JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[lax]

I can only explain it this way. Take the overtime article for instance. Once the IAM and TWU groups hash it out about a particular article, and some articles take a very long time to do that. But once the association comes together and agree with way your going, you then present it to the company and the company gives a proposal of just the opposite back to you. Like where we would adopt the twu language, the company would want to adopt IAM. And where we would want to adopt the IAM, the company would go twu language. Well then it basically puts the IAM and twu back to square one in what each side must have and what we can achieve from the company. This can be, and obviously has been very time consuming. It's basically two sets of negotiatiins going on at one time. The association negotiates among the two sides first, then once you've reached an agreement with the two sides, you then have to go through the company.

hence why the iam should have and still should concede. contract 2021 at this rate!

 

[wings396]

He meant “In exchange”

I don't expect to get a 401k contribution on top of the IAMNFP, and if we do it will be a plus. On the LUS side, the defined pension plan was frozen in 1991 or 92, then we had a 401 match following that until 2003 when we got railroaded into the IAMNFP. I really don't know what you currently have on the LAA side besides the 401 if anything.

 

[Koolcat]

I don't expect to get a 401k contribution on top of the IAMNFP, and if we do it will be a plus. On the LUS side, the defined pension plan was frozen in 1991 or 92, then we had a 401 match following that until 2003 when we got railroaded into the IAMNFP. I really don't know what you currently have on the LAA side besides the 401 if anything.

Our AA Defined Pension plan was frozen in 2012. We only have 401K with a 5.5 match

 

[Traymark]

You do realize that the LUS Fleet group doesn't have a 401K contribution?

Yes, of course. And my point is, maybe it's time to add a contribution to make up for going to LAA health insurance, which is going to happen btw.

I don't expect to get a 401k contribution on top of the IAMNFP, and if we do it will be a plus. On the LUS side, the defined pension plan was frozen in 1991 or 92, then we had a 401 match following that until 2003 when we got railroaded into the IAMNFP. I really don't know what you currently have on the LAA side besides the 401 if anything.

Why don't you expect a contribution? LUS peeps all fully expect to keep their health insurance?

On your second point , the pension frozen since 1991, maybe, just maybe, that and the fact that your hourly pay was way below the industry is why you were able to keep a better lower cost health insurance through 2 BK's.

You see folks , everything has a cost.
If you intend to keep health insurance no one else in the company has, including pilots, then it will be paid for elsewhere, more PT/ready reserve,... hello, McFly...

 

[Traymark]

I disagree completely on the insurance. You are talking about a difference of 500.00 a month for a person who has to have family coverage.

And there you are, using the most extreme example of disparity.
There are also many instances where the difference is negligible, like if your single or divorced, its literally pennies a day difference, but don't talk about that, it doesn't meet the narrative.

We've gone over the numbers here, the biggest difference is if you have a spouse. If your a single parent or single, it's not nearly that big of a difference, certainly not a difference worth holding up a contract over for the vast majority of us.

As I've said, move everyone into the LAA insurance and get something for it to offset.
This is not that hard.

 

[wings396]

Yes, of course. And my point is, maybe it's time to add a contribution to make up for going to LAA health insurance, which is going to happen btw.



Why don't you expect a contribution? LUS peeps all fully expect to keep their health insurance?

On your second point , the pension frozen since 1991, maybe, just maybe, that and the fact that your hourly pay was way below the industry is why you were able to keep a better lower cost health insurance through 2 BK's.

You see folks , everything has a cost.
If you intend to keep health insurance no one else in the company has, including pilots, then it will be paid for elsewhere, more PT/ready reserve,... hello, McFly...

I say that because at the current time, we have the IAMNFP in place. The company hasn't been contributing to 2 plans for either side, and it hasn't been mentioned that there are plans to do so going forward. I would be in favor of another option besides the IAMNFP, but doubt that's going to be an option for the LUS side. While the LAA people should, and most likely will be able to opt out in favor of the 401k, the LUS people won't have a choice. Thus my comments about getting any future bump in a non existent 401 in exchange for the increased medical costs. I'm sure that you've been reading the same thing as myself about an increase to the IAMNFP, which may very well be cut in a few years leaving the LUS people with a net gain of Zero for any increase in medical costs down the road. You along with several others can't seem to grasp that your side isn't going to be out anything given that you already have the sub par medical plan and costs in place, and may even get a bump in your 401k to keep taking it with a smile.

 

[cltrat]

And there you are, using the most extreme example of disparity.
There are also many instances where the difference is negligible, like if your single or divorced, its literally pennies a day difference, but don't talk about that, it doesn't meet the narrative.

We've gone over the numbers here, the biggest difference is if you have a spouse. If your a single parent or single, it's not nearly that big of a difference, certainly not a difference worth holding up a contract over for the vast majority of us.

As I've said, move everyone into the LAA insurance and get something for it to offset.
This is not that hard.

in other words get something for everyone at a cost to the LUS side , got it
sorry if we lose that insurance I expect something and something damn good exclusive to the LUS group

 

[Traymark]

The company hasn't been contributing to 2 plans for either side, and it hasn't been mentioned that there are plans to do so going forward. I would be in favor of another option besides the IAMNFP, but doubt that's going to be an option for the LUS side. While the LAA people should, and most likely will be able to opt out in favor of the 401k, the LUS people won't have a choice. Thus my comments about getting any future bump in a non existent 401 in exchange for the increased medical costs. I'm sure that you've been reading the same thing as myself about an increase to the IAMNFP, which may very well be cut in a few years leaving the LUS people with a net gain of Zero for any increase in medical costs down the road. You along with several others can't seem to grasp that your side isn't going to be out anything given that you already have the sub par medical plan and costs in place, and may even get a bump in your 401k to keep taking it with a smile.

So, because it hasn't been mentioned, you're good with not trying for it, got it. The Flight attendants got a 9.9% Contribution for all those 55 and over, the pilots got 12%, I believe. We should get something similar imo.

in other words get something for everyone at a cost to the LUS side , got it
sorry if we lose that insurance I expect something and something damn good exclusive to the LUS group

LUS just got the largest increases in their history since the merger,
LAA currently has 5 holidays, @1.5 pay less VC less sick days so to say we are out nothing is wrong. As every day passes we are out plenty.


As I stated above and elsewhere in this thread repeatedly, your insurance is not that much better than the LAA. In fact if you are single or a single parent it's very close to the same.
I'm looking at insurance cost of $48.62 per pay period. I have never used anything more than a doctor visit every year so don't bring your deductible crap my way.
Obviously, at some point, everyone needs more medical attention...
The Core plan allows you to put up to $7900 per year into a HSA which is better than a 401K.
It's better because it has Triple Tax Advantage.
It goes in tax free.
It gains interest tax free,
When you take it out to pay medical expenses, it is NOT taxed.
Whatever isn't used is rolled over to the next year, when you quit or retire, it's yours.
The money can be used to pay everything medical, dental, eye.
After 65, the money can be used for anything.
Anybody that doesn't take advantage of that is just dumb.

Bottom line, the insurance you guys are jumping up and down and throwing yourselves on the floor for is just not as fabulous as you say it is when compared to LAA insurance.
Certainly not worth holding the contract up for.

 

[john john]

\

After all read what your IAM counterparts happily agreed to to UGS and McGee (in turn for voluntary recognition and dues $$$).

Josh

How good is that TWU American Eagle aka Envoy contact that TWU negotiated

 

[wings396]

So, because it hasn't been mentioned, you're good with not trying for it, got it. The Flight attendants got a 9.9% Contribution for all those 55 and over, the pilots got 12%, I believe. We should get something similar imo.
With your HC cost posted, I assume that your the only one that's being covered by the plan. Another few points to be made here. When my defined plan was frozen in 1991, our hourly wage was pretty much inline with the rest of the industry. The 401 that came about afterwards was also inline with what was out there. I think that you need to do a reality check if you believe that the company is going to keep contributing to the IAMNPF, and kick into a 401 plan too. You seem to be overlooking the fact that the groups who got an increase to their 401 plans, have nothing but that in place. While you like to keep tossing the lower LUS past wages out there, how much better off was your group with crappy medical plans, less holidays and vacation, and outsourcing galore? Lets not try to kid anyone here, neither side wound be at $30 without the merger. The LAA side may have made more an hour than LUS, but I'm willing to bet that it was all pretty much a wash from the individual companies cost prospective. More in some areas, and less in others.



LUS just got the largest increases in their history since the merger,
LAA currently has 5 holidays, @1.5 pay less VC less sick days so to say we are out nothing is wrong. As every day passes we are out plenty.


As I stated above and elsewhere in this thread repeatedly, your insurance is not that much better than the LAA. In fact if you are single or a single parent it's very close to the same.
I'm looking at insurance cost of $48.62 per pay period. I have never used anything more than a doctor visit every year so don't bring your deductible crap my way.
Obviously, at some point, everyone needs more medical attention...
The Core plan allows you to put up to $7900 per year into a HSA which is better than a 401K.
It's better because it has Triple Tax Advantage.
It goes in tax free.
It gains interest tax free,
When you take it out to pay medical expenses, it is NOT taxed.
Whatever isn't used is rolled over to the next year, when you quit or retire, it's yours.
The money can be used to pay everything medical, dental, eye.
After 65, the money can be used for anything.
Anybody that doesn't take advantage of that is just dumb.

Bottom line, the insurance you guys are jumping up and down and throwing yourselves on the floor for is just not as fabulous as you say it is when compared to LAA insurance.
Certainly not worth holding the contract up for.

 

[WeAAsles]

I say that because at the current time, we have the IAMNFP in place. The company hasn't been contributing to 2 plans for either side, and it hasn't been mentioned that there are plans to do so going forward. I would be in favor of another option besides the IAMNFP, but doubt that's going to be an option for the LUS side. While the LAA people should, and most likely will be able to opt out in favor of the 401k, the LUS people won't have a choice. Thus my comments about getting any future bump in a non existent 401 in exchange for the increased medical costs. I'm sure that you've been reading the same thing as myself about an increase to the IAMNFP, which may very well be cut in a few years leaving the LUS people with a net gain of Zero for any increase in medical costs down the road. You along with several others can't seem to grasp that your side isn't going to be out anything given that you already have the sub par medical plan and costs in place, and may even get a bump in your 401k to keep taking it with a smile.

Bump in our 401k to keep taking it with a smile? Huh wings? What?

Now of course we’re talking TOS here but I’m currently at $64,000 per year with a 5.5% match and my guess is maybe going to $67,000 with a 9% match DOS. So what’s 9% going in then? $7,000 or so? Making my Base about $74,000 cash wise.

Again I think we can/will get a lower percentage than the 21% that we pay on the TWU side? But I also believe it’s going to be a “compromise” somewhere between what you currently contribute and what we contribute.

But I’m just trying to figure out at least financially what am I “taking” with a smile? Even if I had that wife and a couple of little scampers running around and wanted that Platnum Medical plan?

 

[WeAAsles]

in other words get something for everyone at a cost to the LUS side , got it
sorry if we lose that insurance I expect something and something damn good exclusive to the LUS group

What if they had never given us that $6.00 per hour raise and when we received a TA it contained a $7.00 per hour raise and a switch over from the IAMPF to a 9% 401k match?

With comments like this Rat I do feel that at least tactically it was a HUGE, BIG mistake on the Company’s part to have given us those raises outside a Full Agreement. It seems now (At least from these conversations again) that IAM guys have no motivation to negotiate with anyone at all unless it’s completely your way or the highway?

I think (hope) you’re just reacting in defense to Traymarks comments? Again I hope so?

 

[WeAAsles]

Josh,

LUS pays 7% of total cost of insurance for 80% plan, 14% of 90% plan and 19.4% of 100% plan. PT pays double. We went into negotiations wanting PT to pay the same rate as a FT. DP says AA will never lose money again and that he wants to give us an industry leading CBA. LAA insurance isn't industry leading. I don't find that a hard concept to grasp.

P. Rez

Wanted to get these percentages back into the conversation.

“LUS pays 7% of total cost of insurance for 80% plan, 14% of 90% plan and 19.4% of 100% plan. PT pays double.”

Thanks to the LAA BK without looking it up again I believe we pay 21% of the total cost.

So what would be a fair price to pay by percentage for IAM, TWU and (gasp) yes AA on these Medical expenditures? (With still giving us great pay, benefits, workrules and SCOPE)

 

[WeAAsles]

Yes, of course. And my point is, maybe it's time to add a contribution to make up for going to LAA health insurance, which is going to happen btw.



Why don't you expect a contribution? LUS peeps all fully expect to keep their health insurance?

On your second point , the pension frozen since 1991, maybe, just maybe, that and the fact that your hourly pay was way below the industry is why you were able to keep a better lower cost health insurance through 2 BK's.

You see folks , everything has a cost.
If you intend to keep health insurance no one else in the company has, including pilots, then it will be paid for elsewhere, more PT/ready reserve,... hello, McFly...

They should just give us all the value in direct wages and we can have a damn a la carte on Medical, Retirement and a few other benefits.

That way you cut through all the “I want, I want” BS. “You want? Go ahead and buy it” Give us that contribution on the front end and put it into a back end if YOU CHOSE.

Not going to happen though because people need to have everything done for them and be taken care of by big daddy Company.

 

[Traymark]

Wanted to get these percentages back into the conversation.

“LUS pays 7% of total cost of insurance for 80% plan, 14% of 90% plan and 19.4% of 100% plan. PT pays double.”

Thanks to the LAA BK without looking it up again I believe we pay 21% of the total cost.

Thank you W,
Why is there only one % number for LAA. We have 3 plans to choose from. Are they all the same % cost?
I don't think they are as with the Core plan, I know for fact my costs will be hella less than the Value plan, given my usual health insurance usage per year.


Edit to add; I agree with your above post^^^