JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[WeAAsles]

Well I have to admit that I am concerned about it. But I also feel that the TWU side might have had issues with their side of the executive team. So I can only hope that they will now feel better about their side and things will be even better. It's a old saying, but really " only time will tell"

I first met Alex Garcia when I was laid off to MIA in the summer of 2003. I was a VERY angry guy towards the Company and had nothing but almost complete hatred of management and went after them with a vengeance. Alex was the guy who had people come and convince me to be a Steward and channel my anger the right way. I have TOTAL faith and support for Alex. And as much as it might bother certain people I know, I've never had any reason to feel otherwise.

International Secretary-Treasurer Alex Garcia

Alex Garcia was elected International Secretary-Treasurer of TWU in September 2013. He previously served the union as COPE Director, as well as director of the combined COPE and Government Affairs Department.

Garcia was only 19 when he was first hired by American Airlines in Miami’s Fleet Service division in 1989. He quickly rose to power in his local, and by 1992, he was an experienced shop steward representing ramp workers at Miami International Airport. He also served as chief steward and chair of the local’s election committee. In 2002, at the age of 32, Local 568 members elected him President, and he was re-elected in 2005. In 2007, TWU International lured Garcia away from Miami to bring his extensive union and political experience to the national level.

At the International, Garcia has worked effectively as a legislative representative, field representative, and political coordinator, using the first-hand experience he gained while working for U.S. Senator Bob Graham (D-Fla.) from 1998–2003. Garcia assisted the senator’s successful campaign for a third term and his bid for the presidency in 2003, and also worked on the election campaign of Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.).

In 2010, Garcia was elevated to COPE Director, and director of the combined COPE and Political Field Department, now Government Affairs. He was instrumental in creating the TWU State Conference program which combines the power of TWU locals in a geographic area to strengthen grassroots activism on the local and national level.

As Secretary-Treasurer, Garcia keeps the union on sound financial footing and brings his expertise to local leadership by conducting Secretary-Treasurer trainings around the country.

 

[AANOTOK]

Is or will he be involved directly in the negotiations (i.e Executive Sessions)? And if he is, the proof will be in the pudding I guess.

 

[WeAAsles]

Is or will he be involved directly in the negotiations (i.e Executive Sessions)? And if he is, the proof will be in the pudding I guess.

Yes he is. And so is Mike Mays as well who has been there since day one. If John Samuelsen isn't actually going to sit in directly, Alex is the highest executive in the TWU behind Samuelsen.

And if you take him back all the way to step one he's one of us. An AA Fleet Service Clerk.

 

[Deleted member 14439]

Yes he is. And so is Mike Mays as well who has been there since day one. If John Samuelsen isn't actually going to sit in directly, Alex is the highest executive in the TWU behind Samuelsen.

And if you take him back all the way to step one he's one of us. An AA Fleet Service Clerk.

Great.......

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim
Plz show me a post that I have ever told someone they were guaranteed something in the pension. Please. Prove me wrong right now for all to see and witness. That's my point with you. You get to post anything you want with nothing to back it up. The good news is that very few believe you anymore. But again, anyone that knows me knows that from the very beginning I argued against the people telling our members that it was guaranteed. In fact, I probably argued it more than anyone else at the time. It pissed me off. But you want to post something like the last post, that's ive lied and guaranteed something on the pension. Again gain some credibility with me and post where I've made that statement. And debate you on the pension? Debate what? I am as concerned about it as you are. I'm also concerned about 401k,s and social security. People think they can control their 401k,s? But yet probably 90% of the people can't even tell you what their fees are on their 401k,s. Or have no Idea just how a percentage point in fees can change your savings rate by thousands. But I received the same letter you did about the pension. In fact, if you read my last email briefing I put out Sunday, I have had lots of questions about it. And rightfully so. I am as concerned about it as you are.

Admittedly, you didnt claim that members will know the benefit amounts and im glad you are concerned. I just hope, from your leadership position, that you advocate for choice, and not just for the laa.
The plan, like all pensions are scams nowadays. Companies got out of pensions after they stole all our money. Unions steal as well. If someone wants or needs their future contributions to go to the iamnpf then thats their prerogative and fine but i dont like the idea where i wont possibly be able to choose.

As far as credibility and who listens to me, its not for me to say. I dont seek credibility.

 

[WeAAsles]

Great.......

And you have Gary Peterson in there with them.

 

[WeAAsles]

As far as credibility and who listens to me, its not for me to say. I dont seek credibility.

Tim just to interrupt on this one you really need to stop saying you don't seek credibility or want to be credible. You do understand the antonyms of that word right?

"Main Entry: credible
Part of Speech: adjective
Definition: believable
Synonyms: aboveboard, colorable, conceivable, conclusive, creditable, dependable, determinative, honest, honest to God, imaginable, likely, plausible, possible, probable, probably, rational, reasonable, reliable, satisfactory, satisfying, seeming, sincere, solid, sound, straight, supposable, tenable, thinkable, trustworthy, trusty, up front, valid
Antonyms: implausible, impossible, improbable, inconceivable, incredible, unbelievable, unimaginable, unlikely, untenable"

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

I was a VERY angry guy towards the Company and had nothing but almost complete hatred of management and went after them with a vengeance.

HA HA HA are you serious? What did you do post them to death.

Alex was the guy who had people come and convince me to be a Steward and channel my anger the right way.

In other words, he knows a useful idiot when he sees one.

.......went after them with a vengeance. I will be laughing at that for a LONG time.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim just to interrupt on this one you really need to stop saying you don't seek credibility or want to be credible. You do understand the antonyms of that word right?

"Main Entry: credible
Part of Speech: adjective
Definition: believable
Synonyms: aboveboard, colorable, conceivable, conclusive, creditable, dependable, determinative, honest, honest to God, imaginable, likely, plausible, possible, probable, probably, rational, reasonable, reliable, satisfactory, satisfying, seeming, sincere, solid, sound, straight, supposable, tenable, thinkable, trustworthy, trusty, up front, valid
Antonyms: implausible, impossible, improbable, inconceivable, incredible, unbelievable, unimaginable, unlikely, untenable"

Im not saying things for people to believe me. Im usually presenting information that the union doesnt provide or pointing out scams in a ta, or pointing out how the union violates their rights. They can believe me later if they listen now. If members choose not to listen then thats fine. I want them to have all the information and choice and rights that arent continually trampled on. Wanting those sorta things arent how one keeps a union job, but im fine with that as well.

 

[WeAAsles]

Im not saying things for people to believe me. Im usually presenting information that the union doesnt provide or pointing out scams in a ta, or pointing out how the union violates their rights. They can believe me later if they listen now. If members choose not to listen then thats fine. I want them to have all the information and choice and rights that arent continually trampled on. Wanting those sorta things arent how one keeps a union job, but im fine with that as well.

Ok Tim but 9 times out of 10 these are issues on how YOU view things unless you can give "proof" that something you're saying is right. On the IAMPF a lot of what you're saying about future happenings on it are speculations. YES they are speculations now where you do have a lot of strength for your opinions having especially had to live a cut first hand and providing that recent funding letter. That's also why I backed off and started taking you more seriously on the issue.

But you can't say that you don't care about credibility and really expect people to want to listen or take you seriously. And it's NOT about anyone having or wanting a Union job either. It's about having facts to back up things you say or if not (hopefully) gaining the "credibility" that if you tell people something they're going to take you seriously and believe you (Maybe over someone else even)

And I have NEVER read either CB or Rez defend the IAMPF as a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. They HAVE though talked about diversification just like I have. They also NEVER defended the actions of the funds administrators for taking advantage and being snakes in the grass (Slimebags) for using YOUR/THEIR money as their personal frat house. (And the actions of the DOL now have the fund under a microscope which IS a good thing)

All the other things about the IAMPF are debatable and unfortunately for the "people" who are in it and want it to succeed that recent funding letter gave you a lot more strength in your overall arguments against it. But you also can't say that it's GOING to take another cut in the future but you can say you BELIEVE it's going to take another cut (With of course the personal experience to back up that belief)

 

[WeAAsles]

Admittedly, you didnt claim that members will know the benefit amounts and im glad you are concerned. I just hope, from your leadership position, that you advocate for choice, and not just for the laa.
The plan, like all pensions are scams nowadays. Companies got out of pensions after they stole all our money. Unions steal as well. If someone wants or needs their future contributions to go to the iamnpf then thats their prerogative and fine but i dont like the idea where i wont possibly be able to choose.

As far as credibility and who listens to me, its not for me to say. I dont seek credibility.

BTW to come back to this.

You can also say that many DBP's are also scams if the Company you work for isn't funding it to keep up with the anticipated payouts and can use Bankruptcy to throw it on a trash pile in the PBGC which is also dramatically underfunded and may not see a bailout when the chickens finally come home to roost.

You can say Social Security is a scam if people in the Government borrow against those monies held and don't figure out ways to pay back what they borrowed from it. Maybe in the future also leading to dramatic cuts?

You can say the 401k is a scam if because of bad laws passed through cronyism it can cause the market to collapse and people's retirement nest eggs get wiped out at a time when they need those assets the most.

The housing bubble collapse was a scam with shady loan practices and ARM's putting borrowers under water and destroying all their built up equity and credit when those borrowers had to default on their loans due to lost jobs and income under that situation.

Again diversification is the only shot any of us have.

DIVERSITY!!!!!!!

 

[Tim Nelson]

Ok Tim but 9 times out of 10 these are issues on how YOU view things unless you can give "proof" that something you're saying is right. On the IAMPF a lot of what you're saying about future happenings on it are speculations. YES they are speculations now where you do have a lot of strength for your opinions having especially had to live a cut first hand and providing that recent funding letter. That's also why I backed off and started taking you more seriously on the issue.

But you can't say that you don't care about credibility and really expect people to want to listen or take you seriously. And it's NOT about anyone having or wanting a Union job either. It's about having facts to back up things you say or if not (hopefully) gaining the "credibility" that if you tell people something they're going to take you seriously and believe you (Maybe over someone else even)

And I have NEVER read either CB or Rez defend the IAMPF as a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. They HAVE though talked about diversification just like I have. They also NEVER defended the actions of the funds administrators for taking advantage and being snakes in the grass (Slimebags) for using YOUR/THEIR money as their personal frat house. (And the actions of the DOL now have the fund under a microscope which IS a good thing)

All the other things about the IAMPF are debatable and unfortunately for the "people" who are in it and want it to succeed that recent funding letter gave you a lot more strength in your overall arguments against it. But you also can't say that it's GOING to take another cut in the future but you can say you BELIEVE it's going to take another cut (With of course the personal experience to back up that belief)

They are in positions of leadership. Im tougher on them. And its not about defending something wrong or less, but standing up. If the intl preaches it, they turn the pages. Nice guys but altar boys for sito. Believe me, neither one will present the deep pitfalls of the iampf so ill have to be the bad guy and explain the things they are too uncomfortable explaining.
Thats my perspective anyways and i think ive kept this bunch alot more accountable than if i wasnt around...so its worked out better for all of us.

 

[Tim Nelson]

BTW to come back to this.

You can also say that many DBP's are also scams if the Company you work for isn't funding it to keep up with the anticipated payouts and can use Bankruptcy to throw it on a trash pile in the PBGC which is also dramatically underfunded and may not see a bailout when the chickens finally come home to roost.

You can say Social Security is a scam if people in the Government borrow against those monies held and don't figure out ways to pay back what they borrowed from it. Maybe in the future also leading to dramatic cuts?

You can say the 401k is a scam if because of bad laws passed through cronyism it can cause the market to collapse and people's retirement nest eggs get wiped out at a time when they need those assets the most.

The housing bubble collapse was a scam with shady loan practices and ARM's putting borrowers under water and destroying all their built up equity and credit when those borrowers had to default on their loans due to lost jobs and income under that situation.

Again diversification is the only shot any of us have.

DIVERSITY!!!!!!!

I cant argue with diversification. Im uncomfortable having 100% of my company contribution go into the iampf and having no say in the matter.

 

[WeAAsles]

They are in positions of leadership. Im tougher on them. And its not about defending something wrong or less, but standing up. If the intl preaches it, they turn the pages. Nice guys but altar boys for sito. Believe me, neither one will present the deep pitfalls of the iampf so ill have to be the bad guy and explain the things they are too uncomfortable explaining.
Thats my perspective anyways and i think ive kept this bunch alot more accountable than if i wasnt around...so its worked out better for all of us.

Well having a thorn in your side is the best way to keep people on their toes and Jesus H are you a thorn in the sides of the IAM.

And to your credit you were the first person to come on our pages during the little (mini) raid 141 threw at us using the IAMPF for the sell to try and get us to sign up and dismantling that push. (They're never going to love you for that you know)

As far as the Alter boy comment that's between you and them. I like them both and I'm not getting in the middle of something that goes back before I even started working for AA.

I've always read what you wrote about the IAMPF (even under all your many names) and no I don't just take them all with a grain of salt trust me. But when you go all Coo Coo for Cocoa Puffs on it is when you lose me and the Meme's start flying at you.

 

[WeAAsles]

I cant argue with diversification. Im uncomfortable having 100% of my company contribution go into the iampf and having no say in the matter.

And I also agree with you 100%. But all I keep telling you and you have to know this as a fact. Unless the Company puts their foot down otherwise they're never going to let you get completely out of it anyway. That's completely my opinion?

So at best at least for you guys I'd LOVE to see something where you also gain a bit of a match to your 401k contributions as well. BUT you also HAVE to start putting away as much as you can into your retirement accounts on your own to try to stay ahead of any curveballs life throws at you.

20% going into my 401k means with a Nuclear bomb drop (say another BK) I can afford a 20% paycut and keep going.

Borrowing half the money I was approved for with the Credit Union on my Condo gave me another cushion.

I don't work OT or Extra hours so there's another cushion if needed? Not taking CC yet, another cushion. Hording some cash in my Savings account, another cushion.

Get what I'm saying here Tim?