Profit Sharing will shut airline if this happens!

[Phantom Fixer]

Just remember - including the West employees isn't costing the company a single dime. That money comes directly from the pockets of the East employee.

Just remember we all made this profit didn't we!! so it seems your taking money from us! if you want to put it your way. and as me being against the IAM, I and the rest of our techs on the west still want nothing to do with the IAM and it is even stronger after weve seen how they handle things. the best thing that can happe is this Delta stuff goes thru and the non union workforce gives them the boot! thats what the company wants!

A bitter pill for having poor representation on the West side of the coin , isn't it 320tech?

The East IAM'er's are going to gain NO MORE than what they negotiated for...and should expect NO LESS.

Your Beef is with DOOGIE...and your West Executives...Not the EAST or the IAM.

If you are inclined to mud-sling and pick fights...at least be attuned to whom is the real focal point of your anger.

BTW.....Thanks for Saving us in the East..as merging with us is the only thing that is keeping you around as well.

Volumns have been written about AWA true cash value prior to the merger...and Doogie and the Creditors saw a way to make two negatives what seems to be a positive for now....so when you examine the facts of everything involved..your anger and your perspectives on things , are both 180 degrees out from what's taking place here.

Take your frustraitions out while breaking torque on something...Not your fellow workers.

 

[PITbull]

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

First off, NEWBIE, this part of YOUR article:

"The Flight Attendant Transition Agreement was modeled largely after the ALPA Transition Agreement. The ALPA agreement was signed prior to the Company's emergence from bankruptcy and included some protections for US Airways East flying. The agreement protected flying based on the aircraft in the possession of each carrier at the time of the merger announcement. The ALPA agreement also provided that any new aircraft acquired during the period of separate operations would be placed on the US Airways operating certificate and flown by East crews. As you know, the Company will begin to acquire Embraer 190 aircraft later this year. ALPA and the Company agreed the 190 would be placed on mainline with the caveat that the pilot pay rates would be at a substantially lower rates than current mainline rates (even factoring in the gross weight).



That has nothing to do with "profit sharing" give a way. If you are going to lazy your way through negotiations, then why not have the ALPA MEC negotiate for AFA????? The profit pool is a different % driven by CBA concessions give, and ALPA got to keep their stock.

Further in the Aug E-line:


The ALPA Transition Agreement included the America West pilot into the profit sharing plan.

What does that have to do with AFA? Just cause ALPA sucked it up; so does AFA????

You further added:

With that as the backdrop, AFA began Transition Agreement negotiations. The MEC believed that a Transition Agreement was necessary to secure and also believed the agreement had to contain the following key components: (Really,who had convinced the MEC of this bullsh**)

AFA Mainline rates of pay for the Embraer 190 aircraft.
The hiring of our involuntary furloughed Flight Attendants at America West rather than "off the street hiring" at AWA during the period of separate operations. This provision would have to include the Company proposal that furloughed East Flight Attendants be entitled to use her/his US Airways longevity for pay and vacation and have immediate access to health and welfare benefits.
No fence provisions for PHX or any type of slotting for any transfers into PHX after integration
A commitment from the Company to negotiate a single collective bargaining agreement. We believed (and still do) that would be the best avenue to secure improvements in our contract.
A provision that the Company would pay the Union the costs and fees associated with the negotiation of single agreement including the Flight Pay loss for the negotiating committee. We did not believe member's dues money should pay for the merger process.
Reciprocal jumpseat for US Airways and Mid Atlantic Flight Attendants on America West flights.
During the negotiations process the Company agreed to all of the above items. As the negotiations dragged on the major stumbling block became the America West negotiations committee's reluctance to allow involuntary furloughed US Airways Flight Attendants to accept positions under the terms proposed and agreed to by our MEC and the Company.

The negotiations stalled to the point the Company told both groups that a Transition Agreement was not a necessary step in order to proceed with the merger. While it is true that without a Flight Attendant Transition Agreement our flying would have been protected, NONE of the other agreed to items in the agreement would be secured. All of those items would have to be negotiated at a latter date. The MEC was very concerned that loosing the mainline rates of pay on the EMB 190 would be a very hard to get in a merged contract in light of ALPA's earlier agreement to a lower pay scale for the EMB 190.

In early January the Company came to the negotiating committee with a proposal to include the America West Flight Attendants in the profit sharing plan. The Company's intent was to offer the America West leadership a benefit they could take back to their members. The America West leadership decided to accept the terms of the Transition Agreement if profit sharing was included for their membership. The negotiating committee weighed the decision to share the profit sharing, thus diluting the pool for our members, against the knowledge that absent that provision, the Transition Agreement would fall apart and we would lose all of the provisions that the committee and the MEC agreed were necessary to obtain.


THIS FEAR IS WHAT GOT YOU INTO TROUBLE AND WILL CONTINUE TO. This is NOT how you negotiate. The rates of pay comes from the company; and so does the profit sharing provision for the West. You fell for the bait, and failed to negotiate on behalf of the East to protect their provisons. All you did was trade one for the other (cost neutral, bozo) and brought this crap to the MEC with an ultimatim...your an ###.

Again, the e-line:

On January 8, 2006 the negotiating committee informed the MEC of the Company proposal to include the America West Flight Attendants in the profit sharing plan for 2006. During the next 5 days the negotiating committee talked to all members of the MEC and continued to update the MEC with the continuing proposals of the Transition Agreement that contained the profit sharing provision. The negotiating committee reached a tentative Transition Agreement with the Company and the America West negotiating committee on January 13. An MEC meeting was scheduled on January 16, 2006 to vote on whether to accept or reject the agreement.

So, what happened to the VFLR of 2006 and retirees, are they included???? Did you write an e-line regarding their inclusion or exclusion by the vote of the MEC?

The E-line is from the Master Executive Council, indicating that the entire issue falls on the voting members of the MEC when it was centered around the slanted information given by the MECP...

Isn't that so, Mr. NEWBIE??? I see you just joined. Guess you thought it better to start veiwing this board and what's said since you maybe looking from the OUTSIDE...IN, sooner rather than later!

 

[320tech]

A bitter pill for having poor representation on the West side of the coin , isn't it 320tech? No it isn't the IBT's fault we were forced into he IAM! who was the weeker union we didn't take any cuts or no lay offs!!

The East IAM'er's are going to gain NO MORE than what they negotiated for...and should expect NO LESS.

Your Beef is with DOOGIE...and your West Executives...Not the EAST or the IAM. This is a beef with the US Airways executives that said all us airways employees would get profit sharing after this merger! now the are putting it off on the unions.

If you are inclined to mud-sling and pick fights...at least be attuned to whom is the real focal point of your anger. I just posted the e-mail from AL and the east guys mainly 700 started slinging mud.

BTW.....Thanks for Saving us in the East..as merging with us is the only thing that is keeping you around as well.
we were making profits before the merger it was all just talk from Doug. he doesn't have a cristal ball that tells him what wll happen tomarrow.

Volumns have been written about AWA true cash value prior to the merger...and Doogie and the Creditors saw a way to make two negatives what seems to be a positive for now....so when you examine the facts of everything involved..your anger and your perspectives on things , are both 180 degrees out from what's taking place here.

Take your frustraitions out while breaking torque on something...Not your fellow workers.

I stand by my 1st posting and it wasn't an attack of the east side it was on the company and the union for not demanding it for all people. I stand by my statment that if it happens were the west side people are left out this airline will suffer in many ways, there will be no unity.

 

[Phantom Fixer]

I stand by my 1st posting and it wasn't an attack of the east side it was on the company and the union for not demanding it for all people. I stand by my statment that if it happens were the west side people are left out this airline will suffer in many ways, there will be no unity.

320tech...As long as you understand that your beef is with the Company..and the Union (IBT) that your current contract is administered by...Do what you think you have to do to gain your brand of justice. Just remember the old Chinese proverb...if at first you seek revenge , you have to dig two graves...or something along those lines.

I would not think that threats leading to what would be illegal job actions would bid well for the West Mechanics moving forward.

Think for a moment....You will in fact be a dues paying IAM Member at somepoint in this game...and with that being fact...More work will be coming in-house in regards to your B737-300's and the A320 Family at the minimum...likely some 757 work too.

Should the West throw a hissy fit over something they and the IBT failed to negotiate for?...you could hurt your chances for landing work in your own backyard. CLT and PIT can both handle more...and inspite of all the ill-tiddings we've endured , the work is still progressing at a very favorable clip.

In Short....Don't cut your own throat over a token sum in the long term.....unless you are close to winding up your career at HP/US anyway? If you are?...you might hurt the future of those in the West that are lower on the totum pole senority wise.


BTW...your comments about merging with Delta and tossing out the union is insanity. Delta is Non-Union...and they have lost TONS by virtue of the company snapping a finger after years of saying trust me to their Mech's. Well they did trust Management...I'll bet they won't again.

Before you bash the IAM and our concessions...Remember..it took a Rubber Stamp Judge whom represents the creditors to abrogate parts of our contract...and we still have more on the payroll than the West...and a profit sharing plan that is written in stone outside of any past Chapter 11 issues.

Look at the entire playing fieled before you jump to conclussions...as I'm inclined to believe that you are only speaking with emotion and anger in the nearest of terms.

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

Not the IAM's fault the ibt could not negotiate profit sharing or a raise while you were in section 6.

You know what from what YOU have told everyone the IAM's contract was abrogated pending a vote by the membership on a POS final term sheet that the company threw at the IAM's, feet

The IAM nor the negotiating team (that YOU were part of) had the balls to endorse nor denounce the term sheet. Then you say you voted no but the membership didn't have the balls to vote it down so they deserve what they got.

Now you have the nerve to come in here and act like the IAM negotiated the profit sharing plan for the membership when it was obviously written for all the unions as a me too type addon that company put in the term sheet just because they had it in all the other union term sheets.

You already came out and said the IAM had no part in that final POS term sheet. So get off your holier than thou the IAM negotiated profit sharing for it's membership, The IAM did worse then doing nothing at all.

Why wouldn't the IAM recommend a no vote?? It's not like the membership wouldn't get another chance to vote again to get it right, right? Or was the IAM confused between what no and yes really mean?

And you know what... Don't let the freaking facts or what the IAM did to it's membership get in your way.

And you know what else.. this ain't about YOU its about a UNION that you aren't even part of anymore.

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

I have a question. Since the West union employees were not part of concessions that the East side took and most East employees are saying the West should be excluded from the current East profit sharing plans doesn't it stand to reason when transition agreements are reached the West employees should be excluded from the profit sharing portion of the CBA's? After all everyones saying the West didn't suffer the concessions that the East did. So why should you ever give them a share? Why just exclude them one or two years go for the whole ball of wax.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Charlie,

That's why I tried to stress that concessions, layoff, pay cuts, etc are irrevelent to profit sharing at this point in time. While factors such as those were the backdrop of negotiations that produced the profit sharing contract language, all that matters at this point is the language of the various contracts.

Going forward, any union that doesn't negotiate combined contracts that contain at least the same profit sharing language as exists in the East contracts should be fired. The unions should do everything in their power to increase the percentage of profits that are shared with the employees, since there are now more employees than there were when the original language was negotiated.

One thing's for sure - as the company has gotten bigger the execs haven't been bashful about raising their compensation. Why should the employees be any different.

Jim

 

[700UW]

The IAM East M&R have 401k match plus a 3% DCP.

And the Charlie Tuna,


The IAM did negotiate parts of the final offer, the final offer you voted on was not the first offer the company gave to the union when the CBA was abrogated.

And in the previous CBA there was profit sharing NEGOTIATED by the IAM.

There was a split on the negotiating committee on what to recommend, CLT and PHL members wanted to vote it down and PIT was in favor of it so no recommendation was given to the membership, at the meetings I held I told them how I was voting and why.

And once again you try to make it about me and not the issue at hand. I guess that is your only MO and shows what you are all about.

The issue is the westies want to take money out of the east workers wallets, from their families and take food of thier table when not one west worker took a concession from the Chapter 11 case. And like Boeing Boy says, why doesnt the west pony up some vacation and sick pay since you have more then the East?

Have not seen one Eastie asking you for anything yet the West shows their greed by wanting something for nothing.

 

[delldude]

I stand by my 1st posting and it wasn't an attack of the east side it was on the company and the union for not demanding it for all people. I stand by my statment that if it happens were the west side people are left out this airline will suffer in many ways, there will be no unity.

Dude..how can a union demand and include what you refer to when at the time,AWA wasn't even on the radar?
I remember a new guy at U who was hired after lengthly negotiations whining to me about IAM not willing to walk over a lower pay scale for mechanics who weren't even hired at the time of ratification.WTF...DUH...

 

[Phantom Fixer]

I have a question. Since the West union employees were not part of concessions that the East side took and most East employees are saying the West should be excluded from the current East profit sharing plans doesn't it stand to reason when transition agreements are reached the West employees should be excluded from the profit sharing portion of the CBA's? After all everyones saying the West didn't suffer the concessions that the East did. So why ever give them a share?

Charlie....I for one DO NOT agree with the West not being part of the profit sharing...as to be honest , I thought "THE COMPANY" was going to reward everyone as a whole until recently. I had NO idea that the WEST was being excluded in any fashion until recently.

As it has been pointed out...This is the COMPANY playing it foot loose and fancy free with what suits them...a divide on conquer move if thier ever was one.

My issue is in this whole shabang is the West people wrongfully blaiming the IAM and the EAST rank and file for something that they (The WEST IBT) weren't apart of at the time. Our Dues paid for our representation in all this...as the West dues paid for what they have...or have failed to obtain along the way.

IMHO...Both sides of this coin have had what I'd call major oversights in regards to terms and conditions that they negotiated..or failed to negotiate...but hopefully WE will all be smarter the next go around as a unified group. This is the best we can hope for in real lasting terms.

Moving forward...if "The Company" is interested in keeping peace?...it's clearly up to them to pony up the funds to keep one and all happy , as many assumed they were talking about doing. This is in fact the only equitable thing to do on the companies part...more directly DOOGIES part.

By talking about Taking away from the EASTies..to appease the Westies, this will ony create the same anger in reverse...and face it , The EAST outnumbers the West by a damnsight in real numbers. This could cripple any peacefull and meaningfull future going forward.

Face it boys and girls...The days of the IBT Vs.IAM are OVER , that ship has sailed...it's Now all about US as Labor Vs. those that would love nothing more than to see a house divided harm us all in terms of pay , benefits , scope and all the things that one voice of unity attempts to protect us with.

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

One thing's for sure - as the company has gotten bigger the execs haven't been bashful about raising their compensation. Why should the employees be any different.

Jim

Jim,

As usual even with a highy charged topic such as this your voice stands out as a the voice of reason.

And you don't even work there anymore
Kudos

 

[Mr Eagle]

Charlie....I for one DO NOT agree with the West not being part of the profit sharing...as to be honest , I thought "THE COMPANY" was going to reward everyone as a whole until recently. I had NO idea that the WEST was being excluded in any fashion until recently.


IMHO...Both sides of this coin have had what I'd call major oversights in regards to terms and conditions that they negotiated..or failed to negotiate...but hopefully WE will all be smarter the next go around as a unified group. This is the best we can hope for in real lasting terms.

Moving forward...if "The Company" is interested in keeping peace?...it's clearly up to them to pony up the funds to keep one and all happy , as many assumed they were talking about doing. This is in fact the only equitable thing to do on the companies part...more directly DOOGIES part.

By talking about Taking away from the EASTies..to appease the Westies, this will ony create the same anger in reverse...and face it , The EAST outnumbers the West by a damnsight in real numbers. This could cripple any peacefull and meaningfull future going forward.

Face it boys and girls...The days of the IBT Vs.IAM are OVER , that ship has sailed...it's Now all about US as Labor Vs. those that would love nothing more than to see a house divided harm us all in terms of pay , benefits , scope and all the things that one voice of unity attempts to protect us with.

Face it boys and girls...The days of the IBT Vs.IAM are OVER , that ship has sailed...it's Now all about US as Labor Vs. those that would love nothing more than to see a house divided harm us all in terms of pay , benefits , scope and all the things that one voice of unity attempts to protect us with.

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

And in the previous CBA there was profit sharing NEGOTIATED by the IAM.

And once again you try to make it about me and not the issue at hand. I guess that is your only MO and shows what you are all about.

Wrong again...you are trying to make this about me making this about you. With your huge ego you want everything about you but it just isn't so.

The topic I was talking about was the UNION. Yes I was off topic and you responded to my topic. So does that your response on topic or do 2 wrongs still make a wrong? You can't have it both ways.

Pleae tell me what my MO is and what I am (theres a space there between I and am) all about. We konw your MO AND YOUR AGENDA which is spelled.. IAM defend no matter what

The previous CBA was Abrogated pending a vote. What part don't you understand?

Don't let the facts get in way.

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

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?

Nope its not easy... is it easier to take something that isn't yours then to fight for what is right?

 

[PITbull]

Nope its not easy... is it easier to take something that isn't yours then to fight for what is right?

Bingo! B)