LUS/AA Below wing issues

[WeAAsles]

Exactly. What do we want. Short term relief or long term solutions?

Some issues just have no easy solution. If people aren't going to budge when they get to that wall, again the best solution would be. Heads we go with your way, tales we go with ours.

That is probably the only fair way to decide sometimes.

 

[Rogallo]

Our futures based on a coin flip. You got to be kidding? 
 
Too bad they didn't use that logic for the association decision!
 
Best of seven. Heads=TWU, Tails=IAM 

 

[Kev3188]

DOH or percentile (in a sorta distant second) are the easiest and will do the most to avoid headaches down the road.

 

[AANOTOK]

Is this to include DOH when AM'Ts go from turning wrenches to tossing bags (or vise versa)?
I hope not!
 
Back in the 80's had a lady who worked for skychef (AA owned) for many years. When AA got rid of it, she transferred over
to fleet. She ended up having more company time than me (bid vacation before me) but less occupational time (bid shift after me in fleet).
So I hope that's what we all are agreeing on should be the right way.

 

[WeAAsles]

Our futures based on a coin flip. You got to be kidding? 
 
Too bad they didn't use that logic for the association decision!
 
Best of seven. Heads=TWU, Tails=IAM 

The only future you're talking about is your shift times and days off so far for CC versus LEAD. Alright how about this then for a solution. The two sides come to loggerheads on one or two issues and they just sit and stare at each other in the room until somebody blinks?

Or we can go back to what some on this board have proposed. "We have more members than you so it's our way or the highway"

Sounds fine I guess but I don't think anyone in those rooms is buying it.

 

[Kev3188]

Is this to include DOH when AM'Ts go from turning wrenches to tossing bags (or vise versa)?
I hope not!
 
Back in the 80's had a lady who worked for skychef (AA owned) for many years. When AA got rid of it, she transferred over
to fleet. She ended up having more company time than me (bid vacation before me) but less occupational time (bid shift after me in fleet).
So I hope that's what we all are agreeing on should be the right way.

My example was for ramp only and/or AMT's only. How seniority is handled when transferring between them should be a separate issue...

 

[Rogallo]

Is this to include DOH when AM'Ts go from turning wrenches to tossing bags (or vise versa)?
I hope not!
 
Back in the 80's had a lady who worked for skychef (AA owned) for many years. When AA got rid of it, she transferred over
to fleet. She ended up having more company time than me (bid vacation before me) but less occupational time (bid shift after me in fleet).
So I hope that's what we all are agreeing on should be the right way.

 
 
Nothing personal, but that's an IGM mentality.
Why, because you may lose your shift and days off?
But you are fine with someone coming in and taking your Christmas and Thanksgiving weeks vacation?
 
You believe because you've been doing a certain job longer you should get a better shift and days off
then someone who has put in more time with the company.
 
Why do you believe that to be right?

 

[Rogallo]

The only future you're talking about is your shift times and days off so far for CC versus LEAD. Alright how about this then for a solution. The two sides come to loggerheads on one or two issues and they just sit and stare at each other in the room until somebody blinks?

Or we can go back to what some on this board have proposed. "We have more members than you so it's our way or the highway"

Sounds fine I guess but I don't think anyone in those rooms is buying it.

 
What, kinda like asking the members?

 

[AANOTOK]

 
 
Nothing personal, but that's an IGM mentality.
Why, because you may lose your shift and days off?
But you are fine with someone coming in and taking your Christmas and Thanksgiving weeks vacation?
Not really, but that is the rule (you knew it going in) and a compensation for your seniority.
 
You believe because you've been doing a certain job longer you should get a better shift and days off
then someone who has put in more time with the company.
Yes, we both had a decision to make when we hired on. I chose mine and now have that work group seniority
and you chose yours and have your work group seniority.
 
Why do you believe that to be right?
See below.

Because you and I (just an example) had an opportunity to hire in to any work group we so desired. I chose Fleet, you chose AMT.
Just because you change your mind or decide the job is not for you, should not give you the right to bump me as a "new hire" into another classification. You are already compensated for (as you see it, transferring) into another work group by retaining your company seniority and bidding the very important vacation weeks before me.
 
That's just my belief, Rogallo. Nothing personal taken!

 

[AANOTOK]

My example was for ramp only and/or AMT's only. How seniority is handled when transferring between them should be a separate issue...

Not really...bottom line is it's quitting one work group and getting hired into another. You still retain your VC rights under the company umbrella you never quit.

 

[Rogallo]

Because you and I (just an example) had an opportunity to hire in to any work group we so desired. I chose Fleet, you chose AMT.
Just because you change your mind or decide the job is not for you, should not give you the right to bump me as a "new hire" into another classification. You are already compensated for (as you see it, transferring) into another work group by retaining your company seniority and bidding the very important vacation weeks before me.
 
That's just my belief, Rogallo. Nothing personal taken!

 
And I see your point. Nothing wrong with wanting to protect what you've got.
 
But here's my argument. I get laid off in Tulsa after working 20 years as a mechanic. There are currently 150 vacancies in DFW for full time FSC's. I put in for a 12m transfer for a FSC position in DFW. If I were to get it why should I be considered a "new hire" and put at the bottom of the seniority list? Because I've never done that job before? My 20 years of seniority is all but null and void except for vacation. Why should someones seniority be discriminated against for changing jobs? Sorry, I don't buy into the "new hire" mentality.
 
That, in my opinion, is not right, and anti-union.

 

[Rogallo]

Not really...bottom line is it's quitting one work group and getting hired into another. You still retain your VC rights under the company umbrella you never quit.

 
You make it sound more like quitting one company and getting hired by another. It's a different job working for the same company.

 

[AANOTOK]

 
And I see your point. Nothing wrong with wanting to protect what you've got.
 
But here's my argument. I get laid off in Tulsa after working 20 years as a mechanic. There are currently 150 vacancies in DFW for full time FSC's. I put in for a 12m transfer for a FSC position in DFW. If I were to get it why should I be considered a "new hire" and put at the bottom of the seniority list? Because I've never done that job before? My 20 years of seniority is all but null and void except for vacation. Why should someones seniority be discriminated against for changing jobs? Sorry, I don't buy into the "new hire" mentality.
 
That, in my opinion, is not right, and anti-union.

I doubt we will ever see eye to eye on this and I'm sure different folks have different opinions. I will just say that if I decided to go to school and get my AMT license, I would never expect to bump a thirty one year AMT as a recent grad and a one day AMT although I have 32 plus years at Fleet. That's just me, but it's all cool. If it comes up for a vote I will vote against it. If the way I vote is defeated by the majority, I will go with the majority. That is pro-union!

 

[Rogallo]

I believe in true seniority and most don't agree with that. Why, I don't know. But that's fine. We all can agree to disagree!
 
And it will never come to a vote as we are TWU.  B)

 

[Albert]

bob, in my station  a PMUS  working with give or take 45 or more  peeps  some are former PI folks and couple ex Allegheny folks and original US folks as well as folks from AA and Envoy after AA slammed the doors shut here.     We PMUS been mainline for yrs, however just prior to the 2014 contract MGMT wanted to slam the door shut for BWI JAX and a small number of other cities  then the IAM got us and other cities protected thus the ration of 1 mainline jet a day, 7 a week thus giving us protection for the next several yrs and I hope and wish it will be extended when the JCBA begins     Also we took over the AA ramp from Envoy    we have over 15 mainline jets a day  plus additional commuter flights a day.   So bob no matter what you think one thing is very clear  you obviously do not care about ramp losing their jobs.   sorry but I do care and I believe the ramp should have far more protection and higher wages and benes given that we as rampers work out in all elements of the weather putting our lives on the line day in  day out  nite in  nite out    Ive seen peeps get hurt and planes get damaged  

 Do you think 15 people should come to work and work 1 flight a day and the rest of us work much harder for below market rates just to keep that 1 flight station open? What would you say is a fair amount of flights to keep a station open?