First of all the finances of the companies are combined.
What you fail to realize and understand is that there are many different pots that money is in. It's not just one big account. It's department and other budgets. Keep your eyes open and you will see how there's "no money" but things keep happening.
And last time I checked US is still losing money, and alienating their most loyal fliers, not a great way to run a company.
Refer to the statement above. It sure is a helluva lot better looking than it was before. I'm sure that DP and his staff would be more than happy to listen to your ideas on how to run the company.
Third the IAM does not accrete employees, the NMB does that.
That is a partially true statement. BUT the NMB will not even look at an employee group unless they are petitioned to do so. And if I'm wrong, please explain why, when the IBT came in at America West in 1998 (contract in place), why did the NMB not accrete the other, non union work groups that perform "similar" and related functions???? Because those work groups did not want to become unionized and that wish was respected.
Fourth the employees at US that were accreded were being organized, signing cards and even had their own in-house committee overseeing the organizing. (since you were not there I would not expect you to know this, but I have all ready explained this to you several times and even provided you with the link to the NMB case.)
Again, refer to the above statements. I've read the cases and I have also been led to believe that there are a number that no longer wish representation and those that currently don't wish representation. It's a helluva lot easier to get in than it is to get out. But it's not impossible. And that possibility isn't gone. Look what transpired recently........the IAM was voted out because the workers trust their new management.
Fifth the IAM CBA is the surviving CBA no matter what so if HP has employees doing the same work as US employees under the CBA the NMB will acrette them. A word of advice don't believe the company, they lie time after time after time. And the ibt wants to alienate and keep East and West seperate and still permit the company to outsource the heavy mtc on the former HP fleet.
TRANSITION AGREEMENTS. So, when the NMB looks at Stock Clerks and Utility.....disparity..........stock clerks are under a seperate contract and utility doesn't exist. How is that going to work out? Rhetorical question by the way. Please, no advise is needed. I will believe whomever and whatever I choose. You have to be smart enough to read between the lines and NOT put your blind faith in what someone tells you. Understandably, the old US Airways, et al, have been beaten in the ground and it's going to take time to get over that BUT......there is a new scent in the air. My advise to you would be to listen and look to the future for the good instead of living in the past and recollecting the bad. And please, tell me that the IAM has never lied or alluded to half truths or told you what you wanted to hear. Again, you have to be smart enough to decipher the words. And as far as the IBT alientating and keeping the east and west seperate.........bull-oney. The only one that can alienate and seperate is you, as an individual. There are many, many examples of seperation and it's not from the IBT alone.
Now a little tid bit that many may not have thought about regarding the outsourcing of maintenance. Yes, the heavy maintenance in the IAM contract is great. At least it's something. No, there is no heavy maintenance in the IBT contract because it was outsourced by Franke years BEFORE the IBT was in. The question was asked if the company was looking at bringing in additional heavy maintenance. The answer was no. The company cannot even handle the heavy maintenance right now, that they are obligated to do per the IAM contract, once the fleets are combined. It was explained that the cost of outsourcing used to be much less (back when mechanic's wages were higher) but with the reduction in mechanic's wages, the gap has lessened. Now, since the company will struggle to some degree, to accomplish what is contractually obligated, the huge cost of bringing more work in house isn't in the future. The company would have to buy/lease facilities, tooling, equipment, etc. But they don't intend to......the vendor facilities, tooling and equipment are already there. So in the long run, it's still cost effective to outsource the maintenance no matter what, in the company's view. Thus the shell game with money and budgets. So it appears, that no matter which union or no union, an increase of heavy maintenance being done in house, is not going to happen in the near or possibly, distant future.
