JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[WeAAsles]

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?

Also the part of the equation not to be forgotten is that except for AMFA represented Mechanics at SWA there are no longer any open contracts that need to be concerned about as far as leapfrogging.

The Company now has the ability to factor in where they can set a cost bar and if it's a doable equation against competition and anticipated future revenue.

That recent news item about Aprils numbers and Parkers insistent plea to Wall Street that they aren't paying attention to the Forrest through the trees may answer that question.

I believe AA has the ability to set the bar in regards to the Association for the industry. We don't have to expect just to match the bar.

 

[gulfcoast1]

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

PRez,

Thank you for answering my questions and sorry for the delay in my response. I appreciate your honesty and your efforts in negotiations. I realize it is not easy and I know many of us are impatient, myself included. I guess if I had one thing I would like to tell to our friends in the IAM it would be that I don't want to be forced into the IAMNPF. Those of us who are in our 40's are higher, I think should be able to decide to keep on with the 401k or how to proceed. That is my opinion on it. I don't think I could vote yes on a contract with only the IAMPF as a company funded option at my age.

I also hope Fleet Service Scope is at least somewhere in between LAA and LUS. I hope the same for mntc although I think in their case the LAA scope is better.

Thank you again.

 

[gulfcoast1]

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.

I hope we see some sort of increase. I would be happy with 9% or 10%. I would not turn down 8% though. That's what she said lol.

 

[WeAAsles]

Late breaking news here.

Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc (BRKa.N) on Monday said it added to its sizable investments in American Airlines Group Inc (AAL.O) and Southwest Airlines Co (LUV.N), and shed its stake in Twenty-First Century Fox Inc (FOXA.O).

In a regulatory filing, Berkshire said that in the first quarter its American stake grew 8 percent to 49.3 million shares worth $2.08 billion, while its Southwest stake grew 10 percent to 47.7 million shares worth $2.57 billion.

Berkshire also shed 8 percent of its holdings in Delta Air Lines Inc (DAL.N), ending March with 55 million shares worth $2.53 billion.



http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN18B2LH

 

[gulfcoast1]

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 are almost 6 months out from the hearing. I hope we hear good news this week or month.

 

[bob@las-AA]

Not for nothing but LUS {Article 23-A-2, DOS 2014} gets $1.15 towards pension. That equates to a 3.8% match, am I missing something here? Even at IAM $1.30, that's still only 4.3% In order for us to get 9% LUS would have to get $2.72. Seems kinda unlikely. But again, stranger things have happened before.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

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

You actually did a good job.

Also what the costs will be over time as we transition out leaving possibly a longer road to top than you and I had.

The road to the top as you say is already 25 percent of most people's career. How much longer can that road get?

 

[WeAAsles]

You actually did a good job.

The road to the top as you say is already 25 percent of most people's career. How much longer can that road get?

People shouldn't be focusing on how long does it take to get to top since that target should be moving with each subsequent new contract. What they should look at is how long does it take to beat the average pay for that profession.

For example using our poor poor poor Mechanics who like the guy said yesterday are being "held back" by ? On the other thread. The BLS average for Aircraft Mechanics last year was $60,000. So how long once they get in to AA does it take them to reach and surpass that? (Our poor guys only making near 100k per year at top)

https://www.bls.gov/ooh/installatio...onics-equipment-mechanics-and-technicians.htm

 

[NYer]

Not for nothing but LUS {Article 23-A-2, DOS 2014} gets $1.15 towards pension. That equates to a 3.8% match, am I missing something here? Even at IAM $1.30, that's still only 4.3% In order for us to get 9% LUS would have to get $2.72. Seems kinda unlikely. But again, stranger things have happened before.

There you go.

The Wage Adjustment gave them a boost from $1.15 to $1.30 since our raise would also automatically give more into our 401K match.

With a raise, we get more into the 401K automatically, even if it stays at 5.5%. The IAM, however, needs to boost their numbers in a separate transaction. If you listen to Isom in LGA, it seems the goal would be to keep everyone on a somewhat level playing field. That being the case, how likely it is to get a boost in the 5.5% on top of an increase in pay.

If we get another 3% or 4% raise, it means we'll be getting about $1.70 per hour contributed to our 401K, while the IAM would need to negotiate to get from $1.30 to $1.70.

What is the likelihood they go from $1.30 to $2.89 in contributions? That is the same possibility we'd go from 5.5% to 9.3%.

 

[WeAAsles]

There you go.

The Wage Adjustment gave them a boost from $1.15 to $1.30 since our raise would also automatically give more into our 401K match.

With a raise, we get more into the 401K automatically, even if it stays at 5.5%. The IAM, however, needs to boost their numbers in a separate transaction. If you listen to Isom in LGA, it seems the goal would be to keep everyone on a somewhat level playing field. That being the case, how likely it is to get a boost in the 5.5% on top of an increase in pay.

If we get another 3% or 4% raise, it means we'll be getting about $1.70 per hour contributed to our 401K, while the IAM would need to negotiate to get from $1.30 to $1.70.

What is the likelihood they go from $1.30 to $2.89 in contributions? That is the same possibility we'd go from 5.5% to 9.3%.

Don't forget if we're just talking about monetary pocket value in wages and retirement contributions we still wind up short against our three comparable industry peers.

The 7% was meant to make up for any possibilities against PS that the other three were anticipated to receive with us having no PS at all (Can we keep PS out of the contract please Gentleman and get back to the guaranteed wages) Anyway we now know the story why we were shifted down to a 3% promise losing 4% in the outwardly expressed conversation.

So that issue is standalone separate.

On retirement contributions though (comparing to TOS) we are behind all three other airlines. And that divide is growing contractually. UAL is gaining yearly both increases to their IAMPF contributions and their 401k Match is growing with yearly increases to their wages. While SWA is gaining both wage increases and match percentages to their 401k (Delta I believe is a currently set 401k match percentage) So again not counting SCOPE expenses yet let's not leave these facts out of the conversation until we have a JCBA to gauge if we're being shortchanged in comparisons.

But I was happily glad to hear Isom's pivot to "Industry leading compensation" against "Industry leading wages"

"Maybe" we'll soon find out what that means?

 

[WeAAsles]

BTW in a perfect World (We don't live in one) for me the Company can keep all of their contributions to my current (not my DBP) retirement accounts and shift that money back in to my direct wages so I can focus on other investment areas I have going on.

(Not going to happen of course though)

 

[Traymark]

What is the likelihood they go from $1.30 to $2.89 in contributions? That is the same possibility we'd go from 5.5% to 9.3%.

Well, lets just take a look at precedent within our own company.
The Pilots get a 12%(I think) contribution, not a match.
The FA's get a 9.9%contribution, not a match.
Why is it so "crazy town" to expect our match to go up to at least what the FA's got?

Last I checked , we are in the midst of record profits, profits never seen before at any level.
Americans management team at the top is wealthier than they ever dreamed they could be and getting wealthier by the day, just reference the stock sales by Parker and friends.
So why is it crazy for us to expect an improvement?
Why are we the stepchildren of the company?

Edit to add:
We've already paid for ANY improvements we get from here by going over the last 4 years with zero improvement while everyone else got theirs.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

People shouldn't be focusing on how long does it take to get to top since that target should be moving with each subsequent new contract. What they should look at is how long does it take to beat the average pay for that profession.

WeAAsles.... that answer sounds so canned and pre scripted it's not even funny.

 

[NYer]

Well, lets just take a look at precedent within our own company.
The Pilots get a 12%(I think) contribution, not a match.
The FA's get a 9.9%contribution, not a match.
Why is it so "crazy town" to expect our match to go up to at least what the FA's got?

Last I checked , we are in the midst of record profits, profits never seen before at any level.
Americans management team at the top is wealthier than they ever dreamed they could be and getting wealthier by the day, just reference the stock sales by Parker and friends.
So why is it crazy for us to expect an improvement?
Why are we the stepchildren of the company?

If the comparisons made were just within our Company then you'd be 100% correct. However, the comparisons are within the industry and other legacy airlines, we do it and so will they. It is how they keep their costs comparable to other airlines.

The F/A's have a sliding scale by age (under 40 years old, they get 5.5%...40-49 years old get 6.75%...50 years old and over get 9.9%) that would revert back 5.5% in 2018.

Unfortunately, the economic system in this country rewards stock price rather than profit levels.

 

[bob@las-AA]

There you go.

The Wage Adjustment gave them a boost from $1.15 to $1.30 since our raise would also automatically give more into our 401K match.

With a raise, we get more into the 401K automatically, even if it stays at 5.5%. The IAM, however, needs to boost their numbers in a separate transaction. If you listen to Isom in LGA, it seems the goal would be to keep everyone on a somewhat level playing field. That being the case, how likely it is to get a boost in the 5.5% on top of an increase in pay.

If we get another 3% or 4% raise, it means we'll be getting about $1.70 per hour contributed to our 401K, while the IAM would need to negotiate to get from $1.30 to $1.70.

What is the likelihood they go from $1.30 to $2.89 in contributions? That is the same possibility we'd go from 5.5% to 9.3%.

Ok, I get what you're trying to say. Yes if our wages go up, more goes towards our 401k because of the free 5.5% match, right now LUS the contribution to the IAMNPF would have to be $1.66 to place them equal with LAA. It would be nice to see a increase in the match, but let's be real, if we see a modest increase to 7.5% match, it would be incredible. FYI a 7.5% match for LAA is the same as $2.26 for the LUS team.