA being implemented just makes zero sense period. For multiple reasons.

Maybe I having watched the pilots bicker for several years before the eventual merger with AA, but I could easily see us without a JCBA a year from now and maybe even 5 years from now!

In terms of "pushing out" the TWU guys from a station, it would make perfect sense for Management as they would have only one contract to operate under, wouldn't need to argue about who is doing what flights, wouldn't need to concern itself by violating a CBA with mixing work groups together and wouldn't need to have duplicate positions with lav service and connect runners. There will be a loss by not having the economies of scale by the splintering two different work groups as it increases the likelihood of non-productive down time as one side could not work the other's flight. And maybe have a few high seniority people to retire early vs. relocating? Strictly from a Management/financial point-of-view, it makes a lot of sense!

How many stations would there be both work groups operating separately and how many AA stations would be at risk, as US only has a requirement of 1 daily mainline flight on average which pretty guarantees no IAM station closures. Obviously, AA stations would be more at risk with the requirement of 5,475(?) annual mainline flights (15 daily average). I know PHX, LAS, LAX, SFO, ORD, BOS, ATL, DFW, JFK and MIA have both work groups and obviously, LAA hubs aren't going anywhere, but not as sure about the others.

 

[Steve Walegir]

In a JCBA, the membership that will need to brace for the most significant changes would be the IAM. They seem to be in a position where there will be changes to the medical and their current scope language and they'd go backward. The TWU members are eager for a JCBA because we would be going, mostly, forward.

If the Association can leverage keeping other items as they are or enhanced, I believe the IAM can see the writing is on the wall with their medical and it will be a question of what they can get for it. Don't see this moving into a Section 6 scenario because that may be a worse alternative for the IAM than the current process as far as a return in exchange for other items.

Very True, but what they can get obviously is the question. If their medical goes up to half the percentage ours is and if their Scope number goes up to half of what ours is they see it as a complete concessionary deal and rightfully so. What can be done to make it seem like they are getting something that TWU members don't, not possible I believe. And so long as they need to agree for anything to be sent out for a vote, I could be wrong but even though section 6 might not be what's best it's headed that way.

 

[NYer]

Very True, but what they can get obviously is the question. If their medical goes up to half the percentage ours is and if their Scope number goes up to half of what ours is they see it as a complete concessionary deal and rightfully so. What can be done to make it seem like they are getting something that TWU members don't, not possible I believe. And so long as they need to agree for anything to be sent out for a vote, I could be wrong but even though section 6 might not be what's best it's headed that way.

Despite what others have said, there seems little chance we don't all end up with the same medical we currently have in LAA. There would need to be a value attached to that and the IAM would try to maximize that amount. That is a better prospect outside of the Section 6 process, and it may be what the representative from the NMB is telling or will be telling the NC. (there is a reason they were invited)

I fully believe the NC would not agree to anything that they feel is detrimental, but the EC is who makes the decisions once they took over.