Latest Iam Leter Of Agreement

[to much time to quit]

Yous guys will have to read between the lines of this one.

Letter of Agreement 03-61

August 27, 2003

Mr. William L. Freiberger
Assistant General Chairman
District 141M – IAMAW
228 Moon Clinton Road
Moon Township, PA 15108
Dear Mr. Freiberger:

The following will clearly define our discussions concerning “Stability Periodsâ€￾ resulting from Specialized Manufacturer Training for the Airbus aircraft as described in the (Airbus Stability Period) Letter of Agreement on page 172 in the basic agreement.

It is agreed that effective September 14, 2003 employees will no longer be in a stability period as a result of receiving Specialized Manufacturer Training for the Airbus A319, 320 and the 321 aircraft.

However, employees will continue to be in a “Stability Periodâ€￾ resulting from Specialized Manufacturer Training for the A330 aircraft. Employees in an A330 Stability Period will only be permitted to transfer to other Line Maintenance Stations operating the A330 aircraft and/or to CLT Base Maintenance.

Sincerely,

David Cunningham
Manager, Labor Relations - Ground
USAirways

Does anyone other than lavman have info on what brought this one up??

 

[delldude]

yepp....original intent was for anyone trained would to be held in a stability period when we were taking on the new a/c.eventually as more and more became trained on airbus 319/320/321 there would be a day when this wasn't needed anymore.and now it seems we are here.at least for those mentioned a/c and not the 330. :blink:
have a great usairways/iam day pal.

 

[E-TRONS]

DELLDUDE, Nice try. <_<

A more accurate translation is that FARMING ALL THE BABY-BUS WORK OUT WILL NEGATE THE NEED FOR SUCH LANGUAGE. This LOA will ensure the REMOVAL OF ANY LEGAL GROUNDS FROM WHICH A LAWSUIT COULD BE FILED.
For instance, The company bound you to such a position then decided to farmout the work. But what about the stability requirements?? Get it??

Get some seasoning man

E-TRONS OUT.......OF MY FREAKIN MIND!!!!

 

[delldude]

DELLDUDE, Nice try. <_<

A more accurate translation is that FARMING ALL THE BABY-BUS WORK OUT WILL NEGATE THE NEED FOR SUCH LANGUAGE. This LOA will ensure the REMOVAL OF ANY LEGAL GROUNDS FROM WHICH A LAWSUIT COULD BE FILED.
For instance, The company bound you to such a position then decided to farmout the work. But what about the stability requirements?? Get it??

Get some seasoning man

E-TRONS OUT.......OF MY FREAKIN MIND!!!!

E-TRONS...nice try dude...origonal intent was for line maintenance staffing. farm 'em out,still need line and ron staffing stability periods.
what brand 'yall smokin these days DUDE.
where you get your reasoning? is that a real PONCHO or is that a SEARS PONCHO?
i think you need edgar snyder in your corner.
weel if you're right am i to take it that the a330 will be done then by U mech's?that is how you and your pretzel logic infer. :blink:

 

[ata36bg]

DellDude,

farm 'em out,still need line and ron staffing stability periods.


It is agreed that effective September 14, 2003 employees will no longer be in a stability period as a result of receiving Specialized Manufacturer Training for the Airbus A319, 320 and the 321 aircraft.

However, employees will continue to be in a “Stability Periodâ€￾ resulting from Specialized Manufacturer Training for the A330 aircraft. Employees in an A330 Stability Period will only be permitted to transfer to other Line Maintenance Stations operating the A330 aircraft and/or to CLT Base Maintenance.

Where in this letter does it say they will still need stability periods for the A319,320 and A321. I see it for the A330. Am I missing something?

 

[delldude]

yes

 

[delldude]

duh

 

[ata36bg]

Thank you for those concise, stimulating responses to my query. I am sure the IAM is secure in the knowledge that you are represetning their interests on this message board.

 

[delldude]

Thank you for those concise, stimulating responses to my query. I am sure the IAM is secure in the knowledge that you are represetning their interests on this message board.

sorry for the short reply...i was busy.
stabilization was needed when they started to take delivery of they new type a/c...now 5 yrs down the road it really isn't needed on 319-320-321.phl and clt are only ones doing 330 work and is why they want type stabilization on those a/c.
the crap about it being required so they can farmout those a/c really doesn't hold any muster.

 

[ata36bg]

DellDude,
Thank you for taking the time to answer me. I read your original rebuttal post to mean that even if the work was to be farmed out the LOA still required Airbus Training Stability, on all the aircraft. (farm 'em out,still need line and ron staffing stability periods.) Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[delldude]

DellDude,
Thank you for taking the time to answer me. I read your original rebuttal post to mean that even if the work was to be farmed out the LOA still required Airbus Training Stability, on all the aircraft. (farm 'em out,still need line and ron staffing stability periods.) Thanks for clearing that up.

even if the work was farmed out....line would still have to abide by FAR'S....that is the important thing to remember...FAR'S dictate mandatory training on type a/c.the company can get around this to some extent by claiming they have enough mech's on the job who can provide skills/info to accomplish the work,however,sooner or later all working that a/c must be trained.no If's and's or but's.like i said before,just because some yahoo claims this is all thats needed to farmout the buses...stop-think and look at your contract.....
AND BESIDES FOR ALL INVOLVED..THIS ISSUE DOESN'T FALL UNDER AMFA OR IAM-IT IS YOU AND ME AND OUR WORK-SO WE MUST STAND TOGETHER OR TOGETHER WE SHALL FALL.

 

[ata36bg]

DellDude,

I won’t speak for E-Trons but I think what he is offering is that if there is no “stabilityâ€￾ provision then we lose an issue we could have used to fight for the heavy maintenance work. Whether or not this was contrived by the IAM and the company to harm the members is pure speculation. Unfortunately for the IAM they have so alienated their membership that anything they do, be it proper or not, is assumed to be a scheme of some sort.

I for one agree with you that this is not an IAM or AMFA issue. I have lost faith though in my current representatives, but will do all that I can to make our case known. I hope the rest of my peers will do the same. That way when AMFA negotiates our next contract we can start to repair the damage done in the past.

 

[delldude]

DellDude,

I won’t speak for E-Trons but I think what he is offering is that if there is no “stabilityâ€￾ provision then we lose an issue we could have used to fight for the heavy maintenance work. Whether or not this was contrived by the IAM and the company to harm the members is pure speculation. Unfortunately for the IAM they have so alienated their membership that anything they do, be it proper or not, is assumed to be a scheme of some sort.

I for one agree with you that this is not an IAM or AMFA issue. I have lost faith though in my current representatives, but will do all that I can to make our case known. I hope the rest of my peers will do the same. That way when AMFA negotiates our next contract we can start to repair the damage done in the past.

tell you what...if you call the Potomac Air Lodge 1976
International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers
228 Moon Clinton Rd
Moon Township, Pa 15108

ask to speak to bill frieberger,however at this time he's in ccy negotiating the MDA particulars...get ahold of him and ask him what this letter means.that ought to end all the speculation.thats what i normally do in these cases.

 

[LavMan]

But Dell, they don't want the truth, all they want is to throw stones and call names.

 

[ata36bg]

DellDude
I was trying to say that what E-Trons said was not factual, just speculation. In other words I was agreeing with you. With regards to calling Potomac Air Lodge, I do not trust the IAM officials to tell me the truth therefore I no longer ask them anything.

LavMan
Your “throwing stones†barb is really starting to sound childish. What I articulated in my last post were the feelings of over 50% of our eligible membership. Don’t you realize that the IAM has been replaced at three airlines in the past few years? Do you really think that this was done by people who just “threw stones and didn’t want to know the truth?†Are these people just misguided idiots incapable of making a rational decision? Give me your reasons why over 20,000 people are now represented by AMFA.

Stop hiding behind this façade of “the savior of the IAM†and face the facts. The IAM is about to lose the last group of mechanic and related members at a major airline. Why is this LavMan?! Hasn’t this fact demonstrated to the District or International leadership that something may be wrong with the way they are doing business? Or do they act like you and spout childish rebuttals when someone says something you don’t like or disagree with. If you would like to have an intelligent conversation I’ll be more than happy to oblige. Until then try your best to answer my questions with concise articulate sentences.