JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[Jester]

I get it from the DOT

https://www.transtats.bts.gov/ONTIME/Index.aspx

All numbers are from mainline only, through the x-utilize agreement, your ships are ours and ours is yours, you don't think just because a particular station staffed with LAA that has mostly LUS planes can only remain staffed if they only receive LAA planes? As of today I heard of no such agreement.

I think there might be something in that interim agreement that prevents that Of course I'm too lazy to look

I have heard something to the effect that once the cross utilization took place that metal was no longer to be differentiated, but I have also heard that might not be as solid as we were lead to believe either. I have always been concerned about "weasel language" in such agreements that give a false sense of security.

For example, I remember the IAM guys pre-JCBA agreement with the AW TWU were absolutely convinced the "change of control" language in their agreement would lead to a snap-back clause for reduced wages after their bankruptcies. I posted then that the (former) Tempe Boys hire the best corporate legal minds to review and write these agreements, and they were wasting everyone's time and money. I was right and the "sure" thing was proven to be false hope.

 

[NYer]

Checking the numbers, and just as I suspected, non of it fits.

From the first two quarters in 2017 and the last two quarters in 2016, I get the following.


..........2017....2016.....Total Yearly
SAT.....2896....2612.....5508
SJU....3204....2934.....6138
TPA....5948....5895...11844
ATL.....6354....6502...12856
STL....3955.....4142....8097

You or the TWU have some explaining to do, none of the station listed looks in jeopardy of falling below scope. What gives?

I'd suppose your numbers may include LUS flights.

 

[NYer]

I get it from the DOT

https://www.transtats.bts.gov/ONTIME/Index.aspx

All numbers are from mainline only, through the x-utilize agreement, your ships are ours and ours is yours, you don't think just because a particular station staffed with LAA that has mostly LUS planes can only remain staffed if they only receive LAA planes? As of today I heard of no such agreement.

Sure there is.

It is the TWU CBA and it doesn't count LUS metal.

 

[bob@las-AA]

Bob don't pull your hair out doubt they will close any Stations.Do you think they would layoff LAA people pay them severance or maybe even moving expenses only to turn around and hire for LUS off the street?

As soon as the merger was approved, we started seeing job openings from LUS in JetNet for all of the stations we had to vacate during bankruptcy.

 

[Jester]

Did I just read this!, So how would you divide the station booty up in a fair and equitable manner, LAS has more TWU clerks than LUS, are you going to ask LUS to vacate? These "serious efficiency problems" you speak of, please enlighten me.

The type of aircraft metal would dictate the division. As I understand the LAS operation, it has a heavy number of a larger seat capacity A321s for which dominates US fleet, unlike AA with a far larger fleet of B737s. The LAS station would be a high density, price sensitive market, so larger planes would probably work better.

I just got off the phone with a LAS buddy and as he described those "efficiency problems" were the need for 2 lav truck drivers, 2 connect runners, the inability to AA/US agents to work together on the same teams or even the same flight, the confusion as to who is handling which flights on a near daily basis, not to mention, vastly different contracts for managers to follow. I am sure it would be much easier and more efficient to have just one group handle LAS versus both the IAM and TWU.

With hundreds of furloughed full-time US guys system wide left-over from when AW had a hub operation in LAS, it wouldn't be difficult to back fill in those positions without hiring off the street if AA side was contracted out.

 

[bob@las-AA]

Sure there is.

It is the TWU CBA and it doesn't count LUS metal.

So of the nth flights we get in DFW that are LUS metal, we should lay off the equivalent personnel and bring in LUS to work them?

 

[NYer]

So of the nth flights we get in DFW that are LUS metal, we should lay off the equivalent personnel and bring in LUS to work them?

C'mon. There is a cross-utilization agreement that allows us to work LUS metal. If the LUS metal counted as LAA we wouldn't need a separate agreement to specifically touch that subject. Right?

 

[WeAAsles]

Bob don't pull your hair out doubt they will close any Stations.Do you think they would layoff LAA people pay them severance or maybe even moving expenses only to turn around and hire for LUS off the street?

Al please don't use common sense on Forums.

 

[WeAAsles]

I could see something like that happening... I am hearing there are some serious efficiency problems where a station has both TWU and IAM and the work groups cannot work together. So simple solution would be just have one group handle the station by either furloughing one or having one being handled as a preferential hire in a "temporary" position until a JCBA has been approved.

Nah. Highly doubt it.

 

[WeAAsles]

Did I just read this!, So how would you divide the station booty up in a fair and equitable manner, LAS has more TWU clerks than LUS, are you going to ask LUS to vacate? These "serious efficiency problems" you speak of, please enlighten me.

What have I told you guys about common sense.

 

[Albert]

What have I told you guys about common sense.

If they don't want to use common sense the interim agreement should quell any fears. If they took all LUS flights and gave them to LAA here no one would get laid off. Weez post the interim

 

[WeAAsles]

If they don't want to use common sense the interim agreement should quell any fears. If they took all LUS flights and gave them to LAA here no one would get laid off. Weez post the interim

Yea Al I just don't want to jump in to the nonsense conversation that "next year" if we don't have a deal it's doom and gloom for those poor LAA TWU souls. Too much hogwash when I still don't have electricity yet.

Maybe someone else doesn't have electricity on here and is bored to tears too?

 

[NYer]

Yea Al I just don't want to jump in to the nonsense conversation that "next year" if we don't have a deal it's doom and gloom for those poor LAA TWU souls. Too much hogwash when I still don't have electricity yet.

Maybe someone else doesn't have electricity on here and is bored to tears too?

You just jumped in.

 

[Jester]

Yea Al I just don't want to jump in to the nonsense conversation that "next year" if we don't have a deal it's doom and gloom for those poor LAA TWU souls. Too much hogwash when I still don't have electricity yet.

Maybe someone else doesn't have electricity on here and is bored to tears too?

No offense, but if I was without power and living as if I was on Gillian's Island, I wouldn't be hanging out on a message board. Maybe picking coconuts, irritating the Skipper or hitting on Ginger.

 

[Albert]

Yea Al I just don't want to jump in to the nonsense conversation that "next year" if we don't have a deal it's doom and gloom for those poor LAA TWU souls. Too much hogwash when I still don't have electricity yet.

Maybe someone else doesn't have electricity on here and is bored to tears too?

Weez I listen to CBS news on a old hand held transistor radio
for a week. The ear piece was lost maybe 50 years ago. You say at least it wasn't 90 degrees that's true but a week or so after sandy it snowed so all the hanging branches were hanging even more