Machinists Win Major Dispute

[USA320Pilot]

737nCH11:

I'm pragmatic and Itrade brings up a good point. Either party would have likely appealed this dispute -- don't you think the IAM would have and probably has completed the motion of appeal? Maybe it's better to know what could occur to prepare in advance than to have your "head in the sand and not see the sunshine", like some other bankrupt airline employee groups.

In addition, Resource Planning has told ALPA two of the parked A319s will return to service in January, which could have pilots bid on this flying by this Friday. Why the sudden change?

Could the company have a counter plan in place and be one step ahead of the IAM Legal Team? Moreover, there are four other A319s and one A320 parked, which could be flown while the 10 A319s schedule for overhaul wait for a potentially long legal battle.

Oh yea, 737nCH11, it's all about sunshine instead of knowledge and preparation.

Regards,

Chip

 

[AOG-N-IT]

Chip ,

I would expect nothing less from this group....and you my friend are not out of the woods either , keep in mind !!

We need to savor the victory for the moment...but be equally prepared and unified when the next attack is launched against us as an airline family for a positive change.

The best we can hope for is the judges rulings and findings being IRON CLAD...and above any degree of an appeals process...hopefully the wait was worth the end result. Time will tell.

This management group has done something I never would have believed achievable before...it brought more groups together than any previous intentions ever attempted to achieve...and I do not exclude lower echelon management types in that statement either...they knew like we did...if the work leaves? they leave with us.

Hopefully Dr Bronner will see that his cast of characters that the RSA's Money has impowered ...is not going to get it done thier way...and a new way of thinking and acting has to be achieved and acted upon. A vote of NO Confidence is in order...and it's time for sweeping reform from the top this time.

Bring in some leadership that's interested in running and competing as a class act airline...instead of a Hooterville Regional at slave labor wages.

This can be done...if we look to repair the internal flaws...and build upon the strengths we have....and can easily exploit to positive means for a refreshing change.

The Employees of U are the airline...and the tangible assets that make it work...we need leaders as opposed to accountants and contract lawyer wanna be's that see things that way !!! Then we can move forward...and profits can and will be achieved.

 

[USA320Pilot]

AOG-N-IT:

That's my point...none of us are out of the woods.

My point is it's better to know the obstacles and prepare for the battles. I rarely take offense to personal attacks, but 737nCH11's smart aleck comment was inappropriate.

I congratulate the IAM members on their victory, but this is just one legal battle because the war could continue.

Maybe the early pilot bid notification should be fair warning. Could the company use the 7 parked A320 family aircraft to fly 279 jets and the required ALPA block hours while they litigate the outsourcing issue and maintenance stops in Alabama?

Remeber the company said in its press release the "overhaul would be for only 10 Airbus narrow body aircraft that are due for heavy maintenance checks this fall. The airline will continue to explore with the union the assignment of future Airbus heavy maintenance work." Discussions regarding future Airbus work being brought in-house is supported by an agreement US Airways reached with the IAM in June that resulted in a Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service grant to fund a labor-management committee to identify such opportunities. "The issue of how to manage existing maintenance activity and how to incorporate new lines such as this Airbus maintenance is a perfect opportunity for the union leadership and the company to team up," said John Prestifilippo, US Airways senior vice president-maintenance operations. "We will need to look at whether there are economically-feasible facilities and work adjustments that may lead to either the Airbus maintenance to be brought in-house or other maintenance activities that can be done on a contract basis for other airlines."

In my opinion, stay tuned.

Regards,

Chip

 

[TBONEJ4J]

Congratualtions to the IAM!

Sometimes you need to draw a line in the sand, and say no more.

No more Outsourcing. US Airways is not a FRANCHISE to be farmed out to the lowest bidder.

Time to take the Airline back to those who built it, the employees.

 

[delldude]

if judge cindrich did his job,any appeal i hope will be short lived.

 

[AP Tech]

There are several A319/320 A/C that were returned to the lessors while in Chap 11 and it would not suprise me they suddenly appear and are put back in revenue service. But the bottom line we are no longer in Chap 11 and the 10 Airbus that have run/and or running out of time are still being paid for.......Maybe this will amount to another "one time charge" when U's losses are anounced for the next quarter!!!! I am sure "Dave" and his band of LIARS&THIEVES have something up their sleeves!!!!!!! Maybe now that "Dave" finally did not get things to go the way HE wanted them he will pack up his millions and leave!!!!!!!!!


PORTION DELETED BY MODERATOR

 

[AOG-N-IT]

AOG-N-IT:

That's my point...none of us are out of the woods.

My point is it's better to know the obstacles and prepare for the battles. I rarely take offense to personal attacks, but 737nCH11's smart aleck comment was inappropriate.

I congratulate the IAM members on their victory, but this is just one legal battle because the war could continue.

Maybe the early pilot bid notification should be fair warning. Could the company use the 7 parked A320 family aircraft while they litigate the outsourcing issue and maintenance stops in Alabama?

Regards,

Chip

Chip,
Again good Captain...I put nothing past these people...under estimate your enemy for a moment?...and be prepared to have your lunch eaten for you!!

I knew when ALPA was praised for being leaders during the concession talks...and then they turned on you guys and gals like jackals in regards to your pension funding...WE ALL were dealing with the devil himself.

Yes I agree that parked acft can and will be used against us...and yes I agree that Seigel and the Screw U Crew have not played all thier cards yet....we better buckle up and knuckle down...the winter is not the only cold war we face.

 

[allegheny1]

Congradulations!!!!!

Most posters are correct. Expect an appeal.

The cause is just and the contract language and 54 yr history are facts that
will be very hard to dispute going forward.

Given the expense to savings ratio outlined in another thread it will not hurt
the bottom line by very much....and quess what...if the mba s would ask the
very innovative mechanics how to do the job with the least amout of expense
i think their collective jaws would drop to the floor at the suggestions offered.

Enjoy today....be ready to fight again tomorrow.

regards

 

[OldpropGuy]

Well done to the IAM members! Thanks for having the b@lls to stand up to what this company has become.

It's amazing how a member of one employee group is ready to shut the doors over issues which affect him, such as his pension. Then is quick to pass judgement on others seeking fair play!

 

[F/AinDay]

This is fantastic news!!

What happens now? Does the work now being performed stop immeidiately? If so, do you think the company will just let the remaining planes sit until they appeal? Or would this go against the 279 min a/c agreement?

 

[ITRADE]

This is fantastic news!!

What happens now? Does the work now being performed stop immeidiately? If so, do you think the company will just let the remaining planes sit until they appeal? Or would this go against the 279 min a/c agreement?

The airline is enjoined from having any outside work performed that's within the scope of the CBA.

 

[delldude]

word has it hawk and the boys are prepping for a media response down CCY.

 

[Flying Titan]

Chip & Itrade -
As I read the decision, both sides agreed that this judge's decision on a restraining order would be final - meaning there can be no appeal on this point. It appears the next step will be arguments on the merits of the case. I haven't seen a if a date is set yet for arguments, but I would imagine it will be several months off. Based on the tone and some of the language in this ruling, it looks like CCY will have a very difficult time winning that battle.

My question is what happens to these ten aircraft now, especially the two that are already opened up? Will U employees be sent to ALA to finish the work on those two? Where will the other eight go? I assume those eight are not flying currently (Please correct me if I'm wrong). Any guess on where that work would be done. How quickly could the company ramp up to do these checks? Is U below 279 mainline aircraft right now with these being parked for maintenance? Interesting times ahead.

As a frequent US passenger (US2), I am happy that the IAM won this battle. I feel better knowing that the aircraft will be maintained the way they have been throughout the history of the airline.

 

[ITRADE]

I have to say, I read the opinion and the company really got its head handed to it.

While not completely familiar with labor law with respect to the enforecement of CBAs, etc., it certainly looks as if the court was not impressed with the US's main argument - that the single clause that purportedly permitted outsourcing of work that could not be performed in-house.

While I do not necessarily agree that prior history (i.e. the 54 year history of maintenance and the 1999 statement) controls/influences the black letter language of the current contract, it appears that a single line of Subsection "G" was overshadowed by the language found in the totality of the contract.

-----------
Let me back up and state that the standard about which the outsourcing revolved - i.e., who could perform the work - would seemingly be an easy call for IAM. Essentially, who could do the work under what reasons. Given that US's reliance was upon part of Subsection G, the ground for US was shaky. Nonetheless, I still disagree about the reliance upon historical activities.

 

[ITRADE]

Chip & Itrade -
As I read the decision, both sides agreed that this judge's decision on a restraining order would be final - meaning there can be no appeal on this point. It appears the next step will be arguments on the merits of the case. I haven't seen a if a date is set yet for arguments, but I would imagine it will be several months off. Based on the tone and some of the language in this ruling, it looks like CCY will have a very difficult time winning that battle.

Possibly true, but motion for TRO was denied as moot. The prelim injunction was granted.

"The parties also agreed that the court should consider the hearing as a final hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction which is now ripe for decision."

US did not waive its right to judicial appeal, it only conceded the issues were ready for a decision to the judge - an effort for a quick resolution by the court.