Nov/Dec 2013 Fleet Service Discussion

[700UW]

Per Regan, that has changed, I will contact him and get the info, and Regan wrote the Alliance.
 
Item #11 in the agreement
 
http://www.iamdl142.org/Bulletins/2013/TWU/Mechanic%20and%20Related%20Association%20Agreement.pdf

 

[Tim Nelson]

Per Regan, that has changed, I will contact him and get the info, and Regan wrote the Alliance.
 
Item #11 in the agreement
 
http://www.iamdl142.org/Bulletins/2013/TWU/Mechanic%20and%20Related%20Association%20Agreement.pdf

Please do.  Item #11 means nothing legally to management. The agreement between the TWU and IAM has absolutely NOTHING to do with the contract at AMR between the TWU and AMR.
I hope you can produce something from Tommy that is so secret that the TWU hasn't produced it to their own members. I'd love to be wrong on this if another document exist but I doubt AH would waive off SCS when it is a vital part of the merger and he paid 4.3% to all AMR members to attain it. 
 
IMO, neither Tommy or some of these loose bolts in the IAM actually read the MOU and I have a hunch that if you call him, he will read the MOU for the first time and start scratching his head.  Hey, I like Tommy but he plays it safe and won't do or say anything out of line.

 

[700UW]

I sent Tom an E-mail, so we shall see.

 

[Tim Nelson]

I sent Tom an E-mail, so we shall see.

fair enough

 

[737823]

LOA#5, as I repeatedly posted on facebook, does not have any commitment to full time.  Period.  It is an 'exception letter only', i.e., it more accurately reads, all full timers can be downgraded to part time as long as the company isn't doing it to produce back to back part time.   The Union and the company provided the Title, "Full Time Commitment"  but it was title only, a clever manufacturization by the union to give the delusion that full timers are protected. The union leaders even had those deployed on their dime telling folks that a certain number was guaranteed.   At any rate, the contract does allow part time leads and plenty of them.
 
 As far as ORD, there are over 2,000 full timers on the ramp, and only 70 part timers [over 95% full time].

Tim, which FB page are you referring to?

Josh

 

[charlie Brown]

This is the part where I hate when unions BS and try to position their members with nonsense and fairy tales.  Either our leaders have no understanding of research and signed documents or they are being intellectually dishonest.  Nothing in between.
 
700, you almost always provide research to uphold your position, and rightfully so.  You above all folks, can't get away with "I think the TWU changed their MOU".  I know you know the truth in that the TWU necessarily has to file a SCS within 6 months of yesterday. This has nothing to do with opinion.   AH gave the AMR members a 4.3% pay raise and in return he got the single carrier guarantee.  Kindly read the following:
 
http://twu514.org/blog/2013/02/15/memorandum-of-understanding-mou-between-twu-and-us-airways-dated-jan-25-2013/
 
The agreement between the TWU and IAM, while I support its idea, has NOTHING to do with the contract between the TWU and AMR. 
 
That said, the IAM should just be straight with members and say they are sticking in sUS talks, regardless.  The fact that they didn't say that suggest to me that the IAM is going to start S folks by piling up and manufacturing some situation that is not the reality.  One thing I hope is not the case, is that all of their new BS doesn't mean a mini contract that doesn't adequately address scope and other crucial things.  The BS suggest to me that a new TA will be offered sometime in the next 6 months and the IAM will claim it is 'solid' and a result of 'solidarity' and 'fighting like hell' by not 'backing down to management.'   
 
yaaaaaaawwwwwnnnnnnnn.     Just be straight and honest.  That's how they should be, but every time their lips are moving they are lying.  And most [not all] NC members really have little to no formal education or research degrees and no idea on research or anything legal so when Delaney says "The attorneys have advised us to do this or that...",  the NC ask one or two questions and then that's a wrap.

Tim
This is a concern to some of us on the team. We have the same concern you have about the LOA, with the TWU. I believe we will be fine either way it happens. Like you said, we need to finish our section 6 first regardless.

 

[P. REZ]

Tim,
 
What you state about TWU and the MOU and SCS has been addressed and discussed in length as CB states. Worst case scenario has us still finishing section 6 talks IMO. Your NC is committed to getting a contract that the members will ratify.   

 

[robbedagain]

Cb this has got to give us even better leverage esp given the fact that aa folks got raises correct?

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,
 
What you state about TWU and the MOU and SCS has been addressed and discussed in length as CB states. Worst case scenario has us still finishing section 6 talks IMO. Your NC is committed to getting a contract that the members will ratify.   

+1

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim
This is a concern to some of us on the team. We have the same concern you have about the LOA, with the TWU. I believe we will be fine either way it happens. Like you said, we need to finish our section 6 first regardless.

+1

 

[T5towbar]

LOA#5, as I repeatedly posted on facebook, does not have any commitment to full time.  Period.  It is an 'exception letter only', i.e., it more accurately reads, all full timers can be downgraded to part time as long as the company isn't doing it to produce back to back part time.   The Union and the company provided the Title, "Full Time Commitment"  but it was title only, a clever manufacturization by the union to give the delusion that full timers are protected. The union leaders even had those deployed on their dime telling folks that a certain number was guaranteed.   At any rate, the contract does allow part time leads and plenty of them.
 
 As far as ORD, there are over 2,000 full timers on the ramp, and only 70 part timers [over 95% full time].

Didn't know that.
If that's the case, they will "rightsize" it for sure. That's a very large ratio disparity. None of the rest of hubs have that. (I know damn well we don't @ EWR) I knew that LOA #5 had some kind of catch to it, since FT wasn't guaranteed. I read the paragraph again and it does have some "iffy" wording. I thought it more or less pertained to the Lead and Storekeeper category. But when is has something about the "scheduling of shifts, sCO always had multiple start times according to the needs of the station or hub. It works for the people who WANT to be PT, or have been PT for years. But we had our share of involuntary FT to PT. We've seen it in 08 when we had reductions during the "fuel spike" and again this year.

LOA #6 should have been in place before this happens. People want to move into the "insourced" stations. They have to get the vendors out first. Once LOA #6 is in effect, then you can make the proper alignments in staffing. But they will probably drag things out first. Just another idea from our incompetent management. We need to make more money.........

BTW: in your situation, I hope there will be insourcing as well, if agreed upon, instead of running a split operation like in EWR. Hope the negotiators will resolve that. I think that some of the former AA agents would love to come back home.

 

[charlie Brown]

Cb this has got to give us even better leverage esp given the fact that aa folks got raises correct?

Robbed
A lot of people read this site, so I'm not really gonna say what I feel about leverage except this. We have all the leverage we need, the company will eventually want to combine the two fleet groups together, they can't do this, until there is a joint agreement. Eventually the company will have to come around to realize any of the synergies from fleet that he promised the creditors. We just have to continue the race, and not stop 2/3 of the way through.

 

[rockit2]

CB, how did the pizza and cake party go in CLT?

 

[robbedagain]

I hear ya cb! Good luck to you all at the negogiatin committee and ur up comin talks

 

[wings396]

All that I have to say to those of you on the NC, is that if the company continues to jack us around for months on end, is that there damn well better be some retro pay involved. This crap has been going on for waaaaayyy too long already. I know it's not your fault, but unless the company has any sort of penalty and/or back pay to deal with, it will continue to benefit them as each day, month, and year passes by. Shame on the last group that sat at the table for not having any language that pertained to this stall tactic that the company has enjoyed.
I along with many others have been as patient as possible so far, but yesterday's closing of the merger really hit a final nerve for all of us. To read all of the crap about the US Pilot group getting big fat raises and a $40 MILLION dollar bonus to share just in time for the Holidays, is sickening to me and all of the others. Hell, even the BK AA Fleet guys got a raise putting them a clean $2 an hour above us. As a bear MINIMUM we should have been brought up to their level effective yesterday. I also read an article quoting Parker in the DFW paper stating that "ALL" US employees would be getting a raise following yesterdays close of the merger. Really Doug, All of us? Who the hell is he talking about. I suppose that he should have said everyone with the exception of those poor IAM represented Bastards. Then on top of that we find out that NON CONTRACT Managers will be throw a bone in Jan as the receive a few more paid holidays along with another week of vac for the more senior people. This has all become a bunch of Pathetic BS already...