JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[WeAAsles]

We won't get 10% unless the IAM gets about $3 per hour into their pension plan. That would be a huge boost from current levels and unlike the 401K, it would be to all IAM members.

I wish you would stop using phrases like "We won't get" so often. Even if it doesn't wind up happening or the odds are against it, there's nothing wrong with striving for the gold instead of automatically expecting the bronze.

SWA Ramp contract. 9.3% Match 1/1/2019

 

[WeAAsles]

Having a Mediator facilitate the negotiations only means that the unions will be pressured to get items close to industry levels. It will be an outside set of eyes that will see and share their perspective that we will need to make adjustments in our expectations or we will be in these negotiations for a much longer period than what anyone expects.

When we ask for what other airlines have, like pay, the Company will also ask for what airlines have which may not be in our interests. The Mediator, as a facilitator will make that point very clear. It will be up to negotiations team to dictate how we move ahead. Compromise or keep the process open.

It isn't unreasonable to expect these talks will be running towards the amendable dates of the current CBA's unless there are changes in medical, scope and retirement that will not be popular.

Let's see. CB and Prez "think" this may be done fairly soon? And now Isom also said he "thinks" this will be done fairly soon?

But the great NYer says we essentially should expect concessions or this will drag out till the end of 2018.

Welcome back NYer. Oh how I missed you.

 

[Traymark]

It isn't unreasonable to expect these talks will be running towards the amendable dates of the current CBA's unless there are changes in medical, scope and retirement that will not be popular.

Bingo, kinda exactly what I just said, but that is where we are.

 

[NYer]

View attachment 11718




I wish you would stop using phrases like "We won't get" so often. Even if it doesn't wind up happening or the odds are against it, there's nothing wrong with striving for the gold instead of automatically expecting the bronze.

SWA Ramp contract. 9.3% Match 1/1/2019

You can go for it, but we won't get it unless the IAM gets a $3 an hour contribution to their pension. Something in the neighborhood of 7% or 8% is more realistic and that depends on the where we end up with our hourly rate of pay.

 

[Kev3188]

My unsolicited opinion:

Sunset the IAMNPF, and use that "ask" either to boost the fixed company contribution, the match, or in other areas of the JCBA.

 

[NYer]

Let's see. CB and Prez "think" this may be done fairly soon? And now Isom also said he "thinks" this will be done fairly soon?

But the great NYer says we essentially should expect concessions or this will drag out till the end of 2018.

Welcome back NYer. Oh how I missed you.

Everyone has said that for a long time, over a year now. Including yourself who had several timelines of completion come and go including this May.

Unfortunately for you, it seems to gauge your opinions on what others say rather than with independent thought and analysis of the situation. Your handlers tell you what to say, for their benefit, but it doesn't usually pan out. That happens to be the reason you have so little credibility on these pages and elsewhere.

(This is where you start with the rock throwing you've warned us about)​

 

[WeAAsles]

You can go for it, but we won't get it unless the IAM gets a $3 an hour contribution to their pension. Something in the neighborhood of 7% or 8% is more realistic and that depends on the where we end up with our hourly rate of pay.

What I see as "reasonable" for Fleet is at least a match of what UAL Ramp currently enjoys with maybe a slight improvement above that.

And what I would "like" to see also is an agreement to exchange back (forego,release) any acceptance of PS from AA in exchange for the original 7% to wages commitment Parker originally envisioned. (Anyone prefers gambling I suggest flying to Vegas)

 

[NYer]

View attachment 11719 View attachment 11720



What I see as "reasonable" for Fleet is at least a match of what UAL Ramp currently enjoys with maybe a slight improvement above that.

And what I would "like" to see also is an agreement to exchange back (forego,release) any acceptance of PS from AA in exchange for the original 7% to wages commitment Parker originally envisioned. (Anyone prefers gambling I suggest flying to Vegas)

So you see this a positive?

 

[WeAAsles]

Everyone has said that for a long time, over a year now. Including yourself who had several timelines of completion come and go including this May.

Unfortunately for you, it seems to gauge your opinions on what others say rather than with independent thought and analysis of the situation. Your handlers tell you what to say, for their benefit, but it doesn't usually pan out. That happens to be the reason you have so little credibility on these pages and elsewhere.

(This is where you start with the rock throwing you've warned us about)​

Oh so you throw a few rocks at me and then add this quote

(This is where you start with the rock throwing you've warned us about)

To attempt to paint me as I'm such an unreasonable miserable Human monster and so mean that I might bloody poor little NYers nose.

Give me a break.

The Leaders of the Association have joined the talks now and there has been excellent progress. That was confirmed in an Association update, by CB and Prez on here, by Parker in one Town Hall and now by Isom in another.

Who else do you need to tell you?

 

[NYer]

Oh so you throw a few rocks at me and then add this quote

(This is where you start with the rock throwing you've warned us about)

To attempt to paint me as I'm such an unreasonable miserable Human monster and so mean that I might bloody poor little NYers nose.

Give me a break.

The Leaders of the Association have joined the talks now and there has been excellent progress. That was confirmed in an Association update, by CB and Prez on here, by Parker in one Town Hall and now by Isom in another.

Who else do you need to tell you?

When you can have a conversation like an adult we can pick up the subject once again.

Won't play your petty political games.

 

[NYer]

My unsolicited opinion:

Sunset the IAMNPF, and use that "ask" either to boost the fixed company contribution, the match, or in other areas of the JCBA.

If they don't pay into the IAMNPP, then they will pay for the 401K Match. Either way, that expense is spoken for and would do little to augment something else.

 

[WeAAsles]

So you see this a positive?

Absolutely. You can do your own math of course but considering our raise already and at least the low ball number of another 2% in wage gains we can easily make up for any loss to the 2.5% ourselves or invest however we feel works best for us as individuals.

Not to mention of course if we could find our way home to the original 7% that's $2.12 more from where we are now. (Not counting yearly increases)

$2.12 x 40 x 4 = $339.00 x 12 = $4070.00 per year. Now consider the increase to your Social Security and the increase to your 401k if you contribute the entirety into your account compounded over the time you have left till retirement.

 

[WeAAsles]

When you can have a conversation like an adult we can pick up the subject once again.

Won't play your petty political games.

"The Leaders of the Association have joined the talks now and there has been excellent progress. That was confirmed in an Association update, by CB and Prez on here, by Parker in one Town Hall and now by Isom in another"

Oh yea this comment sounds so Political.

 

[WeAAsles]

My unsolicited opinion:

Sunset the IAMNPF, and use that "ask" either to boost the fixed company contribution, the match, or in other areas of the JCBA.

There isn't any purpose in playing games on the subject. We all know the IAM has no intention of letting out anyone already contributing into the IAMPF. And they want us in there as well to try and grow the trust if possible.

We can all bicker back and forth forever if that's F'ed up or not but the bickering don't matter anyway.

 

[P. REZ]

Has anyone watched the LGA town hall on Jetnet? Isom tries to talk about the contract but stumbles some. What worries me is he keeps bringing up pension as a difficult issue. He says pension and not 401k. He might say retirement some but the word pension keeps coming up. Then Weel takes over and he sounds more concerned about Scope.

Maybe CB or PRez can elaborate as much as possible about why Isom sounds so concerned about pensions. I am concerned that he is concerned. The more I hear and the more I think about it, I do not think LAA should be forced into the IAMPF. I think a 10% match would be appropriate for the 401k for those not in the IAMPF. Maybe Weas or Bob can give a number of what anount of increase in the 401k would equate to what the company puts into the IAMPF for IAM employees?

I would like to know what CB and PRez think the major issue will be out of everything.

Is it retirement and will LAA be forced into the IAMPF? I think a couple weeks ago CB said he did not think LAA would be forced.

Is it Scope and do you think we will end up with something in between LAa and LUS for Fleet Service?

I think Isom mentions LAA scope in the Town Hall but I think he is talking about AC Maintenance being better on the LAA side? From what I understand LUS has better scope on the Fleet Service side.

Isom mentions that things are moving with the mediator and he says VC and Holidays being industry leading should not be a problem. They might have mentioned Healthcare but I don't think they mentioned it as much as Pension and Scope.

What is the biggest issue and do you think July is still possible for a contract?

gulfcoast1,

IMO, there are 3 big hurdles:

1. Scope
2. Health Insurance
3. Pension/401K

I believe based on the letter signed by Gless and Pantoja in 2014, that the pension is very important in these talks. When I walk my breakrooms, I have stated that I would personally be in favor of both the pension and 401K match. That seems to be fine with both the 401K preference crowd as well as the pension preference crowd. As CB stated a week ago or so, I worry about the pension. Also, I worry about the 401K. We are in an 8 year bull market, which is the 2nd longest bull market ever I believe. When the bull market ends, it's usually not pretty with 20% declines off previous highs. Give me a crystal ball and I can tell you which would be best moving forward. There are 5 weeks scheduled for negotiations through the end of July. IMO, there is a possibility we have a deal by then but of course that depends on the progress made on the 3 big hurdles mentioned above.

P. Rez