JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[AANOTOK]

Let me add one last thing, if the Association can not bring AA up to the best of what US currently has, then this Association is a complete failure in my opinion. I have never been a restore and more guy (yet now they are posting billions and will be for the foreseeable future, I'm reconsidering) I will not be happy for example if US currently gets 10 holidays, we get 5 and so they negotiate 6,7,8 or 9. Anything less than 10 is a complete failure...

 

[WeAAsles]

And you and I both know, in that dark building, in that dark room, in that dark corner, we are having that going on right now.

Not really. I just don't think the Association is living up to the fullest potential it could if "people" would try to completely set aside their own personal agendas.

Engage the philosophy. Humanism.

It's really pretty fulfilling actually.

 

[WeAAsles]

Let me add one last thing, if the Association can not bring AA up to the best of what US currently has, then this Association is a complete failure in my opinion. I have never been a restore and more guy (yet now they are posting billions and will be for the foreseeable future, I'm reconsidering) I will not be happy for example if US currently gets 10 holidays, we get 5 and so they negotiate 6,7,8 or 9. Anything less than 10 is a complete failure...

I think focusing on just one particular item that adds to your total value yearly compensation is not the way to look at the big picture.

There are plenty of other ways to make up for any perceived loss if we didn't have 10 holidays.

Not saying that we shouldn't expect 10 holidays but just wanted to point out that that is only one aspect of the total I'll be looking at when it's sitting on my desk.

 

[NYer]

Let me add one last thing, if the Association can not bring AA up to the best of what US currently has, then this Association is a complete failure in my opinion. I have never been a restore and more guy (yet now they are posting billions and will be for the foreseeable future, I'm reconsidering) I will not be happy for example if US currently gets 10 holidays, we get 5 and so they negotiate 6,7,8 or 9. Anything less than 10 is a complete failure...

There are many, many difficult issues being discussed and solutions being crafted. The part of this whole thing that has raised the most frustration towards the process is the lack of information and explanation as to the difficulties being faced.

Trying to craft language from three sets of philosophies and points of view is not an easy task. The TWU has a certain way their book works; the IAM has another way their book works and the Company is trying to get what is best for them. That is not an easy track to navigate, and it is made more complicated by the Members not understanding these difficulties and why this process takes time.

We started the process behind the eight ball, and now we are paying for that. We tend to look at the loose items like, how many holidays, we have to remember and try to understand the overall challenges faced in those negotiations. The fact that while we stand to gain, our colleagues stand to lose and as such need to seek to maximize value elsewhere. That takes time.

Yes, we received a notice of the higher-ups getting involved in trying and expediting the process, but there is no date for that and no explanation as to what that means. My worry is that if when they come back with something outside of the expectations of some, will that be blamed of expediency rather than the realities of the situation.

 

[cltrat]

Let me add one last thing, if the Association can not bring AA up to the best of what US currently has, then this Association is a complete failure in my opinion. I have never been a restore and more guy (yet now they are posting billions and will be for the foreseeable future, I'm reconsidering) I will not be happy for example if US currently gets 10 holidays, we get 5 and so they negotiate 6,7,8 or 9. Anything less than 10 is a complete failure...

I agree with you,there' no reason on Gods earth that you guys shouldn't be brought up the our insurance and scope with a company making billions.I think it should be the best of both contracts not a compromising of them. I fear with Sito and Harry getting involved it's going to be get a deal for the sake of having one.We all are going to have to live under it for a long time

 

[Albert]

PJ look at what you just wrote.

"Who is thinking with selfish notions? And yes, I am in the group of people that really doesnt care how long this takes"

Of course you're selfish. So am I and there's nothing wrong with that.

And then you say this:

"The folks on the street, i agree we should try and get them back to work ASAP."

So we're back to the longer this takes the longer they're out. I've even had IAM people tell me that they don't care if this drags out all the way into the beginning of Section 6 next year.

Nah, no way, ah ah. I'm tired of having those people come on FB and wanting to get home and having to ignore them. Or telling people to their faces right here in MIA that I don't know when you're going to get back? Probably why I was hoping it would be done last May and then hoping the end of the year.

To these guys there is no such thing as it being done right. They just want to get home.

And maybe you don't have to listen to them asking about that every day? But here in MIA we do.

So we should agree to an inferior contract for 17,000 for the sake of a couple of hundred?

 

[Albert]

Crema,

I am currently FT at LUS. I started as PT. Back then PT employees accrued 50% of FT seniority. That stopped around 95-96. I stated here before LUS wages were at $24.39 topped out employee, with the lead premium at $1.50. What was LAA at? But it seems you are dodging the question I asked. How/why do you feel the LUS folks benefitted more than the LAA folks did with the merger?

What are you talking about? When they announced the merger we were making $20.57. The rest of the raises we were riding AA's coattails. If there was no merger we'd probably getting $23 or $24. No one would be up to $30 if it wasn't for DL raising the bar

 

[CremaDiLimone]

Neither does McCaskill-Bond nor Allegheny-Mohawk dictates the form in which seniority integration is supposed to look like, aside from saying it should be constructed in a "fair and equitable manner." If the unions comes to an agreement, then that is the preferred outcome under the law. In the event the unions can't come to an agreement or if there is only one surviving union, they would not be allowed to unilaterally dictate how the seniority integration would be. In the event of an impasse, those laws trigger the use of binding arbitration to reach and agreement.

that's what i had posted when you asked me about a fair solution. no fair solution, but a mechanism to proceed with this vision. if this was any kind of an issue for the twu, it would have had to have been hammered out with the iam, prior to the association forming.

you posted above: "if the unions comes (sp) to an agreement, then that is the preferred outcome under the law."

i had envisioned the twu in the driver's seat in any initial association feeling-out talks. the twu tells the iam their seniority vision and the iam responds. step 1.

anyways, you didn't answer my question. why does the company's take on seniority (favors minority of fscs) trumps the union's (favors the good guys, guys with 1 date) - when it comes to something contractual, like VC?

 

[NYer]

that's what i had posted when you asked me about a fair solution. no fair solution, but a mechanism to proceed with this vision. if this was any kind of an issue for the twu, it would have had to have been hammered out with the iam, prior to the association forming.

you posted above: "if the unions comes (sp) to an agreement, then that is the preferred outcome under the law."

i had envisioned the twu in the driver's seat in any initial association feeling-out talks. the twu tells the iam their seniority vision and the iam responds. step 1.

anyways, you didn't answer my question. why does the company's take on seniority (favors minority of fscs) trumps the union's (favors the good guys, guys with 1 date) - when it comes to something contractual, like VC?

This list is just a merging of the TWU and IAM master seniority list. It has nothing to do with vacation bidding or how anything dealing with seniority is to be structured. Those issues will be dealt with during the JCBA negotiations. In the meantime, on the TWU side, we continue to accrue Company, Pay, and Occupational seniority.

There is no driver's seat when it comes to seniority integration talks.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

What are you talking about? When they announced the merger we were making $20.57. The rest of the raises we were riding AA's coattails. If there was no merger we'd probably getting $23 or $24. No one would be up to $30 if it wasn't for DL raising the bar

i agree with dl and ua upping the ante. southwest isn't considered, but they are also generous, relatively speaking. i realize the different work rules..

what is amazing is united. munoz wasn't lying when he said he wants to change the company x employee culture. the 3rd most profitable airline, i believe ua is 4th now, opening new talks/throwing out the previous contract and giving ua an industry-leading contract. these guys upped the bar.

i also believe the mechanics got us our premature raise. they did what they needed to do and the company had enough of maintenance delays and some cancellations. i have no doubt aa's team told us "here's your money", then took AMT on the side and told them, "stop fooking around now" or we'll fire AMTs who wear the wrong color socks.

what we need for peace of mind, is a 'me too' wage clause. no need to force parker to come out with the 'no leap-frogging' speech. any carrier passes up aa fleet service with TOS pay, we automatically pass them up by 3%.

 

[WeAAsles]

So we should agree to an inferior contract for 17,000 for the sake of a couple of hundred?

You see Al this is why I love ya. At least you're an honest man.

You have an ideology that what might come back to you is going to be inferior. Inferior is up to the individual perspective and it's different for each person if they want or need to compare themselves to others.

To be honest if it was right now completely and only about "ME" and I was told what I have is it except for maybe another 2% per year till I retire I'd be perfectly ok with that. Again your bank account has nothing to do with my bank account.

But we are in a Union. And in a Union it's not just about "ME", it's supposed to be about "ALL"

And right now portions of that "ALL" are being neglected.

 

[WeAAsles]

I agree with you,there' no reason on Gods earth that you guys shouldn't be brought up the our insurance and scope with a company making billions.I think it should be the best of both contracts not a compromising of them. I fear with Sito and Harry getting involved it's going to be get a deal for the sake of having one.We all are going to have to live under it for a long time

Again I very much doubt it's going to be just Harry and Sito but you don't for whatever reason seem to have much confidence in them getting involved?

Why? Honestly?

 

[WeAAsles]

What are you talking about? When they announced the merger we were making $20.57. The rest of the raises we were riding AA's coattails. If there was no merger we'd probably getting $23 or $24. No one would be up to $30 if it wasn't for DL raising the bar

Actually I think it was your Union pushing very hard and getting very close on that organizing drive that made management there throw money at the workers to shoo the IAM off.

But otherwise you're pretty spot on. I say between $26 to $27 though?

 

[Albert]

Again I very much doubt it's going to be just Harry and Sito but you don't for whatever reason seem to have much confidence in them getting involved?

Why? Honestly?

Holiday weekend and all, I wonder why none of the negotiators are chiming in? Do you think they are pleased?

 

[Albert]

You see Al this is why I love ya. At least you're an honest man.

You have an ideology that what might come back to you is going to be inferior. Inferior is up to the individual perspective and it's different for each person if they want or need to compare themselves to others.

To be honest if it was right now completely and only about "ME" and I was told what I have is it except for maybe another 2% per year till I retire I'd be perfectly ok with that. Again your bank account has nothing to do with my bank account.

But we are in a Union. And in a Union it's not just about "ME", it's supposed to be about "ALL"

And right now portions of that "ALL" are being neglected.

A small portion as I see it