JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[WeAAsles]

The sky is falling Weez

Why do you think these things existed in the first place. Ask some guys that worked for AA back in the 70's before that language was negotiated.

Every year they were farmed out to other stations. Told on Friday that they needed to report on Monday or they had no job.

That's the fact Jack.

 

[NYer]

The company already pushes part time work. You agreeing to take home less every payday to subsidize PT medical is not going to change that.

It is quite the opposite. The less people in the plan the higher the cost becomes. Making medical so expensive for a certain group that it causes them to opt out only raises the prices for everyone else. The plan by AA is not like the IAM multi-employer plan that pools the resources of over several companies. If we have less people pay into the plan, then the premiums and other expenses goes up.

 

[Albert]

Sorry Al but your contract has only 1 paragraph for PT so that makes me just a little nervous. To be honest I don't know anything anymore and nothing surprises me either.

What happened to the glass half full WeAAsles. Our jobs are more secure than they have ever been

 

[Albert]

It is quite the opposite. The less people in the plan the higher the cost becomes. Making medical so expensive for a certain group that it causes them to opt out only raises the prices for everyone else. The plan by AA is not like the IAM multi-employer plan that pools the resources of over several companies. If we have less people pay into the plan, then the premiums and other expenses goes up.

Makes you wonder why Walmart with their hundreds of thousands of employees wouldn't have a plan,using your theory they would pay close to nothing

 

[WeAAsles]

What happened to the glass half full WeAAsles. Our jobs are more secure than they have ever been

My job is only secure by the work I have and the language written in my contract. Accept much weaker language and my sense of security goes out the window.

And don't get me wrong Al. I do realize you only got your first ever contract in 1995 or 1996 or so and you then went through 2 Bankrupcies that I'm sure weakened already flimsy language because it wasn't built up over 70 years.

And again I mean flimsy because before 1995 you didn't have any language at all. I'm much happier that we merged with you guys over Delta that would have brought squat to our table. I'm glad your guys were able to ride the coat tails of our agreement and hope you ride even more of it. (Including items we used to have and never forgot, such as PENALTY HOURS)

 

[WeAAsles]

Makes you wonder why Walmart with their hundreds of thousands of employees wouldn't have a plan,using your theory they would pay close to nothing

Since when do you think the Waltons or their shareholders care anything about their workforce? The people who work for Wally World are nothing but a disposable cost commodity to be used and turned over when the use becomes too expensive to be interested in any longer.

 

[Albert]

My job is only secure by the work I have and the language written in my contract. Accept much weaker language and my sense of security goes out the window.

And don't get me wrong Al. I do realize you only got your first ever contract in 1995 or 1996 or so and you then went through 2 Bankrupcies that I'm sure weakened already flimsy language because it wasn't built up over 70 years.

And again I mean flimsy because before 1995 you didn't have any language at all. I'm much happier that we merged with you guys over Delta that would have brought squat to our table. I'm glad your guys were able to ride the coat tails of our agreement and hope you ride even more of it. (Including items we used to have and never forgot, such as PENALTY HOURS)

I don't know what penalty hours are but it sounds like the union bleeding the company I want a fair contract I don't want to be asked to take cuts in a few years, They had something with the UAW where a laid off worker would keep getting paid I forgot what it was called

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

It is quite the opposite. The less people in the plan the higher the cost becomes. Making medical so expensive for a certain group that it causes them to opt out only raises the prices for everyone else. The plan by AA is not like the IAM multi-employer plan that pools the resources of over several companies. If we have less people pay into the plan, then the premiums and other expenses goes up.

I understand what you are saying and there is a certain logic to it however, from what I have observed many people take a part time job at American Airlines with their primary motivation for doing so being insurance. PT with a goal of upgrading to FT would most likely take part in the insurance plan.

To tell the truth NYer I have mixed feelings on this subject. I understand the membership's goal of keeping insurance affordable, but I also question saddling someone with insurance cost when they may already have insurance from another source (full time job, spouse).

I ran into that when I hired into American Airlines. I already had insurance (better and cheaper) through my wife's employer. I was told I had to take American Airlines insurance as a condition of employment. Was that fair to me to force a higher cost plan on me as a condition of employment when I got no benefit from it and was already insured?

I think this is one of those issues where there really is no right answer.

I guess at the end of the day you have to ask yourself if the benefit you receive from forced participation justifies the burden you are placing on the individual.

For whatever it is worth I doubt you would see a max exodus of insurance participants from part time workers.

 

[Albert]

I understand what you are saying and there is a certain logic to it however, from what I have observed many people take a part time job at American Airlines with their primary motivation for doing so being insurance. PT with a goal of upgrading to FT would most likely take part in the insurance plan.

To tell the truth NYer I have mixed feelings on this subject. I understand the membership's goal of keeping insurance affordable, but I also question saddling someone with insurance cost when they may already have insurance from another source (full time job, spouse).

I ran into that when I hired into American Airlines. I already had insurance (better and cheaper) through my wife's employer. I was told I had to take American Airlines insurance as a condition of employment. Was that fair to me to force a higher cost plan on me as a condition of employment when I got no benefit from it and was already insured?

I think this is one of those issues where there really is no right answer.

I guess at the end of the day you have to ask yourself if the benefit you receive from forced participation justifies the burden you are placing on the individual.

For whatever it is worth I doubt you would see a max exodus of insurance participants from part time workers.

Insurance was never forced on anyone at LUS ,they would encourage you to use your wife's

 

[WeAAsles]

I don't know what penalty hours are but it sounds like the union bleeding the company I want a fair contract I don't want to be asked to take cuts in a few years, They had something with the UAW where a laid off worker would keep getting paid I forgot what it was called

You see. You're automatically looking at something without even knowing what it is and if it benefits both of us or not and assume it's a fleecing of the company. If you think all we do is try and fleece the company at every turn, seriously why haven't you taken a management position?

I mean you already push papers and they would give you around a 15% raise? Why not go for it Al? Bulk up that retirement account.

It was something that when utilized correctly benefited BOTH of us.

 

[Albert]

My job is only secure by the work I have and the language written in my contract. Accept much weaker language and my sense of security goes out the window.

And don't get me wrong Al. I do realize you only got your first ever contract in 1995 or 1996 or so and you then went through 2 Bankrupcies that I'm sure weakened already flimsy language because it wasn't built up over 70 years.

And again I mean flimsy because before 1995 you didn't have any language at all. I'm much happier that we merged with you guys over Delta that would have brought squat to our table. I'm glad your guys were able to ride the coat tails of our agreement and hope you ride even more of it. (Including items we used to have and never forgot, such as PENALTY HOURS)

It's funny you say for years we argued about joining a union one of the things we feared most was the TWU/AA "B" scale.The whole industry thanks you for that one

My job is only secure by the work I have and the language written in my contract. Accept much weaker language and my sense of security goes out the window.

And don't get me wrong Al. I do realize you only got your first ever contract in 1995 or 1996 or so and you then went through 2 Bankrupcies that I'm sure weakened already flimsy language because it wasn't built up over 70 years.

And again I mean flimsy because before 1995 you didn't have any language at all. I'm much happier that we merged with you guys over Delta that would have brought squat to our table. I'm glad your guys were able to ride the coat tails of our agreement and hope you ride even more of it. (Including items we used to have and never forgot, such as PENALTY HOURS)

It's funny you mention this, for years we argued whether to join a union or not. One of our biggest fears was the AA "B" scale. I'm sure there is a great history behind it. It is probably on scale with today's IAM Spirit contract

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Since when do you think the Waltons or their shareholders care anything about their workforce? The people who work for Wally World are nothing but a disposable cost commodity to be used and turned over when the use becomes too expensive to be interested in any longer.

Depends on where you work and what you do.

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=Wal-Mart_Distribution_Center/Hourly_Rate

[+] Unloader (4)
$11.90 - $23.59

[+] Forklift Driver (4)
$13.18 - $24.08

[+] Cashier (3)
$7.74 - $11.54

Do you think paying a forklift driver $24.08 an hour is unreasonable?

My coworker's husband works for a Wal-Mart distribution center and he is very happy.

In your fantasy world part time cashiers would make 15 an hour and have a full benefits package with a pension..................

 

[Albert]

You see. You're automatically looking at something without even knowing what it is and if it benefits both of us or not and assume it's a fleecing of the company. If you think all we do is try and fleece the company at every turn, seriously why haven't you taken a management position?

I mean you already push papers and they would give you around a 15% raise? Why not go for it Al? Bulk up that retirement account.

It was something that when utilized correctly benefited BOTH of us.

Yeah benefited both, that's why you don't have it anymore

 

[Albert]

Depends on where you work and what you do.

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=Wal-Mart_Distribution_Center/Hourly_Rate

[+] Unloader (4)
$11.90 - $23.59

[+] Forklift Driver (4)
$13.18 - $24.08

[+] Cashier (3)
$7.74 - $11.54

Do you think paying a forklift driver $24.08 an hour is unreasonable?

My coworker's husband works for a Wal-Mart distribution center and he is very happy.

In your fantasy world part time cashiers would make 15 an hour and have a full benefits package with a pension..................

He would also want them to have free tuition to the private college of their choice

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

He would also want them to have free tuition to the private college of their choice

No doubt.