JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[WeAAsles]

No. YOU said you attempted to get it.



I am only speaking to your self proclaimed intent not your accomplishment.

The membership has a UNION they pay to represent their interest to management. They do not need a self appointed representative with an over sized ego calling Doug Parker on their behalf.

Man you are so incredibly pathetic how desperately you need my attention. Seriously why do you think I give a **** in any way, shape or form what you have to think about on anything? Your just an old AA Troll who nobody ever did or ever will care about.

I'm SERIOUSLY happy that you got screwed here at AA man.

 

[WeAAsles]

You live a rich fantasy life.

Not at all Troll. I work for American Airlines and you DO NOT.

Ha Ha.

 

[swamt]

Traymark,

I would wager that the IAMNPF is not the only "hold-up" bogging down negotiations. The reason I asked if you were MTC or Fleet was, it says alot about your mindset regarding the Association. Most of Fleet, on the LUS anyway, could care less about the union or its activities. Apathy is rampant among the ranks, especially since we received our raise. They just don't care. They got their $$$$ and thats enough for them. Granted there are some that are concerned and involved, but they are few and far between. Myself, I was a supporter of the Association, along with the notion of the Association being certified without a vote. Because, from the way it was explained to me, and I could be remembering the conversation wrong, was, that if a vote occured, there would have been only 2 choices, the Association or no union. Personally I didn't want to have our representation be de-certified, so I was ok with not getting a vote. Being on the MTC side, especially at LAA, I can understand the anger of not getting a vote, with the AMFA card drive and possibly writing in AMFA on a vote. So I get the frustration. But Fleet and MTC are together insomuch as we have the same representation and we should collectively stand together to see this JCBA is industry leading, and that it will be good enough for years to come.

I see you were one of them that was believing the unions that the ONLY 2 choices you guys had were asso. or not represented any longer. WRONG again on the unions part. That's exactly what they wanted the membership to believe, they scared you guys to death over the "no longer being represented lies" and simply put you guys fell for the BS. Gee once again the entire membership was lied to and bamboozled into retaining this scam of an asso. The reason the TWU and the IAM did not want a vote was because they (TWU/IAM) was scared to death of being removed from the property when the membership was gonna write-in AMFA and get both of the other unions removed. That is why they had to scare the day lights out of the membership with the "no longer be represented" scare tactic, it was the only thing to save their a$$es. Hate to say it but you got exactly what you deserve. You fell for the lies, confusion, and mislead propaganda from your very own 2 unions. Now you get to deal with the 2 headed union with internal fighting amongst themselves before they even start fighting with the company on each and every contract issue. I warned you about this for years now. Too dam many of you took the word of the unions so now deal with what you got or replace the asso. all together.

WeAAz, Even though the pension is frozen it is still in our contract and provisions pertaining to it. Now I may be wrong, but since it IS still an article in our contract, it can be renegotiated or amended in some way, shape, or form. For instance, what if the company offered to restore it? Would the union say "No thanks, it's frozen?"
My concern about any shenanigans regarding the IAMNPF is that, HYPOTHETICALLY, what if the company offered really good contractual changes only if the TWU took over the pension so they would not have to fund it anymore? I'm just using this as an example. I am too skeptical on this issue especially after we were told we would have a vote on the association. Add this to the wage interim agreement which allowed cross utilization and extended pay scale progression without a vote and the mistrust is warranted

You are correct. By following the correct procedures and steps yes it very well could be renegotiated to become alive again. It was only frozen not killed or given up to the gov. Until then it is quite possible to entertain that. However, with that said, I don't believe the co. will want to reopen it with out some major changes in the cost structures as far as what they would be reliable for injecting into the pensions.

 

[WeAAsles]

I see you were one of them that was believing the unions that the ONLY 2 choices you guys had were asso. or not represented any longer. WRONG again on the unions part. That's exactly what they wanted the membership to believe, they scared you guys to death over the "no longer being represented lies" and simply put you guys fell for the BS. Gee once again the entire membership was lied to and bamboozled into retaining this scam of an asso. The reason the TWU and the IAM did not want a vote was because they (TWU/IAM) was scared to death of being removed from the property when the membership was gonna write-in AMFA and get both of the other unions removed. That is why they had to scare the day lights out of the membership with the "no longer be represented" scare tactic, it was the only thing to save their a$$es. Hate to say it but you got exactly what you deserve. You fell for the lies, confusion, and mislead propaganda from your very own 2 unions. Now you get to deal with the 2 headed union with internal fighting amongst themselves before they even start fighting with the company on each and every contract issue. I warned you about this for years now. Too dam many of you took the word of the unions so now deal with what you got or replace the asso. all together.


You are correct. By following the correct procedures and steps yes it very well could be renegotiated to become alive again. It was only frozen not killed or given up to the gov. Until then it is quite possible to entertain that. However, with that said, I don't believe the co. will want to reopen it with out some major changes in the cost structures as far as what they would be reliable for injecting into the pensions.

Another putz. 8 (Eight) 4 + 4 = 8 write in votes (EIGHT) during the IBT attempt at LUS and this putz REALLY believes his own BS. Seriously.

EIGHT EIGHT EIGHT EIGHT EIGHT!!!!!!!!

Am I quite clear Little Swampy boy? Jeez Louise with this garbage.

 

[swamt]

Speaking of pensions compared to 401's. Who is this moron guy from Forbes Mitch Tuchman? In one sentence he states that the pension funds are a dying breed as time moves forward. Yea that's because so many people are getting out of them and employees are choosing 401's by far over pensions. Then he goes on to use one year 2011 to a comparo to 401's, now how realistic is that? Nobody ever uses one freakin year for any kind of comparo's they use multiple years. Who is this guy kidding? Then he goes all the way back to only the good years of the 90's. Why hasn't he used from 2011 and on? I will tell you why, because the pensions have gone into negative territory since 2011 (union pensions) not executives pensions or the pensions that your union officers get because they are not the same pensions the members get al of these pensions for executives and your union officers are guaranteed to be funded and none of them are underfunded.
Gentlemen, here is how multi employer pensions work. These pensions need and require more and more individuals to come into the pensions to keep them alive and continue positive going forward. People are no longer grabbing onto the pensions as they did in droves in the 60's and 70's, it's just not the same. With no more people getting into the pensions they will lose funding and become a negative over time, then they will have to yet again cut retire benefits in order to maintain the funds. This cycle will then repeat itself over and over just like it has in the past 2-3 times now in my life time. Just look at the teamsters pensions at UPS, and the IAM at Boeing, and at past IAM cuts made with no vote or input from the members just something ramrodded thru the congress, which is where2 pensions are right now waiting on congress to force yet another 3rd time they will force cuts to pensions with no say so from the pension holders. I am telling you now about running like mad away from these pensions just like I was warning you guys about the AMFA drive at AA as well as that there would be no vote on this asso. the very same day it was announced that the combination was coming. Take it with a grain of salt again and you will get what you deserve once again. This BS asso. will continue to lie, lie, lie to the membership in order to get what they or the company wants just as they have been doing it for over 30 years. Keep on believing everything that these unions and company tells you guys they have their puppets right where they want them and it just kills me to see it happening to this day...

 

[737823]

In the past, LAA was willing to use low-cost service providers but had been moving away from actually running such an outfit as a subsidiary. They had voiced their preference to pay for the service but have not wanted to manage the service.

The fact that other airlines use those other services and have that cost advantage in the cities where they're used only makes it much more difficult to win out the ability to keep a "one flight a day" scope language. Having the National Mediation Board present during these talks only increases the likelihood they'd tell the NC that scope language in unattainable now and especially in a Section 6 negotiations, in the event, this drags on that long.

The LAA side would love that Scope language and to inherit the medical insurance the IAM enjoys. In reading these pages, it seems many TWU members believe the IAM will not win out in the Scope or the medical and that being the case, let's get a deal.

On the other hand, I understand the LUS perspective in which they see the issue as to why should they give up something until and unless it is absolutely necessary.

If these competing perspectives were better explained by the Association, then I believe there would be a better balance of reality and patience on each side. Unfortunately, that is not happening and the subsequent JCBA will not be well received because there is little work being done to set the proper expectations of what it may contain.

Thanks and I more or less completely agree. Whether the company starts an outfit themselves as a subsidiary or contracts with a third party doesn't matter in substance to the implications for fleet. I just do think the association (particularly the IAM side) would want a part in that outfit, they'd get dues and would justify it by saying "at least they have the protections of a CBA" or whatever. Heck read the IAM McGee agreement or ExpressJet agreements are full or "at the discretion of management" and "in accordance to company policy" language and the people barely make minimum wage on the scale, and as McGee expands to costly west coast airports that have their own minimums which may exceed the lowest steps on their scale.

I agree about the LUS 2014 one flight scope. Not sure why people are so hung up on that, it was clear at the time that was an interim arrangement until a JCBA and more movement of aircraft and integration of the network as the merger progressed. That said, 700 did go around in 2014-15 saying how great that language was (I can recall the posts) as justification for DL and other groups to organize. Had there been no merger surely that language would have never surfaced and I'd be willing to bet LUS would still be on their old CBA that was amendable in 2011.

Josh

 

[NYer]

Thanks and I more or less completely agree. Whether the company starts an outfit themselves as a subsidiary or contracts with a third party doesn't matter in substance to the implications for fleet. I just do think the association (particularly the IAM side) would want a part in that outfit, they'd get dues and would justify it by saying "at least they have the protections of a CBA" or whatever. Heck read the IAM McGee agreement or ExpressJet agreements are full or "at the discretion of management" and "in accordance to company policy" language and the people barely make minimum wage on the scale, and as McGee expands to costly west coast airports that have their own minimums which may exceed the lowest steps on their scale.

I agree about the LUS 2014 one flight scope. Not sure why people are so hung up on that, it was clear at the time that was an interim arrangement until a JCBA and more movement of aircraft and integration of the network as the merger progressed. That said, 700 did go around in 2014-15 saying how great that language was (I can recall the posts) as justification for DL and other groups to organize. Had there been no merger surely that language would have never surfaced and I'd be willing to bet LUS would still be on their old CBA that was amendable in 2011.

Josh

I fall into the group that believes it is a good thing to have the subsidiary or any service company organized in order to raise their levels.

The wider the divide between us and the unorganized the bigger the pressure to have our pay and benefits reduced or cut to comply.

In MIA, for instance, the Local is in support of the contract workers and trying to get the city and airport to raise the standards of those workers so that there is a smaller gap between them and us. It helps those that need the help and it also helps those of us that may become a target when the airline's fortunes turn.

 

[737823]

I fall into the group that believes it is a good thing to have the subsidiary or any service company organized in order to raise their levels.

The wider the divide between us and the unorganized the bigger the pressure to have our pay and benefits reduced or cut to comply.

In MIA, for instance, the Local is in support of the contract workers and trying to get the city and airport to raise the standards of those workers so that there is a smaller gap between them and us. It helps those that need the help and it also helps those of us that may become a target when the airline's fortunes turn.

Understand your perspective there, but why keep cheapening what will pass for a "union" job? As it some mainline FSC starting steps are barely above minimum wage in certain markets, and certainly so are most all vendors.

But the counterpoint is you have unorganized people at DL making over $30/he plus a rich profit sharing and taking home $75k+ without working overtime plus benefits. Sure there are ready reserves that equal the cost out, but the TWU also has OSMs for maintenance, colleges have adjunct faculty, pharmacies have pharmacy technicians, doctoratw PTs have associate degree PTAs performing many of the duties beside them. So it's hardly unique here.

Certain SEIU locals have quietly been opposed to increases in minimum wage because it will make it more expensive and difficult to organize plus they'll likely lose headcount.

I can only imagine what old school, hardcore, fighter, staunch union types would think today when a false unionist goes in with the company to put out such a pathetic CBA like the one at McGee. You think Samuel Gompers or Michael Quill would approve?

Josh

 

[cltrat]

I don't recall anywhere that AMFA was intending on repping fleet at LAA or LUS so you should really keep that AMFA mess in the MTC thread to a work group that if you go by what you read here hates the TWU, there wasn't enough AMFA cards for a vote. but

I'm no IAM or TWU shill either from where I'm sitting they both have their share of short comings but I see no better choices out there certainly not the IBT clowns

 

[NYer]

Understand your perspective there, but why keep cheapening what will pass for a "union" job? As it some mainline FSC starting steps are barely above minimum wage in certain markets, and certainly so are most all vendors.

But the counterpoint is you have unorganized people at DL making over $30/he plus a rich profit sharing and taking home $75k+ without working overtime plus benefits. Sure there are ready reserves that equal the cost out, but the TWU also has OSMs for maintenance, colleges have adjunct faculty, pharmacies have pharmacy technicians, doctoratw PTs have associate degree PTAs performing many of the duties beside them. So it's hardly unique here.

Certain SEIU locals have quietly been opposed to increases in minimum wage because it will make it more expensive and difficult to organize plus they'll likely lose headcount.

I can only imagine what old school, hardcore, fighter, staunch union types would think today when a false unionist goes in with the company to put out such a pathetic CBA like the one at McGee. You think Samuel Gompers or Michael Quill would approve?

Josh

Comparing the 1960's and today is not really an apples to apples comparison. In the 60's Michael Quill went on strike and used other tactics to make gains, including having politicians help us out by writing favorable laws. Things have changed over the past decades and unions need to change as well.

In 1966 Quill and the TWU came ahead in a transit strike in New York. The very next year, it was written into law (Taylor Law) that transit workers in NY couldn't employ the same tactics, in other words, they couldn't strike any longer. They would need to engage in mediation and binding arbitration.

 

[gulfcoast1]

Comparing the 1960's and today is not really an apples to apples comparison. In the 60's Michael Quill went on strike and used other tactics to make gains, including having politicians help us out by writing favorable laws. Things have changed over the past decades and unions need to change as well.

In 1966 Quill and the TWU came ahead in a transit strike in New York. The very next year, it was written into law (Taylor Law) that transit workers in NY couldn't employ the same tactics, in other words, they couldn't strike any longer. They would need to engage in mediation and binding arbitration.

It's probably going to get worse, at least for the next two years with an anti-union government in charge, or longer if more people in unions don't support their unions outside of the CBA process.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...98ee4b0615b9e90dd19?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

 

[NYer]

It's probably going to get worse, at least for the next two years, or longer if more people in unions don't support their unions outside of the CBA process.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...98ee4b0615b9e90dd19?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I agree.

Unfortunately, unions aren't making things easy for them to garner or win that needed support.

 

[WeAAsles]

I agree.

Unfortunately, unions aren't making things easy for them to garner or win that needed support.

Or Local elected (supposed) Union Leaders who won't get involved with their National Political initiatives because they have a "personal" issue with someone who was elected above them.

"I'll shut it down, I won't help Alex Garcia"

Sound familiar NYer? You're a hypocrite buddy.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Thanks and I more or less completely agree. Whether the company starts an outfit themselves as a subsidiary or contracts with a third party doesn't matter in substance to the implications for fleet. I just do think the association (particularly the IAM side) would want a part in that outfit, they'd get dues and would justify it by saying "at least they have the protections of a CBA" or whatever. Heck read the IAM McGee agreement or ExpressJet agreements are full or "at the discretion of management" and "in accordance to company policy" language and the people barely make minimum wage on the scale, and as McGee expands to costly west coast airports that have their own minimums which may exceed the lowest steps on their scale.

I agree about the LUS 2014 one flight scope. Not sure why people are so hung up on that, it was clear at the time that was an interim arrangement until a JCBA and more movement of aircraft and integration of the network as the merger progressed. That said, 700 did go around in 2014-15 saying how great that language was (I can recall the posts) as justification for DL and other groups to organize. Had there been no merger surely that language would have never surfaced and I'd be willing to bet LUS would still be on their old CBA that was amendable in 2011.

Josh

I agree with you Josh about subsidiaries. Remember, the Company agreed and solicited the NMB for IAM automatic representation of 24 McGee employees so it could then advance the cheap labor and spread it across like cancer. Remember, unlike most unions, the IAM doesn't have a no compete clause or conflict of interest clause. So it is allowed to represent members who bid on and get the work that is covered in another IAM contract. In application, the IAM has been giving work up that is under its NMB certification at United and Alaska and getting automatic recognition deals and contracts that are horrible so they can collect dues and sell out mainline members. At Alaska there are now 2 IAM ramp contracts. 1 for all of the contracted out rampers. And one for all of the new McGee scabs. And they just opened up talks for the mainline ramp contract 2 weeks after the signed a fresh ramp contract for the scabs. Part of the contract was that the IAM had to agree with management to void out SEA and SFO $15 hr labor rules and also FMLA protectons. So, the IAM became the first entity to agree to a contract that circumvents the minimum $15 hr wage. Oddly, IP Martinez went out in SEA a couple months ago campaigning for $15 and often campaigns for the "Drive to $15" but in reality signs contracts waiving protections that city councils granted already. So Sad.

And I haven't seen any evidence where a unionized contractor ends up with increased quality of life, especially when compared to non union scabs. At American Eagle, the wages remain a complete disaster. The reality is that the TWU uses these groups as scabs to take our work. Even in the last deal, the Eagle TWU peeps pimped off mainline work with the TWU blessing. So Sad.

 

[737823]

Agreed Tim. Have you been following the situation at BA with cabin crew? Sadly this business unionism isn't restricted to the US. UNITE the BA cabin crew union in 2010 agreed with management (as part of a new agreement to end a strike/industrial action) to hire B-Scale "mixed fleet" crew that would work on the same BA certificate aircraft but with much lower pay and no work rules. They're called mixed fleet in that, like it was at AA before, BA has "worldwide" and "European" crews who are on the main scale.

Mixed fleet is striking now and BA has brought in wet leased Qatari aircraft (that would otherwise be idle due to the political affairs there having closed their short haul Middle East operations) from oneworld partner and part owner Qatar Airways.

Amazing that UNITE allowed this to happen and to my knowledge hasn't publicly called on the company to integrate them with worldwide and European crews.

At least APFA has strict language on the foreign nationals and they can only fly from their four bases (BOG, EZE, LIM, SCL) to MIA. All of DFW and JFK to South America is APFA exclusive. At NW and UA pretty their agreements allowed foreign nationals on the entire system and even flew with US based crews.

Josh