JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[NYer]

APFA language (2014): "Aggregate employee contributions for the Standard and Core medical options for 2015 will be twenty percent (20%), and 2016 and thereafter will be twenty-one percent (21%) of the total projected cost of each forecasted year of healthcare expenses for these two (2) medical options (which include medical/prescription and administrative expenses) as calculated by the Company."

APA language (2015): "Aggregate employee contributions for the Standard and Core medical options for 2013 will be 18%, 2014 will be 19%, 2015 will be 20% and 2016 and thereafter will be 21% of the total projected cost of each forecasted year of healthcare expenses for these two medical options (which include medical/prescription and administrative expenses) as calculated by the Company."

CWA-IBT language (2015): "Aggregate employee contributions for the Standard and Core medical options for 2015 are twenty percent (20%), and 2016 and thereafter will be twenty-one percent (21%), of the total projected cost of each forecasted year of healthcare expenses for these two (2) medical options (which include medical/prescription and administrative expenses) as calculated by the Company."

TWU language (2012): "Aggregate employee contributions for the Standard and Core medical options for 2013 will be 18%, 2014 will be 19%, 2015 will be 20% and 2016 and thereafter will be 21% of the total projected cost of healthcare expenses (which include medical/Rx and administrative expenses) for the Standard and Core medical plan options."

 

[Tom Talbert 1888]

Just because we're going over the probability of what may occur during these JCBA negotiations doesn't mean we're willing to just give it up.

They can fight, if they choose, and I'd how they'd win. However, the probability of that is not in our favor.

The fact the IAM medical has survived before doesn't really give it any better chance of surviving now. The circumstances of those BK's, the AMR BK and these JCBA negotiations are different.

This isn’t concessionary bargaining.

The IAM Medical survived when US was in extreme financial difficulties, three rounds of concessions in two different chapter 11 cases.

AA is making billions and Parker himself stared that AA won’t ever lose money again.

There is no justification for the IAM medical to be lost at all.

Once again it has survived three rounds of concessions in bankruptcy, a JCBA with the US/HP merger and the 2014 Section 6 CBA.

There isn’t one reason to lose it now when AA is achieving record financial performance.

Once again the IAM medical survived during extreme horrible finances and there isn’t any reason for it to be given up now.

You still haven’t answered why it has survived when US was on the brink of extinction.

I bet you want the IAM vacation, double time and holidays, yet you won’t support your brothers and sisters at LUS to keep their medical.

Why should LUS take concessions while LAA makes gains?

And don’t say that since everyone else at AA has the higher cost insurance as the reason as that theory has been debunked as only the IAM represented employees already kept it numerous times while EVERY other employee group had higher costs.

There is far more likelihood of it absolutely happening again when all the same parties for both the Company and the IAM are once again in the room and they have already dealt with the issue of the Medical importance numerous times before.

 

[NYer]

This isn’t concessionary bargaining.

The IAM Medical survived when US was in extreme financial difficulties, three rounds of concessions in two different chapter 11 cases.

AA is making billions and Parker himself stared that AA won’t ever lose money again.

There is no justification for the IAM medical to be lost at all.

I seriously don’t understand your mindset in this matter.

Once again it has survived three rounds of concessions in bankruptcy, a JCBA with the US/HP merger and the 2014 Section 6 CBA.

There isn’t one reason to lose it now when AA is achieving record financial performance.

The employees at AA are fortunate you aren’t on the negotiating committee with your defeatist attitude and mindset.

Once again the IAM medical survived during extreme horrible finances and there isn’t any reason for it to be given up now.

You still haven’t answers why it has survived when US was on the brink of extinction.

I bet you want the IAM vacation, double time and holidays, yet you won’t support your brothers and sisters at LUS to keep their medical.

Why should LUS take concessions while LAA makes gains?

And don’t say that since everyone else at AA has the higher cost insurance as the reason as that theory has been debunked as only the IAM represented employees already kept it numerous times while EVERY other employee group had higher costs.

There is far more likelihood of it absolutely happening again when all the same parties for both the Company and the IAM are once again in the room and they have already dealt with the issue of the Medical importance numerous times before.

I do support the medical to be kept, I just don't think it's probable. The airline has the other union groups in the current LAA plans and unlike 2005 or 2008 and even 2011, the industry has moved closer to the LAA medical cost structure than the LUS cost structure and the industry was making billions in profits when that transition was made.

Personally, I'd be OK in the status quo because I don't believe most will be happy with the changes in the JCBA. I'm in the minority of TWU LAA members that don't want an end to these negotiations just for the sake a few holidays. I'd be perfectly fine if the IAM drags this out in an attempt to keep their medical because I'd rather keep our current language than adopt changes that will hurt out potential to enhance our bottom line.

I hope they fight with all they have and take as much time as necessary to protect your medical, but to me the probability of its survival is low.

 

[Tom Talbert 1888]

Do you realize the lower costs and better coverage for IAM represented employees has survived for the past 15 years while every other group paid more?

History is on the IAM’s side, not AA.

And you do realize the majority of the company’s negotiators are the very same people who already agreed to the IAM medical costs in previous negotiations?

So it doesn’t matter what other groups pay, the Association is negotiating and taking care of its members, not the other unions who represent the other employees.

 

[NYer]

Do you realize the lower costs and better coverage for IAM represented employees has survived for the past 15 years while every other group paid more?

History is on the IAM’s side, not AA.

And you do realize the majority of the company’s negotiators are the very same people who already agreed to the IAM medical costs in previous negotiations?

So it doesn’t matter what other groups pay, the Association is negotiating and taking care of its members, not the other unions who represent the other employees.

OK.

 

[Traymark]

Personally, I'd be OK in the status quo because I don't believe most will be happy with the changes in the JCBA. I'm in the minority of TWU LAA members that don't want an end to these negotiations just for the sake a few holidays. I'd be perfectly fine if the IAM drags this out in an attempt to keep their medical because I'd rather keep our current language than adopt changes that will hurt out potential to enhance our bottom line.

Prey tell, what changes?

 

[AANOTOK]

Do you realize the lower costs and better coverage for IAM represented employees has survived for the past 15 years while every other group paid more?

History is on the IAM’s side, not AA.

And you do realize the majority of the company’s negotiators are the very same people who already agreed to the IAM medical costs in previous negotiations?

So it doesn’t matter what other groups pay, the Association is negotiating and taking care of its members, not the other unions who represent the other employees.

Has it been confirmed that "our" negotiators (TWU) are indeed blowing off the IAM medical and moving on. Or is that just something the IAM folks are getting from this forum. Secondly, could you explain why the IAM is not supporting the TWU led picketing.

 

[Tom Talbert 1888]

Has it been confirmed that "our" negotiators (TWU) are indeed blowing off the IAM medical and moving on. Or is that just something the IAM folks are getting from this forum. Secondly, could you explain why the IAM is not supporting the TWU led picketing.

Sorry I cant answer any of your questions,as I dont know.

Only person on the TWU side who publicly come out in support ot the IAM medical insurance is Gary Peterson.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Has it been confirmed that "our" negotiators (TWU) are indeed blowing off the IAM medical and moving on. Or is that just something the IAM folks are getting from this forum. Secondly, could you explain why the IAM is not supporting the TWU led picketing.

Due to politics, the IAM made the TWU the enemy and developed the fake narrative that the TWU wants to strip our insurance. It's an easy sell in CLT where there are no TWU peeps. But I'm in ORD and I work alongside 1300 TWU and they are all excited to try to get our insurance. So I know it is all fake news but CLT doesn't know that. The enemy is management, but until elections pass, the IAM leaders will not be caught dead walking a TWU negotiator in LUS Hub breakrooms in CLT. They know what they are doing and unfortunately, they made the TWU the enemy due to political gain. I take a monster hit politically every time I get on our leadership for not supporting the picketing of the Association. The enemy is management and it is absolutely ridiculous that management wanted our health care in the first place. That's offensive. But we were never going to keep our health care with a leadership that is singing kumbuya with management. Believe me they are otherwise they would be supporting all of us out there on the picket lines and at the rallies like we have been. SMFH.

 

[conehead777]

Sorry I cant answer any of your questions,as I dont know.

Only person on the TWU side who publicly come out in support ot the IAM medical insurance is Gary Peterson.

It’s not the twu members are against us insurance . Doug and the boys are the ones who are wanting to take your insurance. And give you aa insurance. So stop blaming the twu members.

 

[bob@las-AA]

Due to politics, the IAM made the TWU the enemy and developed the fake narrative that the TWU wants to strip our insurance. It's an easy sell in CLT where there are no TWU peeps. But I'm in ORD and I work alongside 1300 TWU and they are all excited to try to get our insurance. So I know it is all fake news but CLT doesn't know that. The enemy is management, but until elections pass, the IAM leaders will not be caught dead walking a TWU negotiator in LUS Hub breakrooms in CLT. They know what they are doing and unfortunately, they made the TWU the enemy due to political gain. I take a monster hit politically every time I get on our leadership for not supporting the picketing of the Association. The enemy is management and it is absolutely ridiculous that management wanted our health care in the first place. That's offensive. But we were never going to keep our health care with a leadership that is singing kumbuya with management. Believe me they are otherwise they would be supporting all of us out there on the picket lines and at the rallies like we have been. SMFH.

Just a couple of things Tim, do you truly work side by side with LAA FSC in ORD, or do you work like the CO-UA FSC, in other words, are you on a crew that is LAA, that is directed by a LAA CC, working on LAA trips? Because the CO-UA camp do not. They are segregated, as far as I know, to this day. As far as this ins BS goes, keep it, and use it in good health, BUT! whatever cost savings your group realizes from your low cost health and retirement contribution, I want the members of the TWU to get extra wage consideration to offset that disparity. And as a personal side note, I've been on this forum for 6 years, and you have as much political clout as I do, NONE. Stop what whatever political maneuvering you might be thinking of, and just let this A$$ thing happen. Forming a posse to overthrow your current regime is a exercise of futility. Besides the consequences of delaying the current, although snails pace rate of negotiations may bring all of us to section 6, and all the work now done, wiped clean. We all may stand to be at a greater risk of losing verses now.

 

[bob@las-AA]

This Tom Talbert "newbie", is not on the LAA or LUS FSC list, who is this dude?

 

[pjirish317]

Sorry pj but they already agreed to ax your medial. The only reason why you still have it is because they got nabbed into a new election and realize that they cuoldn't hose you before then. I can't help you from believing your dopey things you believe, and I really wish you were right about this one, but as soon as the election is over, they will be rolling over on your health care if they win. That's ok, you don't keep them accountable but I do and keep these elections going for the sake of democracy and accountability.

And you know this as FACT how exactly? Please show proof of your claims. You claimed a ton of things during our last round of negotiations with LUS and were completely wrong, so why would I or anybody for that matter believe the "dopey" things you say?

 

[pjirish317]

It's not being defeatist, it is just seeing the landscape as it was and as it is. Everyone would love to have a better medical but just hoping for it doesn't make it a reality. We can ask for it, and I'm sure that is the plan, but seeing the landscape around us and knowing the TWU, APA, APFA and the CWA-IBT Association all have the same identical language on medical it seems unlikely for it to survive.

Some on these pages thought this was going to be an easy process, a short process and that frustration are manifesting itself in many becoming impatient. I'm not one of those and my assessment on the medical is based on other factors and not just "let's hurry up."

As far as the negotiations and what you wrote. Does it really make sense to have a Negotiating Committee, then creating an Executive Committee (for expedience) only to have their work go back to the Negotiating Committee for approval to be sent out? If that were the case, why create an extra layer and slow things down further. If indeed the NC makes the final decision, as you suggest, then why not let them deal with the process directly.

Seems unlikely in practice.

Just saying that we will be forced into a lesser, more expensive, crappier plan because everybody else on the property has it, is a BS argument and you know it. I never thought it was going to be an easy process, far from it, but you post as if you have already given up and are ready to call it quits and get what you can and screw over everybody else. As far as the last part, why don't you ask someone on the NC, they can explain far better than I ever could. Heck CB will probably give you his cell number so you can actually be informed.

 

[pjirish317]

If they have already started conversations about alternatives then we may be a step closer to realizing the LAA will be everyone. The CWA-IBT agreed to the medical and also created a committee to seek alternatives. After some time, that process was scrapped and they also have the same LAA medical.

They have invested too much time in getting everyone into the same plan, thanks mostly because of the BK, to throw away that work when there is only one group left and it will create issues with all the other groups as their CBA's all come up for negotiations. It just doesn't seem logical for them change their stripes now that they are so close to their objective.

Hopefully, I'm wrong, but we'll see.

Then why didn't they ask for it during our last round of section 6 negotiations? The CWA-IBT already ratified a CBA with the horrible medical plans, so at that time only the IAM represented groups had a better medical plan, and we were in section 6. Why then NYer didn't Parker and company try and get that better medical from the IAM groups? We were the last frontier so to speak, they could have tried to get everybody on the same plan then. This company is making billions in profits, and according to our leader we "will never lose money again". So why should we settle for an inferior medical plan just to satisfy and placate other workgroups and the company? Why should we "gauge the other areas where we may be able to extract a little more than we otherwise may have. It is about maximizing the process to gain as much as possible"? What we you wanting us to give up for you to make gains? What are you willing to give up to make gains? I am not willing to give up anything, nor am I willing to ask you guys at LAA to give up anything just so we can get a deal done. I want us all to GAIN with this JCBA. Yes there will be some adjustment to the language changes, but by and large this JCBA should be a cost positive JCBA in all areas, not just in select areas, with the rest being cost neutral or cost negative towards the membership.