JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[AANOTOK]

DOH by classification...I didn't know there was any other way.

 

[NYer]

To me, the difference in OT bypass should not be something that prevents a T/A. If I understand the LUS way, if you get bypassed, you are offered OT at another time but are not paid bypass money. At AA, if we are on the bypass end, we get paid either the fours holdover, or eight hours day off if they get someone with more accumulated OT hours. If I were a company, I would try and remove that. Pay the guy who actually works, and then pay the other for sitting at home. Kinda crazy if you ask me.
 
Just as crazy to me is having me scheduled eight and one half hours, but only pay me eight. Ridiculous as well.

 
Paying the guy that doesn't work and get bypassed ensures the Company will pay better attention to the process.
 
By having the guy bypassed work their hours at another time doesn't ensure anything other than someone else not getting the OT.
 
It is a manner of checks and balances.

 

[Kev3188]

DOH by classification...I didn't know there was any other way.

There's about a dozen integration methods that meet the threshold of "fair and equitable" under McCaskill-Bond...

 

[cltrat]

 
Paying the guy that doesn't work and get bypassed ensures the Company will pay better attention to the process.
 
By having the guy bypassed work their hours at another time doesn't ensure anything other than someone else not getting the OT.
 
It is a manner of checks and balances.

 exactly here in CLT they make mistakes pretty much daily in calling OT and there's not an ounce of accountability none. If the company has to pay much double time at 60 plus an hour to someone not working you best believe that will change in a hurry 

 

[ograc]

 exactly here in CLT they make mistakes pretty much daily in calling OT and there's not an ounce of accountability none. If the company has to pay much double time at 60 plus an hour to someone not working you best believe that will change in a hurry 

 
You bet it will. The language tends to ratchet up accountability. There should be some teeth in remedial action across the board whenever there is a contractual violation.
 

 

[Tim Nelson]

There's about a dozen integration methods that meet the threshold of "fair and equitable" under McCaskill-Bond...

None of which meets the mba law. Only if each group are members of the same union can the union be excused with the exception clause under the mba. We are not members of the same union and i believe the 2 unions are misapplying things. Remember, none of us are represented and members of the association. The association is a certificate holder and only has 2 members, sito and harry. Thats the constitution.

 

[Tim Nelson]

I didn't say I didn't agree with you or anybody else on the matter, I am merely stating the reason it won't change.
P. Rez

Oh, but it could change if the union leadership made issue with it.

 

[robbedagain]

of course it will change bec in the hubs is really where it all counts given that the hubs have the largest number of folks    but remember alot of the sheningans goes on in out lining cities just as well but not big difference   I could be wrong but thats how I view it

 

[Jester]

 
To my knowledge, no one has publicly stated on this website or anywhere else that it can be read, why the iam is so against DOH Seniority. Why has the iam fought against it so hard? The iam is always preaching fair, but the iam doesn't produce fair.

 
I will offer an obvious difference which could affect a fair number, especially as we have plenty of furlough agents from other stations, some of whom hit the streets before coming to PHX.  With the LUS and IAM, if one was furloughed that agent keeps their date of hire regardless of transfer or upon acceptance the furlough, thus occupational seniority and date of hire are the same.  However, as I understand the LAA and TWU, if an LAA agent accepts the furlough that person stops accruing seniority and their occupational seniority is adjusted for work schedule, vacation bidding purposes and future possible furloughs.
 
For example, let's have a couple of 5 year agents with identical DOH with one being LUS and the other being LAA, and both are furloughed for 4 years before being either recalled or transferring to another station.  The LAA agent will have only 5 years seniority while the LUS agent will have 9 years seniority.  The LUS agent will not get the pay step increases, but they will keep their bidding and vacation seniority.  The LAA agent would need to transfer to another station not to lose their occupational seniority.
 
By choosing one method over another will mean that prior or current furloughed agents will be reshuffled upwards or downwards within their respective airlines.  Furthermore, if the LUS method is accepted, then there will be a perception by LAA agents that someone on the LUS side who actually worked fewer number of years due to a furlough would be ahead of some LAA agents who put in more years of actual years of service.  The LUS agent in question will contend the rules were followed during the time of the furlough and should not be punished because of a merger years later.
 
This issue will be a zero-sum gain in the end with plenty of upset people, especially if there are future furloughs.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Paying the guy that doesn't work and get bypassed ensures the Company will pay better attention to the process.
 
By having the guy bypassed work their hours at another time doesn't ensure anything other than someone else not getting the OT.
 
It is a manner of checks and balances.

+1
At lus, bypasses happen just about every time you look into it. Cuz there is no accountability and the person bypassed only gets another shift later on. Its retarded.

 

[Ramp Rogue]

I didn't say I didn't agree with you or anybody else on the matter, I am merely stating the reason it won't change.

P. Rez

 
Once again, what explanation do you have for stating that it won't change? What is the reason?
 
Rogue…..

 

[Ramp Rogue]

LAA has Tower Planners, which I believe are equivalent to LUS Operations. They are non union. If I am understanding this correctly, they will be brought into the union. They have no union time, no union seniority. Once they are brought into the union, how will they be placed seniority wise?
 
Rogue…..

 

[Jester]

LAA has Tower Planners, which I believe are equivalent to LUS Operations. They are non union. If I am understanding this correctly, they will be brought into the union. They have no union time, no union seniority. Once they are brought into the union, how will they be placed seniority wise?
 
Rogue…..

 
LUS had that too.... they were brought in on their operations DOH as they were considered part of the ramp, even though they were non-union.  That didn't go over well when some had 20+ years.

 

[Tim Nelson]

My understanding is that all Tower peeps will be or should be IAM, regardless if they work in DFW or ORD. The NMB made the ruling that catering, tower, CLP is all IAM exclusive work. NMB's decision wasn't station based either. For instance, CLP in DFW is IAM.
Thus, Tower in ORD ought to be IAM. Same in MIA, if they have tower there. Based on the NMB ruling. I hope Sito sticks with this.

 

[Ramp Rogue]

My understanding is that all Tower peeps will be or should be IAM, regardless if they work in DFW or ORD. The NMB made the ruling that catering, tower, CLP is all IAM exclusive work. NMB's decision wasn't station based either. For instance, CLP in DFW is IAM.
Thus, Tower in ORD ought to be IAM. Same in MIA, if they have tower there. Based on the NMB ruling. I hope Sito sticks with this.

 
My question is, what seniority are they going to go by? If they are giving DOH, everyone should get DOH. Once again, everyone should treated the same.
 
Rogue…..