MCI

[flaptrack]

----------------
On 7/18/2003 10:09:36 PM KCFlyer wrote:

----------------
On 7/18/2003 9:31:58 PM flaptrack wrote:

Can we put aside the TWU vs. AMFA debate, and all your quoting of union work rules to discuss opinions on the keeping or closure of the MCI Overhaul Base? Some of us would like to know if we could get jobs there someday --- or if the base will be relegated to winter Recreational Vehicle  storage.

----------------​

MIght as well close the AA thread if your going to put aside the TWU vs AMFA debate.  It''s sort of like that "six degrees of separation" game....give them any topic and in less than 6 posts it will become an AMFA vs TWU thread,.

----------------​

Thanks KCFlyer, I enjoy your informative posts. I realize Union membersip is important, but like you, it is not the whole story of what is going on. I would like to hear from some people that have a clue about what is going on at MCIE (I used to work on the hangar and 3rd floor until AA bought TWA and I chose to leave because I had first had experience about what AA did to AirCal and Reno)

Can we have a discussion on MCIE?

P.S. Parkville

 

[Buck]

KCFLYER:

Open a thread for non-union MCI employees and I for one will not participate.

 

[MCI transplant]

----------------
On 7/18/2003 11:01:39 PM flaptrack wrote:

Can we put aside the TWU vs. AMFA debate, and all your quoting of union work rules to discuss opinions on the keeping or closure of the MCI Overhaul Base? Some of us would like to know if we could get jobs there someday --- or if the base will be relegated to winter Recreational Vehicle storage.

(Posted twice)

----------------​

Flaptrack---Maybe there has been too much empisis on MCI! My question is: Did our CEO tell the Mayor of Ft.Worth not to worry, before Mayor Barn''s MCI offer, or after??????

 

[j7915]

----------------
On 7/19/2003 12:29:48 AM MCI transplant wrote:

----------------

On 7/18/2003 11:01:39 PM flaptrack wrote:


Can we put aside the TWU vs. AMFA debate, and all your quoting of union work rules to discuss opinions on the keeping or closure of the MCI Overhaul Base? Some of us would like to know if we could get jobs there someday --- or if the base will be relegated to winter Recreational Vehicle storage.


(Posted twice)


----------------​

Flaptrack---Maybe there has been too much empisis on MCI! My question is: Did our CEO tell the Mayor of Ft.Worth not to worry, before Mayor Barn''s MCI offer, or after??????



----------------​

Flaptrack, if you want to tranfer to an overhaul base someday, you better hope that AMFA does not make it at AA. Our contract is locked for another 1-2 years and then it can be opened for limited negotiations. I don''t know what snapbacks AMFA would want to ask for first, but I can assure you AA will demand 38%++ outsourcing.

Transfers to overhaul maybe as hard to get as transfer used to be to Tampa when it opened and the yankees wanted a head start to there retirement homes on the beach

 

[RV4]

----------------
On 7/19/2003 2:22:51 AM j7915 wrote:

Flaptrack, if you want to tranfer to an overhaul base someday, you better hope that AMFA does not make it at AA. Our contract is locked for another 1-2 years and then it can be opened for limited negotiations. I don't know what snapbacks AMFA would want to ask for first, but I can assure you AA will demand 38%++ outsourcing.

Transfers to overhaul maybe as hard to get as transfer used to be to Tampa when it opened and the yankees wanted a head start to there retirement homes on the beach

----------------​

And what "outsource amount" will AA ask for if we stay TWU?

In fact, what is the current TWU limit and how is it calculated and enforced?

 

[MCI transplant]

Flaptrack--- Notice they''ve still not answeered my question! Maybe there is something to what I''m hearing after all!!!!

 

[KCFlyer]

----------------
On 7/18/2003 10:57:54 PM flaptrack wrote:

P.S. Parkville

----------------​

I''m on the Kansas side - Overland Park.

 

[twaokc]

"What am I missing here?

Are you saying that the STL and MCI people keep their 100% seniority if they bump anywhere in the system?"


That has been the ruling.....

 

[Bob Owens]

If they are going to close a base I'd guess that it would be MCI.

Why?

Huge investment in Tulsa and AFW and both are more likely to be more modern than MCI.

The rumor is that Delta is doing the TWA 757s.

MCI workforce probably has more top paid high timers with many weeks vacation, more medical expenses and less years of service left.

If they close MCI more than likely a greater percentage will hit the streets and even if they dont the company does not have to pay the $12500. The limited number of places that they can bump into lessens the roll and thus costs for the company. Older workers are less likely to go bouncing around the system.

MCI voted yes for the concessions because they were told that if they voted "no" that the company would close the base. Now they get to stick it to them and say "Yea, we told that we would close the base if you rejected it but we never told you that we would keep it open if you accepted it".

If they are getting rid of pretty much everything else from TWA and going back to their pre-TWA size then why would they keep that old hangar open? If the two bases were enough to maintain the fleet then, they are more than enough now due to the fact that between the 5 lost vacation days and 5 less holidays each and every worker works an additional two weeks for not only for free, but 17.5% less the rest of the year. By agreeing to the contract and moving the system protection back to 98, it pretty much sealed MCIs fate. Only a small percentage will have enough time to bump into NY. Most of those that have the ability to bump into NY wont because of their advanced age and the high cost of living in NY. Middle aged workers would have to sell their homes and move their families into costly apartments that more than likely cost more than their mortgage and the youngest workers wont have the seniority to displace.Under the old contract you guys were protected by default, at least anyone with 6 years or more. By moving it back to 98, it exposed guys with 15 years.

We told your E-bd about this, they did not want to hear it, they were voting YES and were not going to let their members hear anything that might cause them to reconsider.

 

[Hopeful]

What am I missing here?

Are you saying that the STL and MCI people keep their 100% seniority if they bump anywhere in the system?

 

[410OhOne]

----------------
On 7/19/2003 7:31:59 PM RV4 wrote:


Does anyone uderstand the seniority issue and how that works if MCI is closed and the TWA Mechanics would like to keep a job somewhere?

----------------​

Well, I was going to reply to the above post by Mr. Owens, but then saw this one so let me kill two birds with one stone. Mr. Owens I am afraid you hit the nail on the head. I was there the other day when a manager got up in front of the group in the conference room and gave the bad news about St. Louis. He kept referring to the fact that AA will keep this base open mainly because of you guys (referring to the highly experienced, high timers in the room). Regrettably what he was saying is not true. Mr. Owens you are so right. Medical, vacation time, pay rate, and the fact they have but 2-3 years top left to offer the company is a major strike against MCI.

RV4,

I believe the only hope for MCI are the very few nAAtives that got transfered there and the very few LLCers who managed to hold another AA station and have recall back there. Other than that. You can divide 45 years seniority by 4 and come up with a 25 percent number to try to exercise say at NY, LGA, MSP, etc. But I cant see many Grandpas leaving the kids behind.

Go AMFA

 

[Buck]

Maybe this exchange from the-mechanic.com can help explain the issue??


Received: 07/19/03 16:16:21 EDT
Name:
E-Mail: j7915 @yahoo.C0M
Employer:
Location:
Message:

Received: 07/19/03 11:41:11 EDT
Name: Buck
E-Mail:
Employer: AA
Location: TUL
Message:
Received: 07/19/03 03:54:33 EDT
Name:
E-Mail: j7915 @yahoo.C0M
Employer:
Location:
Message:
Received: 07/18/03 00:59:23 EDT
Name: Amfarad
E-Mail:
Employer: AA
Location: Tul
Message:
Someone posted a few days ago about little signing a letter of agreement about the Technicians in MCI and/or STL getting a one time bump in case of layoff with full system seniority. Do you have a copy of that letter because if you do Tul may not be far from getting alot more cards.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
AMFA must have a new organizing drive administrators. AMFADave would be happy that TWA people will be integrated into the AA seniority system. Or are you going to blame the TWU if there are layoffs because of MCI people bumping less senior people throughout the system suddenly? Either way you can blame the TWU right?
------------------------------------------------------

J7915, what needs to be remembered is that the TWU membership voted to staple the TWA mechanics to the bottom of the seniority list.

Are you taking the position that the MCI mechanic and related have the right to bump TUL with 100% of their seniority?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No Buck I have read the comments on the agreement as well as you have. Under the agreement the TWA people retain 100% seniority if they bump outside of MCI.

I remember and was commenting that AMFADave for sure and you, I think, were in favor of integrating the seniority lists. My statement was merely asking if AMFA was going to blame the TWU for layoffs that may be caused by bumpings due to to mergers of seniority that you guys actually approved of.​

 

[Hopeful]

System Displacement



Once a junior employee at a location is given a furlough notice, he has the opportunity to displace junior employees on a systemwide basis as identified by the juniority list. Operation of the juniority list is intended to identify those junior employees sytemwide who can be displaced by the furloughed employee through normal operation of occupational seniority. However, because former TWA LLC employees’ occupational seniority varies from location to location (i.e.- 4/10/2001 and 25% and 100%), the juniority list must be constructed to account for this fact.



As stated above, the DRC is unwilling to create new restrictions on use of occupational seniority applicable only to former TWA LLC employees. On the other hand, the contract already has a significant restriction on application of occupational seniority -- a system protected employee may not be "bumped" in a system displacement. Because the vast majority of TWU-represented AA employees have occupational seniority dates prior to 3/1/2001, they are system protected under the TWU/AA collective bargaining agreement. No former TWA LLC employee is system protected. For this reason, the occupational seniority provided former TWA LLC employees by virtue of the Seniority Integration Opinion and Award is of limited use to such employees in competing with system protected AA employees in a system displacement.



In recognition of the above problems, the "juniority" list shall be constructed within each classification subject to furlough in the following fashion. All unprotected employees – all AA employees hired after 3/1/2001 and all former TWA LLC employees – shall be placed on the list in reverse seniority order as determined by their occupational seniority under the Seniority Integration Opinion and Award. For former TWA LLC employees their occupational seniority for placement on the list shall be the occupational seniority they are exercising at their location at the time the juniority list is constructed, i.e. – 100% of TWA seniority, or 25% of TWA seniority, or 4/10/2001, depending on location. The AA employees hired after 3/1/2001 shall be blended with the former TWA LLC employees according to the AA employees’ occupational seniority.



This juniority list will be used solely for identifying the unprotected positions to which a furloughed employee (AA or former TWA LLC) may exercise his occupational seniority to displace a junior employee. With respect to the actual displacement of any employee on the juniority list, a comparison between the two employees of the occupational seniority at the location under the Award will determine whether the displacement can, in fact, occur. Junior employees displaced will similarly use their occupational seniority under the Award in determining their options under the TWU/AA agreement.



A furloughed former TWA LLC employee may exercise the occupational seniority he would hold at a location under the 25% or 100% or 4/10/2001 formula in displacing an employee on the juniority list. In addition to the normal operation of the juniority list, furloughed or displaced former TWA LLC employees will be afforded the additional opportunity to displace junior employees at STL and/or MCI.

 

[RV4]

Does anyone uderstand the seniority issue and how that works if MCI is closed and the TWA Mechanics would like to keep a job somewhere?

 

[MCI transplant]

Bob,---- Why keep MCI open? First of all, $320mil! Alliance cost A.A.$64 mil.@ year in rent to good ol boy Ross! Over a five year period, that''s $320 mil! How much is it going to cost A.A. for MCI in the same time frame? NOTHING, ZERO, NADA!!!!!! Plus $200mil for A.A. to play with for any upgrades that might be needed here! And help with the rent once it starts! As to the age of our workforce,yes it''s higher! But then it''s also more experianced! We''ve proven that we can do more with less than Tulsa, or Alliance!!!So don''t totally count us out yet! Free Money is vary hard to walk away from! Especially if your as greedy as youall are!!!!!