JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[WeAAsles]

Smh, yeah, it's a FACT. I watch them every night here at DFW/DWH. Why would you question it, and in the very same breath qualify it with "4 years ago"? Do you dislike the Weez that much? Just couldn't resist taking a jab?

Yes he just wants to jab (grab) my attention. And yes the jobs have been outsourced but somehow we might still be doing them anyway and maybe it should be verified??????? Huh? Huh? Huh?

 

[Traymark]

Unfortunately, the NMB doesn't look for or interpret fairness.

So, essentially it makes no difference what the companies financial position is, they will always get what they want. Why do we pay for a union again? Because, all those AMT's at KC and AFW were basically workers at will...

 

[CremaDiLimone]

Crema,
What does "there will be many LUS who acquired and will maintain seniority from non pure LUS history" even mean? Please explain.

pjirish:

you do seem like a nice guy and i did sympathize with your lus 1/2 time accrued up to mid '90s PT/seniority issue. though..

...this is not the first time i bring something up and you quiz me about it; when you know exactly what i'm talking about. the first time was about wages, the second time was about seniority and this is the same thing.

 

[gulfcoast1]

I read better than you think. Your initial post spoke volumes. The rest was damage control.

I realize you think you know what I meant to say, and you probably know a lot more about most things than I do, but in this case you are wrong. I care about Scope as much as anyone on here. Forgetting to include it in one post does not change that. Being condescending does not help unity at all, and I do think unity is important to you. Either way I am not going to argue with you about what I think is important or mean to say.

 

[Talos]

Our former members at UA in my station were not around to vote on TA2. By then their jobs were already outsourced or they were forced to transfer. 30 + members gone because of agreed to and ratified weak Scope language. Apparently there were enough members who did, in fact, agree with the language in the TA1. The company knows all they have to do is throw a little up front hourly wage improvement on the table and most will take the bait. Members at UA ratified by a 70% margin.

Quite some time ago we saw a deal that UA ramp workers agreed to and it had terrible scope. If I recall they were going down to 7 stations. It was pretty amazing to see what they had agreed to, and the enhancements were really not so great. Then we heard UA came to the union without having to and gave them a deal with more money and a lot more stations staffed. I'm not sure of the total stations but I think it was around 40. It was quite a change from what they had agreed to and good for the UA guys. I don't think the LAA people are going to pass any deal with bad scope after what has happened the past 13 years. I know way too many guys commuting and having too much trouble doing that to deal with bad scope.It's like people have said before, when the company needed things they got it in a couple of months. Now it takes years for them to fully take care of employees.

 

[WeAAsles]

I realize you think you know what I meant to say, and you probably know a lot more about most things than I do, but in this case you are wrong. I care about Scope as much as anyone on here. Forgetting to include it in one post does not change that. Being condescending does not help unity at all, and I do think unity is important to you. Either way I am not going to argue with you about what I think is important or mean to say.

Here let's take the heat off this conversation. Scope and Station staffing is not my first priority of thought and not going to be the thing I run to look at when we get a TA to vote on.

It's natural to want to focus on cash first unless of course you're in a small Station and are worried about that language. Ograc is in a small Station so that's his (understandably) first priority.

 

[NYer]

So, essentially it makes no difference what the companies financial position is, they will always get what they want. Why do we pay for a union again? Because, all those AMT's at KC and AFW were basically workers at will...

Sure it makes a difference. If they're better off financially then it can even out other conditions that also have influence over a negotiations.

There are other factors that influence negotiations, not just profits and loss.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Smh, yeah, it's a FACT. I watch them every night here at DFW/DWH. Why would you question it, and in the very same breath qualify it with "4 years ago"? Do you dislike the Weez that much? Just couldn't resist taking a jab?

Yes he just wants to jab (grab) my attention. And yes the jobs have been outsourced but somehow we might still be doing them anyway and maybe it should be verified??????? Huh? Huh? Huh?

Why don't you two grow up?

This has nothing to do with WeAAsles.

First off I don't even know who made the flier. I never assumed it was WeAAsles. Second, I never claimed the information was inaccurate only that it should be verified.

We had many people bump into TULE that thought overnight cleaning had been outsourced and were surprised we were still doing it.

Is it outside the realm of possibility that they may not do overnight cleaning at DFW/DWH but might do it at another station?

The fact is if you put a flier out making claims like that they damn well better be accurate or your setting yourself up for embarrassment.

 

[T5towbar]

Quite some time ago we saw a deal that UA ramp workers agreed to and it had terrible scope. If I recall they were going down to 7 stations. It was pretty amazing to see what they had agreed to, and the enhancements were really not so great. Then we heard UA came to the union without having to and gave them a deal with more money and a lot more stations staffed. I'm not sure of the total stations but I think it was around 40. It was quite a change from what they had agreed to and good for the UA guys. I don't think the LAA people are going to pass any deal with bad scope after what has happened the past 13 years. I know way too many guys commuting and having too much trouble doing that to deal with bad scope.It's like people have said before, when the company needed things they got it in a couple of months. Now it takes years for them to fully take care of employees.

TA1 was a real bad deal. PERIOD. That is why it was shot down. TA2 was not much better, but it was voted on. A lot of people got burned on it. My hub got decimated by it. It was so bad (operationally wise), the new management, came in and saw it was so bad, they talked to the IAM to reopen the contract (after Oscar had his heart attack). At least what we got is much better. Not the strongest scope in the world, but it protected what was left and added a few. But the damage was already done. My hub is still recovering from the mess and trying to restaff the heads that we lost.

 

[WeAAsles]

Why don't you two grow up?

This has nothing to do with WeAAsles.

First off I don't even know who made the flier. I never assumed it was WeAAsles. Second, I never claimed the information was inaccurate only that it should be verified.

We had many people bump into TULE that thought overnight cleaning had been outsourced and were surprised we were still doing it.

Is it outside the realm of possibility that they may not do overnight cleaning at DFW/DWH but might do it at another station?

The fact is if you put a flier out making claims like that they damn well better be accurate or your setting yourself up for embarrassment.

You do know (maybe not) that we actually work for AA and you don't right?

Between DFW and MIA there were over 700 lost Cabin Service jobs during the Bankruptcy. And there were even more lost jobs from 2003 on.

I hope that cleared things up for the person who does not work at AA anymore.

 

[Jester]

I don't think the LAA people are going to pass any deal with bad scope after what has happened the past 13 years. I know way too many guys commuting and having too much trouble doing that to deal with bad scope.It's like people have said before, when the company needed things they got it in a couple of months. Now it takes years for them to fully take care of employees.

I think you are right as I suspect many of the displaced AA guys would very much desire to get back to their home stations. I spoke with those AA guys in PHX who were happy to get back, along with some who want to go back to SAN, and I know there are other AA guys in different stations with the same views. Doesn't make much sense to solidify their permanent displacement with a "Yes" vote when the opportunity to re-open stations through the JCBA would be the best and (probably) only option.

TA1 was a real bad deal. PERIOD. That is why it was shot down. TA2 was not much better, but it was voted on. A lot of people got burned on it. My hub got decimated by it. It was so bad (operationally wise), the new management, came in and saw it was so bad, they talked to the IAM to reopen the contract (after Oscar had his heart attack). At least what we got is much better. Not the strongest scope in the world, but it protected what was left and added a few. But the damage was already done. My hub is still recovering from the mess and trying to restaff the heads that we lost.

From what I recall, the TA2 vote came with a caveat of this agreement being "the last, best, and final offer" from the union Leadership. About as good as it was going to get, and hey, there is a great pay raise too (just don't examine scope too closely). Personally, I think it was a real failure of union Leadership to even offer something with such drastic reductions in stations and the expected consequences.

I was actually surprised that UA went back to the union to re-open stations not covered under scope, because the replacements were that awful. The contractors must have been absolutely dreadful.

(Edit: Let me add that I have always had a problem with this idea of "virtual airline" with scores of stations within the domestic network, but in reality only a relatively small number being staffed by actual airline employees. I have always been a firm supporter of keeping stations in-house, but also recognizing a few daily flights wouldn't economically viable for the Company, as well.)

 

[ograc]

I realize you think you know what I meant to say, and you probably know a lot more about most things than I do, but in this case you are wrong. I care about Scope as much as anyone on here. Forgetting to include it in one post does not change that. Being condescending does not help unity at all, and I do think unity is important to you. Either way I am not going to argue with you about what I think is important or mean to say.

gulfcoast 1,
Fair enough. I have campaigned for years about the importance of good Scope language. I apologize if I came across condescending. I believe you understand the importance of protecting the jobs / work that is currently in house. Just making sure we keep it on the radar when discussing what is needed in any future JCBA. There have been many negotiated and ratified contracts where this Article was not a priority. The door of opportunity for the company to outsource previously protected work was left wide open as a result. And they took full advantage of it.

 

[WeAAsles]

I think you are right as I suspect many of the displaced AA guys would very much desire to get back to their home stations. I spoke with those AA guys in PHX who were happy to get back, along with some who want to go back to SAN, and I know there are other AA guys in different stations with the same views. Doesn't make much sense to solidify their permanent displacement with a "Yes" vote when the opportunity to re-open stations through the JCBA would be the best and (probably) only option.



From what I recall, the TA2 vote came with a caveat of this agreement being "the last, best, and final offer" from the union Leadership. About as good as it was going to get, and hey, there is a great pay raise too (just don't examine scope too closely). Personally, I think it was a real failure of union Leadership to even offer something with such drastic reductions in stations and the expected consequences.

I was actually surprised that UA went back to the union to re-open stations not covered under scope, because the replacements were that awful. The contractors must have been absolutely dreadful.

(Edit: Let me add that I have always had a problem with this idea of "virtual airline" with scores of stations within the domestic network, but in reality only a relatively small number being staffed by actual airline employees. I have always been a firm supporter of keeping stations in-house, but also recognizing a few daily flights wouldn't economically viable for the Company, as well.)

You mean like the Company saying that Station is staffed with American Airlines employees...........................In freakin Brazil !!!!!!

"Virtual booshite"

 

[ograc]

TA1 was a real bad deal. PERIOD. That is why it was shot down. TA2 was not much better, but it was voted on. A lot of people got burned on it. My hub got decimated by it. It was so bad (operationally wise), the new management, came in and saw it was so bad, they talked to the IAM to reopen the contract (after Oscar had his heart attack). At least what we got is much better. Not the strongest scope in the world, but it protected what was left and added a few. But the damage was already done. My hub is still recovering from the mess and trying to restaff the heads that we lost.

The result of leaving the door wide open to the company concerning Scope.

 

[ograc]

Here let's take the heat off this conversation. Scope and Station staffing is not my first priority of thought and not going to be the thing I run to look at when we get a TA to vote on.

It's natural to want to focus on cash first unless of course you're in a small Station and are worried about that language. Ograc is in a small Station so that's his (understandably) first priority.

You are correct WeAAsles. I have been on the front line in a small station for quite some time now. You are correct it is natural to have priorities based on the station you are working in. There needs to be a better understanding, however, that weak Scope language will have long term adverse affects on many members including those working in larger stations. I think you know what some of those are. Not JUST a small station issue. Or , at least, it shouldn't be.