JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[bob@las-AA]

Actually weez I bought a new camera and it's keeping me busy getting to know it.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

These people hate you almost as much as me.

I did not know we were in a competition.

You broke me down and made me respond to you.

It's not hard to break down a weak mind.

To attempt to paint me as I'm such an unreasonable miserable Human monster

He has your number alright.

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.

I really had to laugh when I read this because it's pretty much exactly what I have said about YOU.

 

[WeAAsles]

Question, how do you put up with the traffic going into work, seems like a lot more since I last lived there.

I take 75 to work. And I work in the afternoon so 826 and 836 aren't horrible.

 

[WeAAsles]

View attachment 11723 Actually weez I bought a new camera and it's keeping me busy getting to know it.

Nice camera Bob. I see Toilet Flush the Troll is after me again. And NYer as well. At least he's an equal opportunity Troll.

Thumbs up there Toilet Flush.

 

[NYer]

Thanks NYer,
If we keep the 401k Match which I hope we do, and they make our match equal about what the IAM gets, will it be an increase and what would that number equal for our match? Thank you for the information.

Based on 40 hours a week, I believe our current Match (based on top pay) is more per hour than what is being contributed to the IAM Pension. I believe that is the reason they received a bump in the contribution to their pension plan during the Wage Adjustment last August.

The Wage Adjustment has it at $1.30 per hour. The 401K 5.5% Match is about $1.65 per hour (for those topped out)

If the IAM Pension gets the same value as the United CBA or $1.85 per hour, then we may not get an increase from the 5.5% since our ages, shift differential may bring our pay to an area where we'd get a similar level going towards our retirement.

In order for the 5.5% to go up, it would mean the IAM Pension would need to get much sweeter than the current comparison of United contributions.

 

[NYer]

Sorry, I see you already answered. An increase to 7% 0r 8% is not much. I would probably be ok with 8% though. That's what she said lol....

It would be 7% to 8% depending on the rise on the IAM contributions and the level of any other raises that may be part of the JCBA. If we get a 4% raise, for instance, and a shift differential it might bring our 5.5% Match to equal about $1.75 per hour. That's where the contributions for the United IAM Pension rests.

If the IAM, in our negotiations, do better than that. Let's say raise it to $2 per hour then we may see a bump in our 401K Match.

 

[WeAAsles]

Based on 40 hours a week, I believe our current Match (based on top pay) is more per hour than what is being contributed to the IAM Pension. I believe that is the reason they received a bump in the contribution to their pension plan during the Wage Adjustment last August.

The Wage Adjustment has it at $1.30 per hour. The 401K 5.5% Match is about $1.65 per hour (for those topped out)

If the IAM Pension gets the same value as the United CBA or $1.85 per hour, then we may not get an increase from the 5.5% since our ages, shift differential may bring our pay to an area where we'd get a similar level going towards our retirement.

In order for the 5.5% to go up, it would mean the IAM Pension would need to get much sweeter than the current comparison of United contributions.

You wrote "I believe" twice and "may" twice as well.

Bravo. A green from me to you.

According to the Company statement it was because the raises gave us more value by percentage to the match than IAM guys would have received had they remained static with the amount being contributed at that moment.

Only the Company accountants would know which retirement vehicle is currently costing them more at this moment taking into the equation that not everyone is at top pay or full time and unfortunately not everyone even takes advantage of the full match. Also what the costs will be over time as we transition out leaving possibly a longer road to top than you and I had.

I hope you don't look on any of this as Political? I'm really trying very hard here to use kid gloves.

 

[NYer]

I would take a 9.3% match and be satisfied.

If we were to get a 9.3% Match, it would mean the IAM guys would need to get a substantial raise to their pension contributions. It currently stands at $1.30, and the United plan currently has a contribution rate of $1.85 going to $2.05 by 2021.

If you believe there is a chance they go from $1.30 to $2.80 per hour, then you can hope for a 9.3% Match. Seems unlikely when there are other places they may want to enhance or protect, such as their scope language and/or their medical plans.

If they end up making changes to either of those items, then they may be able to expect a payout of some kind or maybe a higher contribution to their Pension, but will it be at that much higher if it takes the Company expense to a different level than their competitors.

 

[WeAAsles]

It would be 7% to 8% depending on the rise on the IAM contributions and the level of any other raises that may be part of the JCBA. If we get a 4% raise, for instance, and a shift differential it might bring our 5.5% Match to equal about $1.75 per hour. That's where the contributions for the United IAM Pension rests.

If the IAM, in our negotiations, do better than that. Let's say raise it to $2 per hour then we may see a bump in our 401K Match.

Ah you're mind is now opening up to the possibilities. I LOVE it.

Wonderful.

 

[WeAAsles]

If we were to get a 9.3% Match, it would mean the IAM guys would need to get a substantial raise to their pension contributions. It currently stands at $1.30, and the United plan currently has a contribution rate of $1.85 going to $2.05 by 2021.

If you believe there is a chance they go from $1.30 to $2.80 per hour, then you can hope for a 9.3% Match. Seems unlikely when there are other places they may want to enhance or protect, such as their scope language and/or their medical plans.

If they end up making changes to either of those items, then they may be able to expect a payout of some kind or maybe a higher contribution to their Pension, but will it be at that much higher if it takes the Company expense to a different level than their competitors.

You're freakin on fire man.

WONDERFUL.

 

[Tim Nelson]

If we were to get a 9.3% Match, it would mean the IAM guys would need to get a substantial raise to their pension contributions. It currently stands at $1.30, and the United plan currently has a contribution rate of $1.85 going to $2.05 by 2021.

If you believe there is a chance they go from $1.30 to $2.80 per hour, then you can hope for a 9.3% Match. Seems unlikely when there are other places they may want to enhance or protect, such as their scope language and/or their medical plans.

If they end up making changes to either of those items, then they may be able to expect a payout of some kind or maybe a higher contribution to their Pension, but will it be at that much higher if it takes the Company expense to a different level than their competitors.

About half the iam members at UA participate in the imnpf. But the ones who do also get I believe 3% match of total compensation. I think 3%. But i know they get both. But they had to waive almost all work rules and most part time language and allow for extended temporary employment. In my opinion, id rather have the current laa contract than giving up additional work and work rule language. They are very close to being "at will" employees since the grievance system is also watered down. Southwest ramp and LAA ramp have the best union rules in contracts that make management accountable. At LUS our work language blows. Getting a lunch or figuring out when we can take one is a chore.

 

[NYer]

About half the iam members at UA participate in the imnpf. But the ones who do also get I believe 3% match of total compensation. I think 3%. But i know they get both. But they had to waive almost all work rules and most part time language and allow for extended temporary employment. In my opinion, id rather have the current laa contract than giving up additional work and work rule language. They are very close to being "at will" employees since the grievance system is also watered down. Southwest ramp and LAA ramp have the best union rules in contracts that make management accountable. At LUS our work language blows. Getting a lunch or figuring out when we can take one is a chore.

That's the challenge of comparing contracts or airlines because while we focus on what we like, the Company will do the same. Now that there is a Mediator to facilitate the talks we can be sure they will be drilling that reality onto the Association. They will not allow for the comparisons that only benefit what we want and that is another reason why this may go into the later rounds.

In the LGA Town Hall, Isom said we can get what the best of what the industry has to offer in pay rates, holidays, vacation, ect., ect. There is a flip side to that, however, and the Negotiating Committee will have to grapple with that fact.

If they come back fairly quickly it will be because there was a movement towards what the Company wants or they laid down a full package with the Mediator suggesting it be sent out to a vote. What will be unlikely is getting everything on our wish list while the Company continues to carry what they believe are uncompetitive costs, as mentioned in the LGA Town Hall video.

 

[bob@las-AA]

Although an increase in the 401k company match would be nice for the LAA side but keep in mind that the remaining LAA side was already compensated for future sacrifice, by the means of the equity, now if we just could get the rest of it.

 

[WeAAsles]

That's the challenge of comparing contracts or airlines because while we focus on what we like, the Company will do the same. Now that there is a Mediator to facilitate the talks we can be sure they will be drilling that reality onto the Association. They will not allow for the comparisons that only benefit what we want and that is another reason why this may go into the later rounds.

In the LGA Town Hall, Isom said we can get what the best of what the industry has to offer in pay rates, holidays, vacation, ect., ect. There is a flip side to that, however, and the Negotiating Committee will have to grapple with that fact.

If they come back fairly quickly it will be because there was a movement towards what the Company wants or they laid down a full package with the Mediator suggesting it be sent out to a vote. What will be unlikely is getting everything on our wish list while the Company continues to carry what they believe are uncompetitive costs, as mentioned in the LGA Town Hall video.

Note the first time either Parker or Isom has backed off the comment "Industry leading wages" and replaced that with "Industry leading compensation"

They have been very careful up to now to focus on the earlier phrase which is part of the shell game of sacrificing one for the other by only mentioning wages.

I don't consider it mere coincidence that NOW the word "compensation" makes its grand entrance.

 

[NYer]

Although an increase in the 401k company match would be nice for the LAA side but keep in mind that the remaining LAA side was already compensated for future sacrifice, by the means of the equity, now if we just could get the rest of it.

We'll get the other areas enhanced, such as holidays, sick days, vacation, penalty hours, shift differential and stuff like that. Even if they just bring us to the IAM levels, we get those increases.

The trick to getting a rise of the 5.5% Match will be tied to the growth in the IAM Pension contribution. The advantage for the Company with the IAM contributions is that they have a lower number for the PTers, while on the LAA side the 5.5% is for all hours worked.

That makes it a two-fold problem for us because we have to take into account that the rise in the IAM Pension contribution has to be a significant level to create enough room for an increase of the 5.5%. That math doesn't take into consideration the costs for the Company as the IAM also wants to maintain their Medical and Scope to as close to what they have now as possible.

So. is it likely the IAM looks towards United level enhancement and use some value for the other items on their list or would they look to break the bank on the contribution and sacrifice other things?