Please fully explain System Protection, have questions?

[Bob Owens]

True Seniority would require that ANYTIME a Senior Union Member wanted to transfer, they would displace the most Junior Union Member at the station to which they desired a TRANSFER.

The current TWU system is not a true seniority system with respect to seniority in that Junior Seniority Union Members can remain on the clock if their station is not the MOST JUNIOR on the bump list.

Good Luck in getting true seniority recognized by the TWU.

While I agree with your views on the inequities of the application of system seniority during a RIF I dont know about the "Anytime a senior member wanted" standard. This industry is already chancey enough for Junior workers without subjecting them to dislocation based upon the whim of a senior worker. Its not as if we all worked at the same location, displacement means uprooting and moving the whole family. I am a high seniority worker and although this would afford me more options I feel the cost for the junior workers would be too great, it would be divisive and cause a lot more animosity between the haves-with seniority, and the have nots-without seniority. The primary purpose of seniority is protection-not priviledge,

I agree that any opening should be filled in system seniority order but if a guy is hired in BOS and all of a sudden someone from DFW decides he would like to go back to BOS he shouldnt be able to displace the guy who is already in BOS. If that were the case junior workers could find themselves bouced around the country, incurring enormous expenses, for no reason other than the fact that someone with Seniority changed their minds and decided to move somewhere else.

 

[Bob Owens]

So nobody has really addressed this article 42.2 LINE #1 which reads.

RIF FOR SYSTEM PROTECTED EMPLOYEE

A SYSTEM PROTECTED EMPLOYEE CAN DISPLACE A NON-PROTECTED EMPLOYEE AT ANOTHER STATION. A SYSTEM PROTECTED EMPLOYEE CANNOT DISPLACE ANOTHER SYSTEM PROTECTED EMPLOYEE AT ANOTHER STATION.

What is the red text referring to exactly, anyone?

Well the way thats written is that if there is no layoff at your station and you are system protected you are safe. Those who are system protected and are subjected to a RIF at the station they are at have to go to places where there are employees without system protection. That would include those hired after 3/1/01? and all the TWA guys. However other language in the contract states that layoffs are done by seniority so the TWA guys would have a legitimate arguement in saying that a junior person cannot displace them. My interpretation(without double checking the language) would be that if someone has less seniority than me and he cant be laid off because he has system protection then the RIF stops there because even if I dont have system protection per se the fact that I have seniority prevents me from being displaced by him. My seniority affords me system protection as long as someone under me has system protection. TWA workers are entitled all the rights of seniority that was given to them, including layoffs, the company should have been aware of this when they maintained that they didnt care how the unions handled the integration of the workforce. They voiced no objection to it then so its too late now-the language is obvious layoffs are done by seniority. If the union had stapled them it would be clear, they would be at 4/10/01 and not be protected by system protection but if they are in MCI, where they have 100% or NYC where they have 25% then they have junior workers to them with system protection. The only way a senior worker (with system seniority but without an "S") can be laid off is if all the system protected workers below him leave the company by either resignation or termination.

Other than the TWA guys are there 1300 people without an "S"? If not then they cant put 1300 on the street. Perhaps the layoffs will be more about reshuffling workers from one location to another and not that many people hitting the streets.

 

[Hopeful]

So nobody has really addressed this article 42.2 LINE #1 which reads.

RIF FOR SYSTEM PROTECTED EMPLOYEE

A SYSTEM PROTECTED EMPLOYEE CAN DISPLACE A NON-PROTECTED EMPLOYEE AT ANOTHER STATION. A SYSTEM PROTECTED EMPLOYEE CANNOT DISPLACE ANOTHER SYSTEM PROTECTED EMPLOYEE AT ANOTHER STATION.

What is the red text referring to exactly, anyone?

I believe this was part of the ONE TIME RELIEF FROM SYSTEM PROTECTION generously granted by the TWU to the company. This RELIEVED the company from paying the $12,500.

Normally a SYSTEM protected employee could displace a system employee else where, but thanks the TWU, that provision was removed for the one time "LET'S SAVE THE COMPANY AND JOBS" theme.

 

[AA Tulsa Mechanic]

Well the way thats written is that if there is no layoff at your station and you are system protected you are safe. Those who are system protected and are subjected to a RIF at the station they are at have to go to places where there are employees without system protection. That would include those hired after 3/1/01? and all the TWA guys. However other language in the contract states that layoffs are done by seniority so the TWA guys would have a legitimate arguement in saying that a junior person cannot displace them. My interpretation(without double checking the language) would be that if someone has less seniority than me and he cant be laid off because he has system protection then the RIF stops there because even if I dont have system protection per se the fact that I have seniority prevents me from being displaced by him. My seniority affords me system protection as long as someone under me has system protection. TWA workers are entitled all the rights of seniority that was given to them, including layoffs, the company should have been aware of this when they maintained that they didnt care how the unions handled the integration of the workforce. They voiced no objection to it then so its too late now-the language is obvious layoffs are done by seniority. If the union had stapled them it would be clear, they would be at 4/10/01 and not be protected by system protection but if they are in MCI, where they have 100% or NYC where they have 25% then they have junior workers to them with system protection. The only way a senior worker (with system seniority but without an "S") can be laid off is if all the system protected workers below him leave the company by either resignation or termination.

Other than the TWA guys are there 1300 people without an "S"? If not then they cant put 1300 on the street. Perhaps the layoffs will be more about reshuffling workers from one location to another and not that many people hitting the streets.

I counted today and there is just over 1500 AMT's without system protection and about 200 OSM's without system protection with 174 being in AFW.

 

[Hopeful]

I counted today and there is just over 1500 AMT's without system protection and about 200 OSM's without system protection with 174 being in AFW.

I'm sure the company is hoping the TWU will agree to another "one time" relief from protection...

 

[Boomer]

While I agree with your views on the inequities of the application of system seniority during a RIF I dont know about the "Anytime a senior member wanted" standard. This industry is already chancey enough for Junior workers without subjecting them to dislocation based upon the whim of a senior worker. Its not as if we all worked at the same location, displacement means uprooting and moving the whole family. I am a high seniority worker and although this would afford me more options I feel the cost for the junior workers would be too great, it would be divisive and cause a lot more animosity between the haves-with seniority, and the have nots-without seniority. The primary purpose of seniority is protection-not priviledge,

I agree that any opening should be filled in system seniority order but if a guy is hired in BOS and all of a sudden someone from DFW decides he would like to go back to BOS he shouldnt be able to displace the guy who is already in BOS. If that were the case junior workers could find themselves bouced around the country, incurring enormous expenses, for no reason other than the fact that someone with Seniority changed their minds and decided to move somewhere else.

Bob,

My version is from the IAM guys that worked at US Air during the early '90's. They were bounced around at will until their seniority allowed them to hold a station.

From the view often voiced by some of the larger stations: seniority based transfers would limit the game playing between line and overhaul and Class 1 and below. I say that because the membership will more closely monitor the language of a proposed TA rather than the IGM aaspects.

With respect to the hardships faced by junior members: the fewer cards we give managment the playroom required for division, the greater the degree of cohesion.

Currently, management plays station against station and line against overhaul: if true seniority rules, management cannot pretend to protect anyone at any station from the "possible" implementation of contractual language.

Everyone "at risk" places everyone in the same lifeboat.

Not to worry: we have theTWU.

 

[AA Tulsa Mechanic]

Why don;t you go down to the union hall for a union meeting and get the stooges that negotiated that language and have access to the secret letters of agreement to give you the answer?

Or have you already been there and not told what you wanted to hear?

I have and got 5 different answers. Nobody down there knew for sure. I get the old "well brother I will check into it and get back to you
"----ya right!

 

[Hopeful]

I have and got 5 different answers. Nobody down there knew for sure. I get the old "well brother I will check into it and get back to you
"----ya right!

The way i read it is that it was part of the "one time relief" provision...

 

[AA Tulsa Mechanic]

The way i read it is that it was part of the "one time relief" provision...

Where are you reading that?

 

[TWU informer]

I have and got 5 different answers. Nobody down there knew for sure. I get the old "well brother I will check into it and get back to you
"----ya right!

Now you get it.

The TWU Labor Agreement is a fluid document, secret letters of agreement are generated on a case by case basis to match what AA needs/wants at any given time.

Good Luck

 

[Hopeful]

Where are you reading that?

I went back and read it,,It's attachment 42.2....42.1 is the one time relief ....i thought it was part of the relief provision until i looked at the dates of signing. the 42.2 letter was signed 1/19/1996 while the one time relief letter was signed 3/31/2003...


Now you have me wondering,,,,,,,it doesn;t make sense,,,,when we got the system protection clause in our contract, it simply meant you had a job somewhere in the AA system....


This sentence makes it sound like a system protected employee is now a station protectd employee........doesn't make sense...

 

[AA Tulsa Mechanic]

I went back and read it,,It's attachment 42.2....42.1 is the one time relief ....i thought it was part of the relief provision until i looked at the dates of signing. the 42.2 letter was signed 1/19/1996 while the one time relief letter was signed 3/31/2003...


Now you have me wondering,,,,,,,it doesn;t make sense,,,,when we got the system protection clause in our contract, it simply meant you had a job somewhere in the AA system....


This sentence makes it sound like a system protected employee is now a station protectd employee........doesn't make sense...

Finally someone is seeing what I am..... Hopeful you in Tulsa? Maybe you could try and find out?

 

[Hopeful]

Finally someone is seeing what I am..... Hopeful you in Tulsa? Maybe you could try and find out?

No, JFK.....I will definitely find out...

 

[iluvaa]

I went back and read it,,It's attachment 42.2....42.1 is the one time relief ....i thought it was part of the relief provision until i looked at the dates of signing. the 42.2 letter was signed 1/19/1996 while the one time relief letter was signed 3/31/2003...


Now you have me wondering,,,,,,,it doesn;t make sense,,,,when we got the system protection clause in our contract, it simply meant you had a job somewhere in the AA system....


This sentence makes it sound like a system protected employee is now a station protectd employee........doesn't make sense...

If anyone has the contract book prior to this one there was a letter in there following the system protection artical about how to handle rif with osm's it said if I remember it right that if an osm gets laid of and there is no unprotected osm then the layoff stops with him. I am 100% it said that but I dont have the old book I know smoeone on here will please post that letter for us

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

True Seniority would require that ANYTIME a Senior Union Member wanted to transfer, they would displace the most Junior Union Member at the station to which they desired a TRANSFER.

The current TWU system is not a true seniority system with respect to seniority in that Junior Seniority Union Members can remain on the clock if their station is not the MOST JUNIOR on the bump list.

Good Luck in getting true seniority recognized by the TWU.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Boomer,

I "think" how they can get away with that....., "may" be the following;

Lets say 100 junior AMT's had a occ sen. date of 1/1/2000(meaning that,...THAT date is THE most junior date)

Now A RIF comes along, requiring 50 AMT's(usually from small out stations) to have to "bump" or take the street.

AA and the TWU(SAME CRAP) locates "50" junior AMTs(WITH THE EXACT SAME occ. date), from stations,.........NOT on the highly favored list"(think TUL), and hypothetically makes "Junior stations" out of JFK-10/LGA-15/BOS-10/MIA-20/LAX-5.

In reality, each AMT w/occ. sen. date..1/1/2000, is listed on the Master sheet, by TRUE Seniority, meaning that the OLDEST AMT in any station, with the SAME occ. date, is Senior.

As you know, the "50" names from the BOTTOM,.....SHOULD be the guys, AND THIER STATIONS, that can be bumped, if NO ONE takes the Street.