JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[swamt]

For all the LAA agents on forums that are going crazy about Tim’s post. Remember, Tim has stated many times how he likes to fish. But he isnt always fishing for fish. For those of us that know him, this is no big deal. Nothing new that he is doing. In fact, it’s expected. I could literally write you a chart on what Tim will do next, I’ve seen it so many times. He sits back and laughs at everyone he can get stirred up. And yes, he can say anything he wants, because in the end, he doesn’t have to answer to anyone.

It’s makes no difference to the negotiating team what he says he knows, and what he says we don’t know: it makes no difference to the negotiating team, when he says a T/a will or won’t come out. It will come out just like our 2014 agreement did. When we all think it is good enough to present to the members for a vote as a leading industry contract. That’s it! Nothing else! Also keep in mind, He will only bring up in the future what he was right about. But anyone with half a brain can name 10 things about our contract and be right on 2 of them. So enjoy his post as entertainment, as I think most of you already do. As the old saying goes. If you tell a lie long enough, people will start to believe you. Tim also likes to feed on the people that don’t really know him. Once people figure him out. Common sense takes over. That’s all that is needed: common sense.

Great analyst. I think most all are finally seeing what is going on with both these characters.
CB, in order to keep a better lid on the rumors started by both these guys, could you give a guess of a time frame of a possible AIP or maybe even a T/A? ONly reason I ask is some (I think) are still slightly believing an AIP is coming very soon. I would expect a more likely time frame of mid 2018 not early. What do you think? Thanks for chiming in, I too hope this will settle some folks down a little and wait for the official updates instead of the misinformation coming from both these characters. Happy New year CB...

 

[WeAAsles]

Great analyst. I think most all are finally seeing what is going on with both these characters.
CB, in order to keep a better lid on the rumors started by both these guys, could you give a guess of a time frame of a possible AIP or maybe even a T/A? ONly reason I ask is some (I think) are still slightly believing an AIP is coming very soon. I would expect a more likely time frame of mid 2018 not early. What do you think? Thanks for chiming in, I too hope this will settle some folks down a little and wait for the official updates instead of the misinformation coming from both these characters. Happy New year CB...

AMFA sucks.

And I don’t think I read CB say anything about more than one person. I think he said Tim?

Maybe you should ask him who he was talking about if you’re confused?

 

[WeAAsles]

Weez you have a new admirer. I understand why you don't want to post the info you have on some of the articles. You are welcome to DM me if you want. I promise I won't share it. It's ok if you don't want to do that either. I am curious about the CS's and Part Time articles. Happy New Year.

gulfcoast even though I’m going to get attacked by the loon from Southwest Airlines who’s obsessed with me, I’m not comfortable doing either unless I actually knew you personally on the PT stuff. On the CS stuff the “rumors” floating around on it now are pretty accurate after a bunch of systemwide clarifying.

I think if CB or Rez stop by they can at least confirm that the PT language is stronger than what it is currently in the two separate CBA’s

They don’t want to keep chasing all of Tim’s BS on here though I’m sure.

 

[WeAAsles]

NICE LEGS!!

Hey buddy take it easy there.

 

[charlie Brown]

PT language is not finalized yet. And that’s all ill say on that. Remember part of what I said about TIm fishing. He post those issues only to bait people that know what’s going on to say he is wrong.
And Swamt I cant answer your question on when this will be done. I know this month is going to be very intense on scope. And I do know that once scope is done, you will see all the remaining issues wrapped up pretty quickly. There is also much talk going to be done this coming week even though we aren’t in negotiations until the following week. If the company wants to get this done as they stated last time we met, It could get done in the early parts of this coming year. Or it could all fall apart because of scope. While Im only one member of the team. I will be against bringing out any agreement that gives up the LUS insurance for our members, or gives up any jobs. Our members made it very clear to Sito at our committee conference how important our insurance and scope is to our members. I think that was a very important meeting, for Sito to hear the voices across the whole system. And I’m glad to say he stayed as long as it took for all questions and comments were done. And I know our committee people left there feeling confident. So it’s up to the company how soon this gets done. All I can say, is it’s going to get hot and heavy these next few weeks.

 

[WeAAsles]

PT language is not finalized yet. And that’s all ill say on that. Remember part of what I said about TIm fishing. He post those issues only to bait people that know what’s going on to say he is wrong.
And Swamt I cant answer your question on when this will be done. I know this month is going to be very intense on scope. And I do know that once scope is done, you will see all the remaining issues wrapped up pretty quickly. There is also much talk going to be done this coming week even though we aren’t in negotiations until the following week. If the company wants to get this done as they stated last time we met, It could get done in the early parts of this coming year. Or it could all fall apart because of scope. While Im only one member of the team. I will be against bringing out any agreement that gives up the LUS insurance for our members, or gives up any jobs. Our members made it very clear to Sito at our committee conference how important our insurance and scope is to our members. I think that was a very important meeting, for Sito to hear the voices across the whole system. And I’m glad to say he stayed as long as it took for all questions and comments were done. And I know our committee people left there feeling confident. So it’s up to the company how soon this gets done. All I can say, is it’s going to get hot and heavy these next few weeks.

I hope at the end of the day there is an acceptable solution for that LUS Medical? I just don’t see how as it stands I would be able to vote yes to having our (TWU) PT members pay double the cost that I do? Last thing I want would be to encourage the Company to hire more PT over FT or max out whatever caps are ultimately and completely finalized. (MIA does not want to foot the bill with even more PT than we already have)

Now you do know because of your (kind of) elusive comment on the PT my good buddy from that other Airline and a few other Trolls will be along momentarily to attack me as usual. Could you at least elaborate (slightly) in explaining to people what “finalized” means?

Basically “I’ll” say I was told Tim’s comment on no PT restrictions is complete BS (TWU side information)

 

[charlie Brown]

I hope at the end of the day there is an acceptable solution for that LUS Medical? I just don’t see how as it stands I would be able to vote yes to having our (TWU) PT members pay double the cost that I do? Last thing I want would be to encourage the Company to hire more PT over FT or max out whatever caps are ultimately and completely finalized. (MIA does not want to foot the bill with even more PT than we already have)

Now you do know because of your (kind of) elusive comment on the PT my good buddy from that other Airline and a few other Trolls will be along momentarily to attack me as usual. Could you at least elaborate (slightly) in explaining to people what “finalized” means?

Basically “I’ll” say I was told Tim’s comment on no PT restrictions is complete BS (TWU side information)

We are fighting for everyone to pay the same for their insurance regardless of their status. And when I say not finalized, I mean the percentage of pt agents.

 

[WeAAsles]

We are fighting for everyone to pay the same for their insurance regardless of their status. And when I say not finalized, I mean the percentage of pt agents.

Perfect. Thank you friend.

 

[bob@las-AA]

PT language is not finalized yet. And that’s all ill say on that. Remember part of what I said about TIm fishing. He post those issues only to bait people that know what’s going on to say he is wrong.
And Swamt I cant answer your question on when this will be done. I know this month is going to be very intense on scope. And I do know that once scope is done, you will see all the remaining issues wrapped up pretty quickly. There is also much talk going to be done this coming week even though we aren’t in negotiations until the following week. If the company wants to get this done as they stated last time we met, It could get done in the early parts of this coming year. Or it could all fall apart because of scope. While Im only one member of the team. I will be against bringing out any agreement that gives up the LUS insurance for our members, or gives up any jobs. Our members made it very clear to Sito at our committee conference how important our insurance and scope is to our members. I think that was a very important meeting, for Sito to hear the voices across the whole system. And I’m glad to say he stayed as long as it took for all questions and comments were done. And I know our committee people left there feeling confident. So it’s up to the company how soon this gets done. All I can say, is it’s going to get hot and heavy these next few weeks.

And just how do you plan to keep any of your stations open at scope 5, 5 flights per day when ours is at 17-20? I do realize that the TWU has no "ME TOO" clause, but c-mon man, you don't think any of the TWU would allow that to happen would you?

 

[gulfcoast1]

PT language is not finalized yet. And that’s all ill say on that. Remember part of what I said about TIm fishing. He post those issues only to bait people that know what’s going on to say he is wrong.
And Swamt I cant answer your question on when this will be done. I know this month is going to be very intense on scope. And I do know that once scope is done, you will see all the remaining issues wrapped up pretty quickly. There is also much talk going to be done this coming week even though we aren’t in negotiations until the following week. If the company wants to get this done as they stated last time we met, It could get done in the early parts of this coming year. Or it could all fall apart because of scope. While Im only one member of the team. I will be against bringing out any agreement that gives up the LUS insurance for our members, or gives up any jobs. Our members made it very clear to Sito at our committee conference how important our insurance and scope is to our members. I think that was a very important meeting, for Sito to hear the voices across the whole system. And I’m glad to say he stayed as long as it took for all questions and comments were done. And I know our committee people left there feeling confident. So it’s up to the company how soon this gets done. All I can say, is it’s going to get hot and heavy these next few weeks.

Thank you for that update. I agree that SCOPE is very important, as is insurance. I, too, think we all should be paying the same whether FT or PT.

The only thing I have heard about CS's and rumors about CS's is that the new policy will be a negative for TWU. Can you give more information on that either here or via DM? I won't share any information I am asked not to share. We are being told in TWU Stations that no specific information can be given out. That does not seem to be the case in IAM Stations from what I read here. You have answered my questions about PT and Insurance. My two current questions are about CS's and SCOPE. Is there a good chance we can expect Insourcing at 7 Flights or less? That was our previous TWU Scope and I would very much like to see that or better.

Thank you and Happy New Year. I hope 2018 is good for all of us.

 

[charlie Brown]

And just how do you plan to keep any of your stations open at scope 5, 5 flights per day when ours is at 17-20? I do realize that the TWU has no "ME TOO" clause, but c-mon man, you don't think any of the TWU would allow that to happen would you?

Huh??
I have no clue what your talking about. Current scope for all IAM stations is 7 flights a week. Plz explain a little more in detail what you are referring to. I want to make sure I am answering your question correctly. We will all have the same scope going forward. May not be 7 flights a week. But it won’t be the twu language either.

 

[charlie Brown]

Thank you for that update. I agree that SCOPE is very important, as is insurance. I, too, think we all should be paying the same whether FT or PT.

The only thing I have heard about CS's and rumors about CS's is that the new policy will be a negative for TWU. Can you give more information on that either here or via DM? I won't share any information I am asked not to share. We are being told in TWU Stations that no specific information can be given out. That does not seem to be the case in IAM Stations from what I read here. You have answered my questions about PT and Insurance. My two current questions are about CS's and SCOPE. Is there a good chance we can expect Insourcing at 7 Flights or less? That was our previous TWU Scope and I would very much like to see that or better.

Thank you and Happy New Year. I hope 2018 is good for all of us.

I can not address scope right now, as it is very much still being worked out. As far as the cs policy. Everyone at LAA is assuming Your current cs policy was staying the same. I can assure you through conversations with the company and since the cs policy was company policy it was going to change. Your current way of doing cs,s would no longer exist whether you got it in the contract or not. So that being the case, why not get something contractual that can’t be changed by the company. And I can’t aay too much about what is agreed upon, other to say, once you learn the process, and what counts as a cs and what doesn’t, then it’s not going to be as big a issue as people think imo. As NYer likes to point out. There is going to be some educating needing to be done before a vote. But again. People that state they want to keep their old company policy instead, are assuming that it wasn’t changing. They are assuming wrong. But it’s really not a bad policy imo. Biggest change would be for the people that want to give up a last minute hour or two and it not count as a cs.

 

[charlie Brown]

And thanks!
HAPPY NEW YEAR to all of you.
Let’s look forward to 2018 being a great year for all of us with a leading industry contract.

 

[Jester]

Huh??
I have no clue what your talking about. Current scope for all IAM stations is 7 flights a week. Plz explain a little more in detail what you are referring to. I want to make sure I am answering your question correctly. We will all have the same scope going forward. May not be 7 flights a week. But it won’t be the twu language either.

CB,

While I cannot speak for Bob (not that I am sure anyone would desire such an onerous task), he does raise an interesting point an LUS station with a few mainline flights would stay with a new JCBA, while a former LAA station with more mainline flights would continued to be contracted out. Off the top of my pointed head, I could think an example of RNO vs. DTW with the former prior to the AA merger only handled 4 daily flights from PHX with LUS with half of them being RJs whereas DTW handles far more, but not handled by either LAA or LUS ground agents.

I raised this same point with so-called "snap shot" as a possible proposal to a TA on a post I raised a few weeks ago. The snap shot locks the Association into the EXISTING stations while it would certainly include some minimum number of mainline flights for current stations. So we would still not get back places like DTW (or SNA, SJC, IAH, etc.), but we could still lose stations like RNO (or PDX, DEN, MSP, etc.) depending on the scope. Needless to say, reduction in stations will cause a great deal of displacement and hardship for those affected.

In terms of insurance costs between P/T and F/T, I continue to advocate that as the distinction between the two labels becomes blurred as there are P/T'ers working 60 hours a week and F/T'ers barely handling 20 hours a week, there needs to be a floating scale based upon average weekly hours worked calculated bi-annually. The Company will raise the issue of efficiency as to spreading out the fixed cost of insurance based upon number of hours worked. However, does the efficiency change if one works 35 hours as a P/T'er vs. 35 hours as a F/T'er? Of course, not... it is the same number.

 

[WeAAsles]

CB,

While I cannot speak for Bob (not that I am sure anyone would desire such an onerous task), he does raise an interesting point an LUS station with a few mainline flights would stay with a new JCBA, while a former LAA station with more mainline flights would continued to be contracted out. Off the top of my pointed head, I could think an example of RNO vs. DTW with the former prior to the AA merger only handled 4 daily flights from PHX with LUS with half of them being RJs whereas DTW handles far more, but not handled by either LAA or LUS ground agents.

I raised this same point with so-called "snap shot" as a possible proposal to a TA on a post I raised a few weeks ago. The snap shot locks the Association into the EXISTING stations while it would certainly include some minimum number of mainline flights for current stations. So we would still not get back places like DTW (or SNA, SJC, IAH, etc.), but we could still lose stations like RNO (or PDX, DEN, MSP, etc.) depending on the scope. Needless to say, reduction in stations will cause a great deal of displacement and hardship for those affected.

In terms of insurance costs between P/T and F/T, I continue to advocate that as the distinction between the two labels becomes blurred as there are P/T'ers working 60 hours a week and F/T'ers barely handling 20 hours a week, there needs to be a floating scale based upon average weekly hours worked calculated bi-annually. The Company will raise the issue of efficiency as to spreading out the fixed cost of insurance based upon number of hours worked. However, does the efficiency change if one works 35 hours as a P/T'er vs. 35 hours as a F/T'er? Of course, not... it is the same number.

Are you kind of talking about a system like the FA’s have in their 40 Hour Qualifier?

First I think you’d have to do it annually as opposed to bi annually and I’m not sure this makes me comfortable either.

What happens if a Brother has a family situation with say his wife or mother that takes him out of the picture for most of the year. Now we voted to screw him even harder the following year?

Too many personal variables to account for in your idea Jester and even you or I could fall into a very dangerous and hurtful trap.