Teamsters "raiding" TWU?

[swamt]

You are one damn good AMFA organizer.

Keep up the great work!

Hence why I keep telling him to keep on posting. Gotta love this stuff.

 

[Anomaly]

Hence why I keep telling him to keep on posting. Gotta love this stuff.

On the subject of amfa's choice to extend the 2004 agreement rather than negotiate it as promised during the earlier campaign;

At year end in 2004 Southwest had 417 aircraft and provided service to 60 airports in 31 states and they were still growing. Operating revenues were up 10% over 2003 and SWA enjoyed a profit of $313 million for the year. Southwest had contractual obligations and commitments primarily with regard to future purchases of aircraft, payment of debt, and lease arrangements. Along with the receipt of 47 new 737-700 aircraft in 2004 (one of which was leased), the Company exercised its remaining options for aircraft to be delivered in 2005, and several more options for aircraft to be delivered in 2006.

The following two sites are WN's 2004 presentation to stockholders and employees and the second one is their actual 10K Securities Exchange Commission filings.

http://www.airtimes....t/ar/wn2004.pdf
http://www.getfiling...-05-002093.html

swamt, you were apparently mislead in to believing that amfa did something for you, but all along your airline was extending your contract so it could purchase more aircraft among other things.

In fourth quarter 2004, Southwest was selected as the winning bidder at a bankruptcy-court approved auction for certain ATA Airlines, Inc. (ATA) assets. As part of the transaction, which was approved in December 2004, Southwest agreed to pay $40 million for certain ATA assets, consisting of the rights to six of ATA’s leased Chicago Midway Airport gates and the rights to a leased aircraft maintenance hangar at Chicago Midway Airport. An initial payment of $34 million in December 2004 is classified as an intangible asset and is included in “Other assets” in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. In addition, Southwest provided ATA with $40 million in debtor-in-possession financing while ATA remains in bankruptcy, and has also guaranteed the repayment of an ATA construction loan to the City of Chicago for $7 million. And there is more...

Fuel hedging created a gain in 2004 of $455 million and there was a smaller gain of $13 million due to company reorganizing.

Do you want to know how much your officers, board of directors and CEO made during the year amfa extended your contract?

As for Alaska, they did negotiate the number two agreement....for about three months. Both CO and UA agreements are higher than them but still sets the mechanics on the top part of the middle for consideration with their mid term pay adjustment review which we will be hearing about any day now. The argument they have to find is one that overcomes their current position. Unless the AA mechanics can get a huge raise in the next few hours, I have my doubts for Alaska. Unfortunate. Alaska has some good mechanics.

Like my last post, this too is factual and verifiable. I even offer you the sites to check it out for yourself. Where is your proof that any of this is untrue?

 

[TWU informer]

Anomaly the Liar,

I have another question for you. Since you have been spewing on this forum that the ibt would be for Date of Hire in seniority integration, why is it not an option on the UAL emnployee survey?

http://surveygoldplus.com/s/2B85473BE6084779/35.htm

You surely were not a liar about this too?

 

[Overspeed]

Just think, if he is willing to give up $15/hr, settle for just one week of vacation for the next five years, with just 5 paid holidays, (but only paid at half pay if he is assigned to work), and settle for just five sick days he too can buy the right to call himself a Union Mechanic at American Airlines for only $700/year (after taxes). (In other words if he wanted to give up his non-union job and go work Union at AA as a mechanic he would neeed to accept at least a $32,000/year paycut, and thats if he was hired at Top Pay. Do you blame him for not wanting a Union? )

I don't know where he works but if it is FedEx (which would be about their pay rate) they outsource huge amounts of work. You can have their wages but you also have to accept their level of outsourcing. Given that you probably wouldn't be working at AA under their level of outsourcing Bob.

You need to tell the whole story Bob. Yes he would make $32K less a year however if you put their work rules and outsourcing in place here at AA, then about 6,000 would make $74K less a year because they would be unemployed.

 

[lineguy43]

Of course UPS is much more in line with you. Yes, I have read these threads. Unfortunately sarcasm is a bit hard to write in to a post, but I did get you to admit the points I wanted to focus on. Thanks.

Yep thats true just goes to show you that you do not need a union to make superior wages and bennies. But I will be the first to admit they pay me this wage to keep the unions out. I will also admit my current wage is more a direct result of AMFA at NWA than any other reason.

 

[Anomaly]

Yep thats true just goes to show you that you do not need a union to make superior wages and bennies. But I will be the first to admit they pay me this wage to keep the unions out. I will also admit my current wage is more a direct result of AMFA at NWA than any other reason.

I disagree. I think union wages are what drove the wages and benefits up in this and many other industries. Non union companies like yours are paying the competing wages as much to keep unions out, as they are to keep skilled employees like yourself in.

A question does arise from your response; how do you consider amfa at NWA had anything to do with your salary?

 

[Anomaly]

Anomaly the Liar,

I have another question for you. Since you have been spewing on this forum that the ibt would be for Date of Hire in seniority integration, why is it not an option on the UAL emnployee survey?

http://surveygoldplu...E6084779/35.htm

You surely were not a liar about this too?

And I still believe date of hire will be the case because of the Federal Court issue against UAL. I do not believe at the end of the day there will be any choice.

But still, the Teamsters have gone ahead and allowed the full membership to weigh in on the subject and offered a vehicle to get this done.

So you think asking the membership what they think is a bad thing? Would you suggest something different like maybe an observer to run back and inform the rest of us?

Actually, judging by the amfa negotiating team at SWA, your opposition to including the full membership makes perfect sense.

We do things differently here with the Teamsters. At UA, we insist on being part of the process and the Teamsters allow us to do this.

By the way, if you read the survey more carefully, you will notice that it is based on date of hire. The questions on the survey relate to doing something other than that. Again, I am happy the Teamsters reached out to the full membership.

Too bad you disagree with this.

 

[swamt]

I disagree. I think union wages are what drove the wages and benefits up in this and many other industries. Non union companies like yours are paying the competing wages as much to keep unions out, as they are to keep skilled employees like yourself in.

A question does arise from your response; how do you consider amfa at NWA had anything to do with your salary?

Just like all of us have told you, AMFA started the huge increases in our industry. All the other unions just used what AMFA started to gain increases at their airlines. BTW. genius, he is x-NWA.
Both DL and FX have always kept up or within reason of the unionized carriers to keep the unions out.

 

[swamt]

And I still believe date of hire will be the case because of the Federal Court issue against UAL. I do not believe at the end of the day there will be any choice.

But still, the Teamsters have gone ahead and allowed the full membership to weigh in on the subject and offered a vehicle to get this done.

So you think asking the membership what they think is a bad thing? Would you suggest something different like maybe an observer to run back and inform the rest of us?

Actually, judging by the amfa negotiating team at SWA, your opposition to including the full membership makes perfect sense.

We do things differently here with the Teamsters. At UA, we insist on being part of the process and the Teamsters allow us to do this.

By the way, if you read the survey more carefully, you will notice that it is based on date of hire. The questions on the survey relate to doing something other than that. Again, I am happy the Teamsters reached out to the full membership.

Too bad you disagree with this.

Once again, another "action speaks louder than words". The teamsters are once again copying AMFA's way of doing things. The teamsters actually polled the members. Never happend here with the teamsters. The actions as of late by the teamsters ate copying the exact same way AMFA is operated. Now that speaks volumes. And as Visa would say, "priceless"...

 

[Anomaly]

Once again, another "action speaks louder than words". The teamsters are once again copying AMFA's way of doing things. The teamsters actually polled the members. Never happend here with the teamsters. The actions as of late by the teamsters ate copying the exact same way AMFA is operated. Now that speaks volumes. And as Visa would say, "priceless"...

Sure. You go ahead and believe that one pal, while I go make myself a drink and laugh at you....

Have a good night and a nice weekend swamt.

 

[Anomaly]

Just like all of us have told you, AMFA started the huge increases in our industry. All the other unions just used what AMFA started to gain increases at their airlines. BTW. genius, he is x-NWA.
Both DL and FX have always kept up or within reason of the unionized carriers to keep the unions out.

psssst....swa and ups were at the top of the game for years before amfa came in to the picture.

and I read many pages threads back that he was former nwa, but being a guy who was thrown to the curb by amfa does automatically mean you get the big money. Again, what does amfa have to do with him making a higher salary now?? Other than they foolishly handled the whole disaster, absolutely nothing.

ok, now go back to your nice weekend.

 

[Anomaly]

Again Anomaly, not made up. Lived it. We had outsiders at the table as lead negos. CAL also had outsiders nego for them as well. With the closed door to negos that the teamsters always use while nego contracts is how and why the teamsters can work out "behind closed door deals" with the company in a private hotel room. This was in fact done (as we have already proven) and will more than likely be brought up in the webinar. The same shanigans were also played out over at CAL.

I can never get enough of your "TRUTHFUL" opinions....

For the 90th time, because you see things differently does not make you more right, or even sane.

Just as a point of example, both SWA and UAL are in negotiations.

This is the FULL list of voting negotiators at SWA

http://www.amfa18.or...ns Update 1.pdf

Earl Clark –Region 1 Director

Jack Coonrod – Region II Director

Bob Cramer – Airline Representative Local 18

Nino DiMaggio – Airline Representative Local 11

Mike Young – Airline Representative Local 32

Besides these 5 deciding AMFA International and Local Officers, rank and file members are invited to join and participate on a non voting basis at their own individual expense where adequate facilities and time are provided.

This is the FULL list of voting negotiators at UAL

http://www.teamster....eptember-6-2012

Bob Clever - IAH

Michael Nerren - IAH

Vinny Graziano - EWR

Steve Olsen - EWR

Paul Becerra - MCO

Mike Moats - CLE

Jay Koreny - IAD

Mitch Hunt - DEN

Mike Pecoraro - ORD

Mark DesAngeles- SFO

Joe Prisco - SFO

Anthony Ybarra - LAX

John Pangelian - GUM

These men are Stewards or rank and file members who will fall under and be bound by the terms of the agreement they decide on.

They are assisted by 12 Business Agents, 3 Airline Reps and a Legal Attorney present at each meeting. If there is a subject to be decided by vote, only the 13 members named above are allowed to vote. If there is a decision to be made among the 13 voting members, all other IBT reps are asked to leave the room while the voting members discuss or debate in private what the outcome will be. All members are provided transportation to and from the neutral negotiations site, offered per-diem and hotel as needed, and compensated for any lost time attributed for participating in the meetings.

With the IBT; rank and file members decide the contract and are assisted by the officers and staff. Not the other way around as it is practiced in amfa.

This system is not new to UAL, but has been in place for many years and practiced for many IBT contracts

Some of you guys are expressing if AMFA can handle the greiv. and arbitration cases when they take over at AA. Just to let you know; AMFA has handled numerous upon numerous arbitrations since the teamsters got fired. Matter fact, AMFA has done more arbitraded cases at SWA in under 10 years than the teamsters handled in there almost 30 years at SWA. What does that tell ya?? The teamsters would always just let the company do what it wants and never take a stand against them. At the time, the teamsters had company yes men at the helm for the teamsters, and there for awhile, nothing was grieved or challenged for many many years. These type of folks are currently in management positions for the company. It is built into AMFA's constitution that you cannot take a company position for at least 2 years after being a union rep or officer.
This former teamster BA will in fact feed you guys the truth of how the teamsters really operate on the insides, especially at their upper officers level, it will be an eye opener for all.
Hey "Scab Supporter" (Anomaly) It would be worth your time to tune in and really see this. Matter fact I recomend you ask any questions about ANYTHING that you have been spreading on this forum, which is all lies and faulse mis-represented infomation.

Per your own amfa organizing web page,

http://www.amfanatio...page=Organizing

the organizing ventures of amfa rely on grass roots and "fundamental philosophies." This can include any statement by any person in order to get you to sign a card. It does not have to be true or factual, but it can be the opinion of the grass roots "organizer." Even you, swamt, are immune from fact according to amfa history. You may or may not be correct on the argument that amfa has arbitrated more grievances in it's 10 years than the IBT did in it's 30, but I find it suspicious at best. Can you supply proof of this statement? Can you provide proof that the IBT did in fact ignore or refused to proceed with legitimately filed grievances?

Was there ever a complaint to the DOL filed for this refusal? But lets say you are correct, and there were few IBT grievances filed for the reasons you claim.

I do not argue that there may have been Stewards within your ranks that were friendly to and may have been looking for positions with management. This unfortunately has happened at every union I have been with (and amfa's constitution barring this action does nothing if not introduced in the contract, which it is not). Company YES men will always be around, but will only get away with their bad behavior if people like you allow them to. You can not hide behind a constitution in this. But do you have proof the IBT elected leadership, or International stood by and allowed violations of the negotiated contract? Did YOU try to point this out at the time?

Statements like what you said above more often than not tend to be from those who believe someone was not doing their job well enough, but refuses to step up themselves. Or, just as likely, these types of statements come from one who continual lives life from the sidelines careful to throw stones at the appropriate time while never getting his own hands dirty. Or maybe you are just angry because you felt ignored for one reason or another and none of what you said is actually true??

If you were there while the company was violating the contract, did YOU grieve or challenge? If you did, do you have a written record of this? If you did nothing.....WHY?

Still waiting for a response......

 

[swamt]

Sure. You go ahead and believe that one pal, while I go make myself a drink and laugh at you....

Have a good night and a nice weekend swamt.

It's true. They never once polled us at SWA. Not even for contract nego's. Just reporting as we lived it while the teamsters were here, so how can you tell me to believe it, we lived it.

 

[Overspeed]

Just like all of us have told you, AMFA started the huge increases in our industry. All the other unions just used what AMFA started to gain increases at their airlines. BTW. genius, he is x-NWA.
Both DL and FX have always kept up or within reason of the unionized carriers to keep the unions out.

But you are working under an extended IBT contract. AMFA did not negotiate your wages, but they did extend them in exchange for outsourcing work to El Salvador. Nice job.

 

[TWU informer]

But you are working under an extended IBT contract. AMFA did not negotiate your wages, but they did extend them in exchange for outsourcing work to El Salvador. Nice job.

In contrast, TWU after taking industry leading concessions in 2003 for 9 years, just lost the pensions, retirement medical, and 35% outsourcing, along with thousands fo jobs lost.

Maybe extending the SWA agreement in 2004 compared to what the TWU did was a damn smart move.

Great job?