JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[WeAAsles]

I always felt that the disparity of health care between FT and PT encouraged the company to keep as much part time as they could.

That's why when our Negotiators in the BK had the chance to get rid of it with the added 3% back to our losses, ending our PT Medical disparity was chosen.

The belief being yes the Company would maximize their PT cap all the way to the line.

 

[WeAAsles]

Then LUS would hire off the street in ATL to make up for those who left. That would be a knee to ones testicles

Even if we did go all the way to Section 6, I highly doubt they would close those Stations until they know what a JCBA allows them to do.

There are associated costs to doing something like that when it could be only a transitional arrangement.

Just think about the contracts that need to be signed with a company to perform the ground work alone. They would want at least a minimum amount of time to continue servicing or a heafty out clause payment.

Nah just doesn't make sense man.

 

[NYer]

If you had been there we would have been done a year ago I suppose?

You don't seem to pay attention. While you have been predicting quick resolutions, including the belief the "expedited", talks would be quick or we'd be done by July. I've been saying this is a long process with the toughest parts yet to come and sharing we are nowhere close to being done.

The only way around that is if we'd receive a comprehensive proposal which would later come with a suggestion from the NMB to send out for a vote.

 

[Traymark]

FYI, I believe the difference in LAA and LUS is $150 because your $2000 doesn't include the $850 deductible whereas our $3000 does include the deductible, but nonetheless, it is $150 cheaper for LAA.

Thanks for clarifying the numbers.
There is a difference, never said there wasn't. The difference isn't huge but it should be addressed by the company.

 

[WeAAsles]

You don't seem to pay attention. While you have been predicting quick resolutions, including the belief the "expedited", talks would be quick or we'd be done by July. I've been saying this is a long process with the toughest parts yet to come and sharing we are nowhere close to being done.

The only way around that is if we'd receive a comprehensive proposal which would later come with a suggestion from the NMB to send out for a vote.

Well you've done a pretty good job with your predictions then I suppose.

Let me ask you seriously when the Association was formulated was there the same anticipation that once talks with the Company actually commenced the process would be slow going? Was this at all considered at that time?

Seriously again where do you think these Negotiations would be at this moment if Jim, Bobby and Tim were still in the TWU? Do you feel they would have continued to ignore Tim Hughes pleas that the numbers in BOS were wrong? They did ignore them from the outset as you know.

You argue that you obviously don't like some items in the IAM contracts. Don't you think that the former TWU Leaders would have just capitulated to the IAM point of view for expediency (I REALLY believe they would have)

BTW maybe you didn't notice but we just DID receive a comprehensive proposal from American Airlines.

Do you want to vote on it NYer?

 

[NYer]

Beginning of what, the association? Well there's only one way to fix that, imo.

Actually, I'd go back to September 2014 when the TWU accepted an invitation, from the IAM, to begin the reconciliation process only to rebuff it in October. The reconciliation process didn't start until June 2015 taking us to December 2015. The first negotiation session with the Company was in January of 2016.

That's time many wish we'd have back.

 

[WeAAsles]

And BTW NYer the formation of the TWU/IAM Employee Association was HORRIBLY thought out.

Whether "people" within it get along bad, well, great or fantastic doesn't change that fact.

There should have been a vote before it was sent to the NMB and that's why there's so much bickering and sniping.

 

[WeAAsles]

Actually, I'd go back to September 2014 when the TWU accepted an invitation, from the IAM, to begin the reconciliation process only to rebuff it in October. The reconciliation process didn't start until June 2015 taking us to December 2015. The first negotiation session with the Company was in January of 2016.

That's time many wish we'd have back.

If it had been MIA that was to be lost to the IAM you would NOT have felt the same way.

But the issue was not MIA was it.

The IAM said they would address the BOS issue informally AFTER they received their standalone CBA and they "chose" not to.

Actions have consequences and here we are today.

 

[NYer]

I always felt that the disparity of health care between FT and PT encouraged the company to keep as much part time as they could.

Think the IAM OT (extension) language helps with that more than the medical.

 

[NYer]

Well you've done a pretty good job with your predictions then I suppose.

Let me ask you seriously when the Association was formulated was there the same anticipation that once talks with the Company actually commenced the process would be slow going? Was this at all considered at that time?

Seriously again where do you think these Negotiations would be at this moment if Jim, Bobby and Tim were still in the TWU? Do you feel they would have continued to ignore Tim Hughes pleas that the numbers in BOS were wrong? They did ignore them from the outset as you know.

You argue that you obviously don't like some items in the IAM contracts. Don't you think that the former TWU Leaders would have just capitulated to the IAM point of view for expediency (I REALLY believe they would have)

BTW maybe you didn't notice but we just DID receive a comprehensive proposal from American Airlines.

Do you want to vote on it NYer?

See, you can't have a conversation.

 

[WeAAsles]

Rogallo

If the TWU had started the process of getting to know their IAM counterparts in Maryland and crafting JCBA language BEFORE the NMB had certified the Association, would you (all) had then come to the realization that you were NOT going to vote and that Jim Little had LIED to us all that we would? (Again the IAM never said anyone would vote)

 

[WeAAsles]

See, you can't have a conversation.

Yes by far I can. You just don't like the context of our conversations because it goes against the narrative you prefer to portray.

Basically I don't follow where you want to lead.

 

[NYer]

And BTW NYer the formation of the TWU/IAM Employee Association was HORRIBLY thought out.

Whether "people" within it get along bad, well, great or fantastic doesn't change that fact.

There should have been a vote before it was sent to the NMB and that's why there's so much bickering and sniping.

It's a fact? Sounds like another supposition or like an opinion.

The bickering that seems to be prevalent is more of a by product of terrible updates and communication received from the Association.

It doesn't help we've had 3 different Association Vice Chair on the TWU side, plus several different members in the Negotiations Committee. We've even had different members in the Executive Committee, meanwhile the IAM has seemed to of had consistency on their side.

Advantage?

 

[NYer]

If it had been MIA that was to be lost to the IAM you would NOT have felt the same way.

But the issue was not MIA was it.

The IAM said they would address the BOS issue informally AFTER they received their standalone CBA and they "chose" not to.

Actions have consequences and here we are today.

Oy! The issue with BOS could have and should have been handled exactly in the manner it was ultimately decided.

There was no reason to stop the reconciliation process, in October 2014, in order to address that issue. As a matter of fact, that issue was resolved AFTER the two sides had their reconciliation process in June of 2015. So in fact, they could have handled both issues at the same time and they should have.

As a matter of fact, the fix cost MIA several members in the Tower which had already started the process of being integrated under TWU station agreements. Those folks were not happy when that was changed with no say from them.

In any case, you believed at the time that he issue would be quickly fixed and the two sides would meet as scheduled at the end of 2014. Well, it didn't happen that way.

 

[WeAAsles]

It's a fact? Sounds like another supposition or like an opinion.

The bickering that seems to be prevalent is more of a by product of terrible updates and communication received from the Association.

It doesn't help we've had 3 different Association Vice Chair on the TWU side, plus several different members in the Negotiations Committee. We've even had different members in the Executive Committee, meanwhile the IAM has seemed to of had consistency on their side.

Advantage?

Well you can blame the IAM I guess for all those terrible updates as you say since they held the Association chair for the first 2 years. But I'm still waiting to see how much better you could have described those "difficulties" as you keep harping about? Do you think one day you might decide to write that?

And no absolutely nothing personal to say William Fa but losing Brian Oyer after the amount of time and work he put in was a tremendous loss. Changes always can create setbacks BUT changes are the way the TWU is structured. People get voted out.

But if you like the IAM structure I don't understand why you argue against their contract language philosophy then?

You can't always cherry pick NYer.