LAX Maintenance Town Hall 2/24/15
- Thread starter Overspeed
- Start date
700 is correct. He has been saying this whole time that there still will be a vote. The TWU/IAM has also stated that there will be a vote. But I am still very worried that there will not be one. Why else would the NMB spend all these man hours, money and time for the last 30 plus weeks working on it on a gamble that the membership votes it down. I would think the NMB would of wanted a membership vote to show the approval prior to all this time the NMB has been spending on this. I honestly just hope you guys do get a chance to vote on it. The negative part about this vote, and 700, you have confirmed in the past, is the fact that we are being told that there will be limited options on the ballot. Correct me if I am wrong here 700; 1-a Yes vote for the association, 2-a no vote which may mean no-union, and a 3-"write-in" option. The two unions want this No-union option on the ballot to scare the membership into voting for this association. They both know for a fact that if the option was a NO vote would just resort both carriers back to their current representative unions and then order a run-off just between TWU and the IAM with the typical time limits for others to present cards to be installed on the ballot and of course the 2 typical "write-in" and "speak-in" options then one of the two would be gone if not both. There has already been closed door discussions between the TWU/IAM and the NMB as has been admitted by the TWU. So why won't the TWU share with the membership what ALL took place during these closed door meetings??? Really makes most of us wonder what is really going to be the final outcome, a vote or no vote for the membership...700UW said:
2ndGENAMT
Veteran
- Dec 23, 2011
- 818
- 497
The question I have is why the company execs are so motivated for us to get to negotiations.
I believe in ORD no one asked about the NMB decision or why it is taking so long and it promted Isom to bring it up where he called on Wroble to do his little song and dance.
Every town hall has the same theme and it is We want to get to negotiations and give you DL +7 and he adds "in wages" recently I've noticed.
So, what is it they want? I fear their Joint Contract offer will have a few high points they hope will sway the majority..Look at the whole package and it will probably be a POS!
I believe in ORD no one asked about the NMB decision or why it is taking so long and it promted Isom to bring it up where he called on Wroble to do his little song and dance.
Every town hall has the same theme and it is We want to get to negotiations and give you DL +7 and he adds "in wages" recently I've noticed.
So, what is it they want? I fear their Joint Contract offer will have a few high points they hope will sway the majority..Look at the whole package and it will probably be a POS!
OP
Overspeed
Veteran
- Jun 27, 2011
- 3,245
- 1,065
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #130
Bob,
You sure like blaming me and portraying me as all powerful but I only have one vote. A lot of other people have to vote the same I did.
How much blame do you and your vote no coalition own in shooting down the 2010 TA? Granted it wasn't perfect but we missed out on years of $38/hr pay plus 100% SK pay waiting for the perfect deal. Still waiting. An incremental return of concessions would have been better than what we have now.
You sure like blaming me and portraying me as all powerful but I only have one vote. A lot of other people have to vote the same I did.
How much blame do you and your vote no coalition own in shooting down the 2010 TA? Granted it wasn't perfect but we missed out on years of $38/hr pay plus 100% SK pay waiting for the perfect deal. Still waiting. An incremental return of concessions would have been better than what we have now.
I think I covered this before, I blame all those who voted Yes, but you are the one complaining about what you helped put in place. I've also made clear that never before has a Union asked to not be released after NMB mediated talks failed. By 2009 it was clear the company was not going to move yet Don continued to drag things out. The International refused to ask to be released and I'm still confident that had they asked, we would have been released, because there is no precident of them not releasing an Airline after a failed mediation and a rejected TA. The clock would have started, that would change stakes and I think in order to avoid a PEB, and all the disclosure that comes with it, the company would have moved considerably. If not we would have faredpretty well as far as compensation. I still think they would have jumped into BK because they wanted concessions from the Pilots and our Headcount today would be no differnt than it is now, but without Don, and the Yes votes, of which you are one, the formula would have been based on hours not dollars.Overspeed said:
Its not the No voters fault that you voted for a worse deal than what was rejected in 2010. You should have rejected the 2012 deal as well. You certainly leave a lot out concerning the 2010 rejected agreement such as the fact it was a zero cost contract, changes in one area were paid for by concessions elswhere. It not only was a far from perfect deal it was in fact an extension of the 2003 deal, all we were doing was trading concessions to end up with the same zero cost contract that left the full dollar amount of the 2003 concessions in place. That is a fact and the company even stated that.
We werent the target, we were already at the bottom of the Industry, people like you made us a target of opportunity.
