JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[NYer]

I have looked over the list and I am seeing one obvious problem... those people who accepted a preferential hire position are not being given their full time, but rather their new (but supposedly temporary) DOH instead. If this list is the final draft then there will certainly be some upset people who find themselves behind those preferential hires who are now on the bottom (assuming the adjustment will be made) or those preferential hires who lost nearly all their time (if the adjustment will not be forthcoming).

"It should also be noted that as part of this integration process I have identified those employees who are covered by the parties’ preferential hiring agreements dated August 6, 2014. Under the terms of those agreements, these employees are to appear with the Occupational/Classification Seniority date from their original pre-merger airline on the integrated seniority lists. In other words, by agreement of the parties, these employees’ seniority snaps-back to the seniority that they held at their original pre-merger airline. Accordingly, I have placed these approximately 117 employees on integrated lists using their original dates." --Javits Report and Recommendation

 

[Jester]

"It should also be noted that as part of this integration process I have identified those employees who are covered by the parties’ preferential hiring agreements dated August 6, 2014. Under the terms of those agreements, these employees are to appear with the Occupational/Classification Seniority date from their original pre-merger airline on the integrated seniority lists. In other words, by agreement of the parties, these employees’ seniority snaps-back to the seniority that they held at their original pre-merger airline. Accordingly, I have placed these approximately 117 employees on integrated lists using their original dates." --Javits Report and Recommendation

Thank-you, NYer, and it is very helpful; however, it would be even more helpful for those who are preferential hire to know where they stand post-integration instead of attempting to guess based upon their relation to another who may be under different circumstances (involuntary furlough, voluntary furlough, not furloughed, accepted transfer, LOA, etc.). Not to mention, it would be helpful to those who are likely to be bumped down instead of trying to figure who is a preferential hire and their DOH and their post-integration seniority.

In addition, the language of "Accordingly, I have placed these approximately 117 employees on integrated lists using their original dates," I find to be confusing I did not see a link to the "integrated lists" post-JCBA. The only list I saw was not using their original dates, but instead their current dates with their "new" employer. If I was one of those preferential hires, I would most desire to see my name on the correct integrated list versus hoping the Association stands by an "agreement of the parties" instead of using some weasel language later how that list was a final draft.

 

[NYer]

Thank-you, NYer, and it is very helpful; however, it would be even more helpful for those who are preferential hire to know where they stand post-integration instead of attempting to guess based upon their relation to another who may be under different circumstances (involuntary furlough, voluntary furlough, not furloughed, accepted transfer, LOA, etc.). Not to mention, it would be helpful to those who are likely to be bumped down instead of trying to figure who is a preferential hire and their DOH and their post-integration seniority.

In addition, the language of "Accordingly, I have placed these approximately 117 employees on integrated lists using their original dates," I find to be confusing I did not see a link to the "integrated lists" post-JCBA. The only list I saw was not using their original dates, but instead their current dates with their "new" employer. If I was one of those preferential hires, I would most desire to see my name on the correct integrated list versus hoping the Association stands by an "agreement of the parties" instead of using some weasel language later how that list was a final draft.

Javits is only speaking on the methodology of how to integrate the seniority list. He is using the current seniority lists available but does touch on how the Preferential Hire will revert to their seniority once the JCBA is ratified. That has been the agreement between all parties since the very beginning.

If you're worried about "weasel language" then having your name on some list is not really any protection from that, is it?

The Preferential Hire will be OK as their original agreement and the Javits Recommendation both clearly state they will receive their LAA seniority. It really can't get any clearer than that.

 

[bob@las-AA]

Here is the master list sorted by stations.
I added a union affiliation next to your job title, and the first column is your system seniority, second column is your station seniority.

 

[WeAAsles]

Here is the master list sorted by stations.
I added a union affiliation next to your job title, and the first column is your system seniority, second column is your station seniority.

Holy crap Bob we need to get you in to Centerport as a corporate bean counter.

120k plus benefits work for you?

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Can anybody explain this?

9480 134 Barrera Jorge 591166 TWU FSC TUL 12/04/2000

 

[CremaDiLimone]

as an aa twu employee, i have 2 concerns with this seniority integration process....that only iam/legacy us air people can help with:

- while being laid off from us air/iam position, did affected employee(s) lose seniority? if they didn't lose seniority, they have an inherent advantage as aa/twu laid off employees did lose seniority.

- through the years of legacy us air mergers & acquisitions, or hiring from a piedmont/allegheny airline into legacy us air, did affected new legacy us air employee get to keep half or any of their former seniority? if so, they have an inherent advantage as legacy aa employees that were former polishers/sky chef/building cleaners/amr/fuelers (prior to 1991)/eagle/reno air...did not get to keep any seniority (only company).

speaking to a few legacy us air employees prior to and after the merger, this is what i was told. of course, i can't rely on what joe lunchbox fsc tells me, i'm hoping that some of the iam negotiators that post here (p rez/charlie brown), can confirm or deny.

unfortunately but understandably, i have found that after nearly 30 years, most legacy aa employees would throw a party knowing that a coworker they have known for 30 years won't pass them up in seniority....while potentially, after this blended seniority list, dozens of us air employees will now pass them up after accumulating seniority in ways that you could not accumulate seniority at legacy aa. if this is true, i find this very unfair, but not sure if this is javits' job to sift through and either add seniority to various legacy aa employees or take away seniority from various legacy us air employees.

i thank anyone in advance for information.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

Cha Ching !

the ruling sounds exciting and i realize that the amount in this kitty is nearly 10xs more than the money in the equity/retiree case.....but:

- i'm surprised that the intl. didn't post a bit more informational q&a bulletin immediately after the ruling. as if, the twu's lawyers haven't told the twu what the monetary potential of winning this lawsuit consists of?

worst case scenario looks as though we are owed apprx. 1-2 shares for every $1k in equity we received. most ft guys with 25 or so years (at the time) were to get some $8k in equity. does this mean we will get 8-16 more shares?

if so, then was it worth the case where we get 8 more shares and bank of america gets $500 million as one of the 'movants'??

that is worst case scenario and i pray i'm wrong.

of course, we had a union meeting in ord that other day and this was brought up and the reply in so many words was, "it won't be much".

 

[bob@las-AA]

the ruling sounds exciting and i realize that the amount in this kitty is nearly 10xs more than the money in the equity/retiree case.....but:

- i'm surprised that the intl. didn't post a bit more informational q&a bulletin immediately after the ruling. as if, the twu's lawyers haven't told the twu what the monetary potential of winning this lawsuit consists of?

worst case scenario looks as though we are owed apprx. 1-2 shares for every $1k in equity we received. most ft guys with 25 or so years (at the time) were to get some $8k in equity. does this mean we will get 8-16 more shares?

if so, then was it worth the case where we get 8 more shares and bank of america gets $500 million as one of the 'movants'??

that is worst case scenario and i pray i'm wrong.

of course, we had a union meeting in ord that other day and this was brought up and the reply in so many words was, "it won't be much".

From the letter this past week, how were you able to determine its nearly 10 times the amount that is in limbo.

 

[LuxuryLiner]

Here is the master list sorted by stations.
I added a union affiliation next to your job title, and the first column is your system seniority, second column is your station seniority.

Is there a reason why they don't show any of the AA TWU FSCs at PHX? They were called back in September..

 

[bob@las-AA]

Is there a reason why they don't show any of the AA TWU FSCs at PHX? They were called back in September..

The list that they use to arrive at this list was from a old one and not up to date.

 

[bob@las-AA]

as an aa twu employee, i have 2 concerns with this seniority integration process....that only iam/legacy us air people can help with:

- while being laid off from us air/iam position, did affected employee(s) lose seniority? if they didn't lose seniority, they have an inherent advantage as aa/twu laid off employees did lose seniority.

- through the years of legacy us air mergers & acquisitions, or hiring from a piedmont/allegheny airline into legacy us air, did affected new legacy us air employee get to keep half or any of their former seniority? if so, they have an inherent advantage as legacy aa employees that were former polishers/sky chef/building cleaners/amr/fuelers (prior to 1991)/eagle/reno air...did not get to keep any seniority (only company).

speaking to a few legacy us air employees prior to and after the merger, this is what i was told. of course, i can't rely on what joe lunchbox fsc tells me, i'm hoping that some of the iam negotiators that post here (p rez/charlie brown), can confirm or deny.

unfortunately but understandably, i have found that after nearly 30 years, most legacy aa employees would throw a party knowing that a coworker they have known for 30 years won't pass them up in seniority....while potentially, after this blended seniority list, dozens of us air employees will now pass them up after accumulating seniority in ways that you could not accumulate seniority at legacy aa. if this is true, i find this very unfair, but not sure if this is javits' job to sift through and either add seniority to various legacy aa employees or take away seniority from various legacy us air employees.

i thank anyone in advance for information.

Javits did his job, and I have no problem with the list as is.

 

[WeAAsles]

the ruling sounds exciting and i realize that the amount in this kitty is nearly 10xs more than the money in the equity/retiree case.....but:

- i'm surprised that the intl. didn't post a bit more informational q&a bulletin immediately after the ruling. as if, the twu's lawyers haven't told the twu what the monetary potential of winning this lawsuit consists of?

worst case scenario looks as though we are owed apprx. 1-2 shares for every $1k in equity we received. most ft guys with 25 or so years (at the time) were to get some $8k in equity. does this mean we will get 8-16 more shares?

if so, then was it worth the case where we get 8 more shares and bank of america gets $500 million as one of the 'movants'??

that is worst case scenario and i pray i'm wrong.

of course, we had a union meeting in ord that other day and this was brought up and the reply in so many words was, "it won't be much".

Nothing personal to the guys in your Local but I would go and talk to Elvira there if I were you. He does all the searching and researching to find out all the info about this kind of stuff.

He's the guy honestly I call to help fill in some of the blanks when I'm having some difficulty on these Court issues.

 

[WeAAsles]

From the letter this past week, how were you able to determine its nearly 10 times the amount that is in limbo.

Exactly. Cases are still ongoing so the amount in reserve could still shrink. And I haven't seen yet how many shares right now are in there not to mention the shares will go to all 3 Unions.

It could wind up being a nice windfall or it could wind up being just a few shares?

Don't know just yet?

 

[NYer]

as an aa twu employee, i have 2 concerns with this seniority integration process....that only iam/legacy us air people can help with:

- while being laid off from us air/iam position, did affected employee(s) lose seniority? if they didn't lose seniority, they have an inherent advantage as aa/twu laid off employees did lose seniority.

- through the years of legacy us air mergers & acquisitions, or hiring from a piedmont/allegheny airline into legacy us air, did affected new legacy us air employee get to keep half or any of their former seniority? if so, they have an inherent advantage as legacy aa employees that were former polishers/sky chef/building cleaners/amr/fuelers (prior to 1991)/eagle/reno air...did not get to keep any seniority (only company).

- while being laid off from us air/iam position, did affected employee(s) lose seniority? if they didn't lose seniority, they have an inherent advantage as aa/twu laid off employees did lose seniority. --"Furloughed Fleet Service employees accrue and retain seniority for four years, but lose all seniority if not recalled during that time"..."Furloughed Mechanic and Related employees continue to accrue seniority for five years after which they retain, but do not accrue additional seniority."

- through the years of legacy us air mergers & acquisitions, or hiring from a piedmont/allegheny airline into legacy us air, did affected new legacy us air employee get to keep half or any of their former seniority? if so, they have an inherent advantage as legacy aa employees that were former polishers/sky chef/building cleaners/amr/fuelers (prior to 1991)/eagle/reno air...did not get to keep any seniority (only company). --"In the past, the contractual rules regarding seniority accrual and retention were different at the two pre-merger Carriers. In addition, in some instances, different seniority rules or practices applied to different employee groups at each pre-merger Carrier. Citing these past differences in seniority treatment, I received a number of employee comments requesting that I adjust the seniority dates for certain groups or individuals in order to negate the effect of past differences in seniority rules. A sizeable number of employees suggested that I simply integrate the work groups according to hire dates in order to place all employees on an equal footing. Although I understand why employees would advocate for these adjustments, as I explain below, the seniority integration process cannot be a vehicle for re-writing history."

The comments submitted to me focused on several differences in seniority accrual among the pre-merger work groups. Some commentators pointed out that LUS employees could move between some work classifications without any loss in seniority, whereas LAA employees who made similar moves were only able to retain seniority in a prior classification for a limited time or not at all. Others pointed to the fact that furloughed LUS employees continued to accrue seniority for longer periods of time while on furlough that LAA employees. Other commentators complained that seniority credit for time spent working at subsidiary LUS and LAA carriers had been applied inconsistently in the past with some employees receiving credit for such time and others not. I also received comments from some LUS Fleet Service employees who complained that prior to 1999 part-time Fleet employees only received 50% credit for time worked for seniority purposes. While this rule was changed subsequently through collective bargaining, the change only applied prospectively. As a result, some Fleet Service employees affected by the 50% rule asked that I now go back and retroactively give them 100% credit for their part-time service."

"While I appreciate why employees have requested adjustments in their seniority date to account for different seniority treatment in the past, there are several reasons why it would be inappropriate for me to grant such requests."

"First, the past accrual of seniority was the result of the parties’ collective bargaining agreements or company policies. It is not my role during the seniority integration process to sit in judgment of these agreements or policies after-the-fact and decide which believe were proper and which were not. Moreover, as previously discussed, seniority in the airline industry is a zero-sum endeavor, with one person’s gain being another person’s loss. If I were to add seniority to individuals who were not credited with it in the past, this would have a negative impact on everyone who I placed after them on the seniority list. In addition, retroactively altering the seniority dates of thousands of employees to adjust for events that may have occurred decades ago is nearly impossible as a practical matter, not just in terms of time constraints, but also because complete records are no longer available in many instances. Any attempt to reconstruct work histories would be based largely on estimates and guesswork, which is hardly fair or equitable in a matter as important as seniority integration."

"Moreover, even if accurate records did exist for every single employee, adjusting seniority for all of these purposes would result in a major re-shuffling of the seniority order currently in place for each pre-merger group, including at stations that are populated only by LAA or LUS employees that would not otherwise be immediately impacted by the seniority integration. Finally, past decisions that impacted seniority -- for example,decisions about whether to transfer among positions, work in management, or take a personal leave -- were made based on the seniority practices in existence at the time and retroactively changing them now would be grossly unfair to other employees who also made decisions in reliance on the practices in place at the time."