JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[NYer]

pjirish,

i worked with former twa guys...1960s-70s seniority and we had many conversations.
what was the alternative for twa? they had none. icahn had stripped the company..this deal was made prior to 9-11 and hanging in the balance after 9-11. after 9-11, twa would have folded by christmas and those guys would have been out on the street with NOTHING. 9-11 happened and we had a contract on the table that most (aa) understood you had to vote in. acquisition confirmed.

for you to tell me that lus rescued aa or this merger is similar to that 2001 acquisition, with lus as aa and laa as 2001 twa is so far from reality and will get you some nasty replies from legacy aa guys.

i'm getting the impression from legacy us air guys that as a legacy aa fsc, i'm not allowed to voice my displeasure about the merger seniority issue. i did not know that this forum appears to be a hardcore lus website. anyways, i blamed the twu and felt the twu should have looked after it's dues-paying members better. that's all. in this forum, you've been led by the pied piper telling you i hate us air, when i have posted that seniority should apply to all, including lus PTers.

if this guy gets seniority today from piedmont or psa than that guy gets seniority from fueling or reno air. if this legacy laa PTer gets full seniority than that legacy lus PTer also gets full seniority. i have posted all that. i can't be anymore clear. do you believe that is so outrageously unfair?? surely that means i hate us air? clearly, this means i only want seniority for myself?? so, most of my posts have been going backwards to defend myself from ridiculous accusations - made to wind you and other lus clerks up, i'm done with that.

mixing the twa acquisition with the merger is a smokescreen and here, in the midst of some legacy aa fscs, you and the the big fish and not doing yourselves any favors by constantly sympathizing with an acquired twa and telling us that twa 'should have' or 'maybe' had their occ. time to try and stick it to me, because i happen to post here and was/am not impressed by the seniority developments.

If fairness is you goal then please help me with something.

Let's say that PTer that has had his seniority accrual in place for all this time suddenly gets full credit for all years on the clock, despite his CBA saying he only gets 50%, He passes several people on the seniority list that had been ahead of him since the 90's because they reached FT or were hired after the change to the CBA.

How do you explain to those Members he passed them despite the contractual language that gave him the seniority he had, they will now jump ahead after spending 20 years behind them.

How is it fair to that Member that was passed? I know you think it's fair for the PTer to suddenly gain what they never had, but how is it fair to the others?

If this is about fairness, show me how to do it where it is fair to everyone.

 

[Kev3188]

Using Date of hire is really the only way to check all of those boxes-and I'm not even sure you could legally touch Kasher.

Lots of short term angst, but easiest in the long run.

 

[Ramp Rogue]

If fairness is you goal then please help me with something.

Let's say that PTer that has had his seniority accrual in place for all this time suddenly gets full credit for all years on the clock, despite his CBA saying he only gets 50%, He passes several people on the seniority list that had been ahead of him since the 90's because they reached FT or were hired after the change to the CBA.

How do you explain to those Members he passed them despite the contractual language that gave him the seniority he had, they will now jump ahead after spending 20 years behind them.

How is it fair to that Member that was passed? I know you think it's fair for the PTer to suddenly gain what they never had, but how is it fair to the others?

If this is about fairness, show me how to do it where it is fair to everyone.

In reality it is an easy fix. The very first day that any person works the ramp as a fleet service employee for the now NEW AMERICAN, that first day that they start is their seniority date. That would give everyone the same chance. The one with the oldest date is the most senior, and that goes for everyone across the board. No one can honestly have an argument against that.

Rogue…..

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

i blamed the twu and felt the twu should have looked after it's dues-paying members better. that's all.

That is where you made your mistake.

You should have known better.

TWU is obviously going to chase after a new source of dues. They have no fear of losing their current dues paying members.

If you were a business who would you concentrate on, someone you had locked under a (working) lifetime contract or new money?

 

[WeAAsles]

Using Date of hire is really the only way to check all of those boxes-and I'm not even sure you could legally touch Kasher.

Lots of short term angst, but easiest in the long run.

Kasher couldn't be touched as it could set up a DFR claim against both Unions but especially the TWU. Unity or Union fairness ideology aside the organizations are still essentially businesses.

Using the TWU example. The TWU was the organization I paid to represent me since May of 1995. TWA people were not part of the TWU prior to 4/10/01 which would have been when they first started paying for the service of the Union I had already belonged to for 6 years at that point.

But if you want to interject fairness into the conversation. Would it have been fair to me if they had gotten all of their seniority by an organization that they had never been a part of before I hired on?

What's fair and what's not fair is only one or each individual's opinion.

 

[WeAAsles]

In reality it is an easy fix. The very first day that any person works the ramp as a fleet service employee for the now NEW AMERICAN, that first day that they start is their seniority date. That would give everyone the same chance. The one with the oldest date is the most senior, and that goes for everyone across the board. No one can honestly have an argument against that.

Rogue…..

Not really and here's why.

Any member who is now part of the merged airline was under their own individual CBA's before the merger ever happened. Either they hired in to each individual carrier or they were there when there was a CBA change that was voted on by those members.

As an example when I hired on I received pay raises of roughly $1.00 yearly. The people who hired on previously to the contract I fell under were gaining raises every 6 months of roughly .50 cents. Was it fair that for 6 months those people were getting paid .50 cents more than me where I had to wait till my anniversary date?

Absolutely of course again it was fair. The reason it was fair was because it was NOT the contract I hired in under and by accepting the job I also accepted the language of that particular contract.

Just like when we get a JCBA to vote on if it passes by "majority" that's now our new contract that we "all" have to live with or under.

If as individuals we don't accept that contract we only have one option. We resign from the company and seek employment elsewhere.

 

[WeAAsles]

Again this idea of fairness is up to the individuals interpretation of what they personally feel it means.

And no we're not always going to agree with each other when we throw our opinions on it out there.

 

[pjirish317]

NYer,

My apologies, it was a broad statement and not all encompassing. So my mistake.

Crema,

Seniority is a touchy issue for all of us. Can we agree to disagree on the seniority situation? I know my date isnt changing. It is what it is. The date that Javits went by was the date that was given to him by the COMPANY, not the union. So other than the seniority issue, which we all will have differing opinions on, how/why do you think LUS benefitted more than the LAA folks with this merger?

WeAAsles,

But if you want to interject fairness into the conversation. Would it have been fair to me if they had gotten all of their seniority by an organization that they had never been a part of before I hired on?
.

using this logic, the LAA load planners shouldn't have gotten all their time when they were certified by the NMB as part of our class and craft for CLP. You're saying they should get a seniority date for bidding schedules and vacations that is 12/09/2013? Because they weren't part of any union before that date?

 

[WeAAsles]

NYer,

My apologies, it was a broad statement and not all encompassing. So my mistake.

Crema,

Seniority is a touchy issue for all of us. Can we agree to disagree on the seniority situation? I know my date isnt changing. It is what it is. The date that Javits went by was the date that was given to him by the COMPANY, not the union. So other than the seniority issue, which we all will have differing opinions on, how/why do you think LUS benefitted more than the LAA folks with this merger?

WeAAsles,



using this logic, the LAA load planners shouldn't have gotten all their time when they were certified by the NMB as part of our class and craft for CLP. You're saying they should get a seniority date for bidding schedules and vacations that is 12/09/2013? Because they weren't part of any union before that date?

Excellent point PJ, excellent. The "only" argument I "think" I can make on that is that it wasn't the choice of those individuals to come into our little (big) Union family. That was the decision of the NMB without any disagreements to that being heard or listened to.

But yes your response certainly does provide for more debate on the issue.

 

[Albert]

Excellent point PJ, excellent. The "only" argument I "think" I can make on that is that it wasn't the choice of those individuals to come into our little (big) Union family. That was the decision of the NMB without any disagreements to that being heard or listened to.

But yes your response certainly does provide for more debate on the issue.

They weren't given the option to go to Customer service? Either way I think they should keep their seniority

 

[Ramp Rogue]

NYer,

My apologies, it was a broad statement and not all encompassing. So my mistake.

Crema,

Seniority is a touchy issue for all of us. Can we agree to disagree on the seniority situation? I know my date isnt changing. It is what it is. The date that Javits went by was the date that was given to him by the COMPANY, not the union. So other than the seniority issue, which we all will have differing opinions on, how/why do you think LUS benefitted more than the LAA folks with this merger?

WeAAsles,



using this logic, the LAA load planners shouldn't have gotten all their time when they were certified by the NMB as part of our class and craft for CLP. You're saying they should get a seniority date for bidding schedules and vacations that is 12/09/2013? Because they weren't part of any union before that date?

That is exactly right. Their seniority date should be 12/09/13. I'm talking about the load planners. If that is their first day working as fleet, that should be their seniority date for everything relating to fleet. If they are given all of their time, every fleet agent should be given all of their time too. You can't be fair to some, you have to be fair to all. I have a big problem with someone that has never been in fleet, jumping ahead of me in seniority.

Rogue…..

 

[pjirish317]

• Association Leadership to Expedite Outstanding Joint Contract Economic Issues
  
  
  
  
  
  Janaury 13, 2017
  
  Association Leadership to Expedite Outstanding Joint Contract Economic Issues
  
  Top level TWU/IAM Association leadership will be joining ongoing joint contract negotiations with American Airlines to expedite outstanding economic issues.
  
  “The time is now for Association members to achieve the fair contract they deserve,” said Association Chair and Vice Chair Sito Pantoja and Harry Lombardo, respectively. “Association Negotiating Committees have been bargaining hard for over a year now and the membership has already enjoyed some of the benefits of their hard work. We have more work to do and we are committed to directing all the Association’s resources, including our direct involvement, to bring these negotiations to conclusion.” The TWU-IAM Association began joint contract negotiations with American Airlines in November, 2015. In August of last year, Association Negotiating Committees reached agreement on an interim wage agreement, which provided wage hikes of approximately 25 percent.
  
  Negotiations will follow the previously announced January schedule. Specific dates for the leadership to enter the discussions have not yet been determined.
  
  
  Download:
  TWU-IAM Association Bulletin.pdf

While I applaud Sito's and Harry's enthusiasm, my personal opinion is that they should keep their fingers out of the pie. I mean really, what are they going to accomplish? Possibly getting us a deal, but at what price? What articles they going to skip to get us a quick deal? Scope? Medical? OT? Only to use the old "we will get that next time" line? Leave the NC alone and let them do the job YOU entrusted them to do. It's not like they will waltz into the room and the company will start shaking in their boots because of their presence? My fear is that they WILL bypass the NC and scrimp on certain articles just to get a deal done. Please Sito and Harry, help the NC any way you can, but PLEASE, PLEASE keep your hand out of the cookie jar. I think you will only hurt us during these negotiations if you get involved, because you want a quick JCBA. Everybody wants a JCBA so we can ALL start working as the worlds #1 airline. If you do HAVE to get involved, please do not sacrifice anything just to get a deal done.

 

[WeAAsles]

While I applaud Sito's and Harry's enthusiasm, my personal opinion is that they should keep their fingers out of the pie. I mean really, what are they going to accomplish? Possibly getting us a deal, but at what price? What articles they going to skip to get us a quick deal? Scope? Medical? OT? Only to use the old "we will get that next time" line? Leave the NC alone and let them do the job YOU entrusted them to do. It's not like they will waltz into the room and the company will start shaking in their boots because of their presence? My fear is that they WILL bypass the NC and scrimp on certain articles just to get a deal done. Please Sito and Harry, help the NC any way you can, but PLEASE, PLEASE keep your hand out of the cookie jar. I think you will only hurt us during these negotiations if you get involved, because you want a quick JCBA. Everybody wants a JCBA so we can ALL start working as the worlds #1 airline. If you do HAVE to get involved, please do not sacrifice anything just to get a deal done.

PJ since the letter says "Association Leadership" I would have to doubt that means just Harry and Sito. Wouldn't that also mean Sean Doyle, Mike Mays, Tommy Reagan, Mike Klemm and ?

These other guys by now must be fully aware of every detail in other contracts out there in the industry and what's good and maybe bad in them right now?

On SCOPE I'm sure they'll at least bring up what the PSA have right now which is 5 flights per day to both staff and restaff. The one flight per day on your side did come with the caveat "Until a JCBA is reached"

On PT staffing and treatment I am concerned how that goes even if I did leave PT behind 20 years ago. I don't like them getting half benefits in so many areas but I also don't like them being included in the mix for OT with FT frankly. I do feel there should be some type of enticement for members to want to gain FT. PT is just so different between our two contracts.

In the UAL contract the items I like are their Retirement package of IAMPF and a 3% Match plus "Shift Continuance" or what we used to call "Penalty Hour" that I REALLY would like to see come back. I think it would be a shame not to see that return because it really does also help management keep their numbers more consistent for aircraft arrivals and especially departures.

(SWA in the next few years is going up to a 9.9% match)

On Medical I keep hearing from multiple people that Tom Reagan is the whiz kid in that area. I just don't think I subscribe to this doom and gloom notion that you automatically have to come up to the complete cost of our medical? My mind keeps thinking the worst case scenario is somewhere in between the two costs?

I'd like to think that the Leaders don't intend to just bypass or dismiss the work or opinions of any of our Negotiators in either Fleet or Maintenance. In Maintenance in particular TWU Peterson would publicly throw them under the bus in a heartbeat IMO if they did. He certainly has the History.

But if they do what you think they could do I'd like to hope they'll take responsibility for anything that maybe was opposed by those Negotiators who've spent so many months away from their families and friends as that would be the right thing to do.

 

[pjirish317]

WeAAsles,

I just hope that they don't lose sight of the long term gains just for short term gains. My question for them would be this, Why the rush for a JCBA now? What information do they have that we don't, that has them intervening now. I get that the workforce is getting impatient, I do. But we have gotten a considerable raise, the company got the cross utilization that they wanted to get in the 13 cities. So why the rush now? When you rush things get forgotten, overlooked, or left out, and then its to late to change it. But as I said before, this is just my opinion.

 

[WeAAsles]

WeAAsles,

I just hope that they don't lose sight of the long term gains just for short term gains. My question for them would be this, Why the rush for a JCBA now? What information do they have that we don't, that has them intervening now. I get that the workforce is getting impatient, I do. But we have gotten a considerable raise, the company got the cross utilization that they wanted to get in the 13 cities. So why the rush now? When you rush things get forgotten, overlooked, or left out, and then its to late to change it. But as I said before, this is just my opinion.

Actually PJ since the members got the raises I think the emphasis on rushing is exactly the opposite frankly.

But I think there are now other things and people to consider. I'm not completely adept at how your grievance procedures work but don't the AGC's have a lot of responsibilities that they have to attend to that being in consistent negotiations bogs them down from getting to? It's a bit of a different structure in the TWU as we have most of our Locals and officers based in Station to attend to those matters.

Another thing not brought up much here on Forums but they are on Facebook and have been essentially pleading for a conclusion for a long time now is our commuters. We have hundreds of members on our side systemwide who want to go home and feel like none of us care about them. We even still have members on the street that we really do need to get back now.

I think again perhaps with the raises it put too many people out there into the frame of mind where it's an "I don't care how long this takes"?

We're all sitting on different sides of fences on that view and I have to say the ones that feel they already have everything can be more complacent than the ones who don't have everything just yet.

If we really are going to be a true Union as one group, we have to consider the entire collective and not just think with only selfish notions.