JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[swamt]

Personally couldn't care less what happens to CCs or the titles, and you talk as if this is happening to you, really?!?!

It does affect me because I too am in the industry. I can see you do not care about anything that does not affect you directly (IGM case) but it will some day if you or any other peeps want to advance in their careers. Your kind of attitudes is exactly what the company wants, IGM...

 

[robbedagain]

Swamt. At lus leads. Laa crew chiefs. Same basic role. Only at laa crew chiefs do clp. They dont push back or wing walk. I believe they take a yrly test to be crew chief qualified

 

[pjirish317]

We bid our shift with Occupational seniority (the day we started as a FSC). We bid our vacation with our Company (DOH) seniority.

I hope you are ready to bid vacation by occupational seniority (classification seniority for LUS). Like you say with the health insurance, it is a foregone conclusion.

 

[NYer]

Does Fleet have CC's or Leads? Or whatever they may call the positions. If they do which I know they do in some form or fashion, and the 2 different sides have different methods of using seniority once entering the new classification as the mechanics do, then yes it will affect Fleet the exact same way it does the mechanics.

In Fleet, neither Crew Chiefs or Leads restart seniority accrual when they go into those classifications.

Hence, this particular issue doesn't affect Fleet.

 

[pjirish317]

Javits was just tasked to create an integrated seniority. He's done that.

That was his only task. We dovetailed our seniority list via the LAA Occupational Seniority and the LUS Classification Seniority.

Everything else is decided by the JCBA and that is when our Company, Pay or DOH seniorities may be used.

I would wager going forward, you will have one date to use as a "Pay Date", used to calculate your rate of pay, which my guess would be your D.O.H., and the date that is on the Javits list will be used for everything else, IE vacation bids and shift bids.

 

[pjirish317]

Does Fleet have CC's or Leads? Or whatever they may call the positions. If they do which I know they do in some form or fashion, and the 2 different sides have different methods of using seniority once entering the new classification as the mechanics do, then yes it will affect Fleet the exact same way it does the mechanics.

Fleet for LUS have Lead Agents, all awarded by seniority via system transfers. Their seniority doenst change. Just their classification, and they are slotted into the Lead Agent list according to their classification seniority date. So NYer is correct, this particular issue does not affect us.

 

[NYer]

I hope you are ready to bid vacation by occupational seniority (classification seniority for LUS). Like you say with the health insurance, it is a foregone conclusion.

It may be.

Since vacations are station specific, is it possible there could be the ability to use the IAM methods in IAM represented stations and the TWU method in TWU stations?

In LAA Fleet, most have the same Occupational and Company time. If they go with the current IAM language the most negatively affected would the former TWA Members who could lose the use of decades of Company Seniority they were able to grandfather from their TWA careers.

In Maintenance, there would be many more affected since they have many that transfered into those classifications. Those transfers restarted their occupational seniority clocks while they're in maintenance, but they kept their Company seniority for vacation bidding.

 

[WeAAsles]

It may be.

Since vacations are station specific, is it possible there could be the ability to use the IAM methods in IAM represented stations and the TWU method in TWU stations?

In LAA Fleet, most have the same Occupational and Company time. If they go with the current IAM language the most negatively affected would the former TWA Members who could lose the use of decades of Company Seniority they were able to grandfather from their TWA careers.
.

So are you proposing Local Agreements that may violate the direct language of the new JCBA? You do realize I'm sure that there are many TWU members who feel TWA folks were given an unfair advantage on their Vacation picks as they didn't actually work for AA prior to 2001.

If it does go by Occupational Seniority for bidding vacations I'm not sure it would be very wise for any TWU Local President or Rep to try and touch that change with a 10 foot poll?

 

[NYer]

So are you proposing Local Agreements that may violate the direct language of the new JCBA? You do realize I'm sure that there are many TWU members who feel TWA folks were given an unfair advantage on their Vacation picks as they didn't actually work for AA prior to 2001.

If it does go by Occupational Seniority for bidding vacations I'm not sure it would be very wise for any TWU Local President or Rep to try and touch that change with a 10 foot poll?

This is a perfect example of why you're so depised on these pages.

We were having a perfectly fine conversation in which you had to infuse points that have not been discussed and doing so simply to create animus where there is none.

By the way, here are your straws that you can continue to grasp at.

 

[WeAAsles]

This is a perfect example of why you're so depised on these pages.

We were having a perfectly fine conversation in which you had to infuse points that have not been discussed and doing so simply to create animus where there is none.

By the way, here are your straws that you can continue to grasp at.
View attachment 11819

No Sir. You just implied yet again a wish on your part to continue on with a particular way things are done currently on the LAA side. You kind of implied a desire to violate perhaps our new contract to continue a practice that not everyone does agree with.

If under the new JCBA we bid vacations by Occupational Seniority then we will ALL do so with NO exceptions. There will be NO special compromise to accommodate for 469 former TWA Employees systemwide. My middle finger to you if you even try to make it a reality.

 

[NYer]

No Sir. You just implied yet again a wish on your part to continue on with a particular way things are done currently on the LAA side. You kind of implied a desire to violate perhaps our new contract to continue a practice that not everyone does agree with.

If under the new JCBA we bid vacations by Occupational Seniority then we will ALL do so with NO exceptions. There will be NO special compromise to accommodate for 469 former TWA Employees systemwide. My middle finger to you if you even try to make it a reality.

ignored

 

[WeAAsles]

ignored

Impossible to ignore anything on Forums there Donkey boy.

BTW every time someone turns around on here you're spouting off

"Maybe we can do this the TWU way in TWU Stations"
"Maybe we can do that the TWU way in TWU Stations"

Look here genius. What did you think was going to happen when you wholeheartedly joined in with Little and Gless to shove this Association down the members throats? I guess you didn't care since you were supposed to be heading over to Hurst anyway as another sellout. Oops.

 

[NYer]

Impossible to ignore anything on Forums there Donkey boy.

BTW every time someone turns around on here you're spouting off

"Maybe we can do this the TWU way in TWU Stations"
"Maybe we can do that the TWU way in TWU Stations"

Look here genius. What did you think was going to happen when you wholeheartedly joined in with Little and Gless to shove this Association down the members throats? I guess you didn't care since you were supposed to be heading over to Hurst anyway as another sellout. Oops.

 

[gulfcoast1]

It may be.

Since vacations are station specific, is it possible there could be the ability to use the IAM methods in IAM represented stations and the TWU method in TWU stations?

In LAA Fleet, most have the same Occupational and Company time. If they go with the current IAM language the most negatively affected would the former TWA Members who could lose the use of decades of Company Seniority they were able to grandfather from their TWA careers.

In Maintenance, there would be many more affected since they have many that transfered into those classifications. Those transfers restarted their occupational seniority clocks while they're in maintenance, but they kept their Company seniority for vacation bidding.

It's not just former TWA. There are a lot of Fleet Service that were Envoy or other groups, even other TWU groups like cleaners. This affects a lot more than 469 people and along with forcing TWU into the IAMPF would cause most of them to vote no imo.

 

[NYer]

It's not just former TWA. There are a lot of Fleet Service that were Envoy or other groups, even other TWU groups like cleaners. This affects a lot more than 469 people and along with forcing TWU into the IAMPF would cause most of them to vote no imo.

Sure. Didn't say the TWA folks were the only ones affected, just the most affected.

It will also be an interesting situation being they were represented by the IAM and their seniority arbitration allowed them to credit their TWA service as LAA Company seniority.

Company seniority is what LAA uses to bid vacation. So in MIA, for instance, their occupational seniority is 4/10/01 but their Company seniority could in the 1970's and 1980's.

If the JCBA eliminates the current mechanism used by LAA in exchange for the IAM mechanism in LUS, those former TWA members could lose 20-30 years of Company seniority which they've carried at LAA for the last 16 years.