Profit Sharing will shut airline if this happens!

[Charlie_Tuna]

Why are you trying to turn this against the unions and why have you not read the language?

You don't get it. I am not turning this against union and don't put words in my mouth or post. I want the company to pony up by whatever means it takes.

Why are you always attacking everything?

Yes I made this about you because you made it about me as usual. You just won't give up

 

[700UW]

So back to this question is Doug sharing a portion of the unions money with East's and/or West's non union workforce and if they are what are the unions going to do about it?

You said what are the unions gonna do about it, yet you dont even realize Doug is not taking any money from the east to pay the west as that is contractually prohibited.

You did not even take the time to read the language nor the facts of what is going on, so I questioned YOUR statement about why are you posting what are the unions going to do about it, when there is nothing happening to do anything about.

 

[malikie]

He could have put up the additional money necessary to provide the same benefit for the West employees - that was completely within his power to do - but he didn't do that. Instead he set up a situation where the East unions and employees would be seen as the evil, greedy ones if they didn't give up part of a negotiated benefit so that the West folks could get a benefit that they had not negotiated. Judging by this thread, he succeeded.

Jim

After reading the numerous posts on this thread Doug did not have to do anything of the sort to make you all look evil or greedy you the east have already done a good job doing that.

Its really sad. People who do not work in the airline industry read these boards and they must be thinking to themselves these people sound like 5 year old little girls arguing over a doll.

 

[700UW]

It is really sad that you want to take money out of the east employee's wallets and food of thier table as you made not one penny concession in the chapter 11 case and East employees did.

You are showing your greed by wanting something for nothing.

 

[PITbull]

And another point to bring up to add to Boing boy's rational post, AFA East receives only 9 months of medical at employee contribution, for any medical leave, whether LTD, FMLA or straight medical leave according to the ratified concession #3 agreement (and it was 60 days, but in 2005, was able to knuckle punch the company for an addtional 6 more months with much media pressure and daily harrassment)

West f/as get 24 months medical at employee contribution for any medical leave according to their CBA before COBRA is elected....Should AFA West split their 24 months with the East f/as so each side receives 12 months???? Any folks willing to offer this from the West? Don't you think that would be cost neutral for the company which Doug is betting on.?

Is the West planning to argue anything with their management?

 

[BoeingBoy]

I guess whether it's the union's money or not is semantics, just like asking whether a paycheck is the union's money or the employee's.

I assume that the other East union's profit sharing provisions evolved like ALPA's, which was the first agreement reached during both bankruptcies. What is not the East ALPA MEC (thru the negotiating committee) negotiated a profit sharing provision that stipulated that a certain percentage of that profit sharing would go to it's members - what are now the East pilots. This was prior to BK1.

Shortly after entering BK2, new profit sharing language was negotiated to replace that reached prior to BK1, but the general idea stayed the same - a percentage of profits would go to what are now called East employees (there was no West at that point) with a percentage of that reserved for the pilots covered by that language - now called East pilots.

During negotiations on the ALPA transition agreement (before exiting BK2 and still pre-merger), the two MEC's agreed to two things - contractually reducing the percentage of profits that would go into the profit sharing pool ("old" US management had unilaterally changed the formula when they presented their POR) and including the West pilots.

So you could say that the non-union employees benefited from the union's negotiations - the portion of any profit sharing left after each union's members had gotten their negotiated percentage was for the non-union folks. For the non-union folks on both sides, the company can split that piece of the profit sharing pie any way it wants since non-union folks don't have a contract.

For the union folks, it's a different story. Specific contracts have the profit sharing language - the East contracts. So it's up to the East unions and/or their members to decide whether to share their portion of the profit sharing. ALPA decided to share. AFA decided to share. Some of the others may have - I just don't know. Apparently the IAM has decided not to share until the appropriate employees on both sides are under the same contract.

It seems to me that those West employees now represented by the IAM have a choice. They can accept the East contract and take the bad along with the good of profit sharing, they can wait for a combined contract that includes profit sharing, or they can ask Doug to provide them with profit sharing. What they don't have the right to do is demand to remain under their contract with it's better provisions in many areas while demanding to participate in the desirable parts of the East contract at the East members expense.

Jim

 

[700AW]

the easties say if we want the profit sharing, negotiate for it, okay, then you can negotiate for everything that you lost, if it is as easy as that then you should get it....right?
is it far to say that under the bk the profit sharing was negotiated, was the profit sharing a replacement for the pensions that they dropped to the pbgc.
we want to keep our 401k and matching, will you allow us that????

 

[The Truth]

I can't speak for the company, but as someone not involved in the union, it is my assessment from viewing this thread that the company is only honoring the negotiated contract.

As Pitbull will tell you, it is imperative to honor all contracts. The company is only going by the contract that was agreed upon at the negotiation table. That doesn't exclude the IAM from assisting the West employees, but that is a union matter and should remain with the union. I would contact the union about this issue if it is important to you.

If I were a union leader, I would be more than willing to assist all of my colleagues, that is what unionism is all about in today's society. I am sure that the IAM will step up to the plate. The same way that the "concession stand was closed" slogan, which only did more harm than good, as the company was willing to give more than the IAM asked in their initial proposal.

 

[nethan]

Jim, quick question for you. I can't seem to find the language for BK2 but what was the outcome as far as the WO ALPA groups being included? We have been promised (har har) that we will be included in the profit sharing but even our management is saying they don't know how. I doubt we are being included by the AAA MEC out of their 30-something% piece of the pie along with the AWA group. I wonder now if we are in the same boat as the rest of the west groups who were promised it but so far have seen no action on it. Thanks for clearing that up if you can.

 

[BoeingBoy]

the easties say if we want the profit sharing, negotiate for it, okay, then you can negotiate for everything that you lost, if it is as easy as that then you should get it....right?

Which is (or should be) exactly what is happening in combined contract negotiations....

How many easties have you heard demanding that you give up some of your vacation so that they can have more? How many easties have you heard demanding that you pay more for medical coverage so that they can pay less? Pick any part of your contract that is better than the East - have you heard any eastie demanding that you give anything up so that they can get more?

All I've seen is people on both sides demanding better for everyone - not demanding that someone else give them part of what they have. Except for profit sharing.....

Jim

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

so I questioned YOUR statement about why are you posting what are the unions going to do about it, when there is nothing happening to do anything about.

See you are so selfish (even though you don't even work at U as you were let go) you are blinded. What is the unions common shout? Solidarity..unity in numbers. But you all you think about is me me me and screw everyone else let then fend for themselves. God forbid your blessed union lifts a finger to aid anyone else. You sir have only two agendas on this board. One defend the IAM at all costs no matter what and two boost your massive ego in your own eyes.

 

[Informed1]

Not only was the AFA MEC misquided by the newly voted in MEC Pres Mike, but worse, the MEC Pres never put that part out on the MEC E-line..nowhere was it written how a vote came about and that the East concession provision for profit sharing was given to the West. Flight attendants know about this through aviation. The MEC Pres said he would put it out a few months ago when I wrote him a scathing note, but as of late, no info on it.

I am sure when and IF there is a end of year net profit, he'll come out and wash it out with some lame comment about the profit sharing, but I doubt he will mention how the MEC came about a vote last January to leave the company off the hook, and share the East contract provision with the West f/as.

One MEC member gave me some excuse that even with a $300 million profit pull and 10% being about $30 million, with f/as part being 14.5% of that, that adding 3,000 more f/as to the appox. 4,600 from the East meant the difference of about $100 bucks less for each East f/a, and it was a non-issue.

Really? 🙄 How'd he come up with that when its driven by W-2.

Below you will find a link directing you to the e-line put out by our MEC explaning where the profit sharing plan came from and why the West f/as were included. We should all make sure we are completly informed before we spread rumors. It does nothing more than add to the problems we have already.

http://www.afausairways.org/Eline/aug29_06.htm

 

[320tech]

QUOTE(AIRWOMAN @ Dec 3 2006, 09:00 AM)
If someone could provide the profit sharing language in the east CBA, it would make this issue easier to discuss.

Even better would be for you to show us your contract language providing for profit sharing.

lets put it this way for you to understand, Airwoman was in a non union position until this merger and was forced into the IAM, the way the company is handling the profit sharing is that all non union people will get profit sharing so it is not just because your unions got it for you all non union people will get profit sharing and the west people that are union will get nothing! what a way to bring the groups together.

 

[PITbull]

I can't speak for the company, but as someone not involved in the union, it is my assessment from viewing this thread that the company is only honoring the negotiated contract.

As Pitbull will tell you, it is imperative to honor all contracts. The company is only going by the contract that was agreed upon at the negotiation table. That doesn't exclude the IAM from assisting the West employees, but that is a union matter and should remain with the union. I would contact the union about this issue if it is important to you.

If I were a union leader, I would be more than willing to assist all of my colleagues, that is what unionism is all about in today's society. I am sure that the IAM will step up to the plate. The same way that the "concession stand was closed" slogan, which only did more harm than good, as the company was willing to give more than the IAM asked in their initial proposal.

Well, you should know since you were at the IAM table back then, and you can and do speak for the company...

PITbull also posts that the West mechanics are in section 6 and the company should be providing the % amount for the West employees until such time THEY are covered by one CBA.

I JUST HOPE THAT THE IAM LEADERSHIP DEMAND THAT THE COMPANY EITHER A) WORK OUT TRANSITION AGREEMENT TO PLACE BOTH EAST AND WEST UNDER ONE CONTRACT WHERE THEY CAN THEN SHARE THE PROFIT SHARING POOL THAT WILL BE NEGOTIATED, OR...

B)DOUG, JERRY, AND YES...THAT IS AL H. GIVE THE WEST MECHANICS AND RELATED A PROFIT SHARING POOL THAT THEY ARE ENTITLED TO BY THIS MANAGMENT AND OUT OF YOUR BONUSES AND THE $8 BILLION EAR MARKED FOR MORE MERGERS!!!

OTHERWISE,IAM SHOULD NOT MOVE TO GIVE A PROPOSAL TO A GROUP THAT IS NOT COVERED UNDER THEIR CBA!!!!

If I were a West mechanic I would contact MY CEO AND SENIOR LABOR RELATIONS MANAGMENT TO provide a "profit sharing pool" that should be recognized and given by the company negotiators because the West deserve this compensation from the company...

As for you...go pound salt in a desert storm hanging on to a 6 ft. cactus! :angry:

 

[700AW]

Which is (or should be) exactly what is happening in combined contract negotiations....

How many easties have you heard demanding that you give up some of your vacation so that they can have more? How many easties have you heard demanding that you pay more for medical coverage so that they can pay less? Pick any part of your contract that is better than the East - have you heard any eastie demanding that you give anything up so that they can get more?

All I've seen is people on both sides demanding better for everyone - not demanding that someone else give them part of what they have. Except for profit sharing.....

Jim

exactly, but as the merger halted the sec6 talks and the nmb certifieing the iam, they were canceled, now that the iam are working on a transition into the east cba we have no way to negotiate anything for us, we are at the liberty of the iam to do what is right and try to get the best of both contracts ( which was the ibt's stance that we should force the compant to open a new sec6 so we could have a new cba, not a bk cba or one that is not amendable until 2009 or longer) if that makes sense..