TWU and IAM representation alliance vote

[NYer]

 
If they use the SSN instead of the age rule that's in place at AA, there will be some change in seniority. Numbers are not sequential so it won't be fair to an AA employee which uses age as the tie breaker.

 
It won't change anything for TWU Members in their current standing. The SSN will used only when an IAM Member has the same Classification and Date of Hire as a TWU and in that case the SSN would be used. Those TWU Members in the same class, will continue to be in the spots as they are today, relative to the other in their class. The TWU will not be reshuffled according to SSN.
 
This is the least disruptive way for each side.

 

[Slopoke]

 
Their seniority will not change.
 
As an example, if there are two IAM Members with the same exact 12/26/95 seniority and they're placed 1 and 2 based on their SSN then they also remain in those positions relative to each. Where the tie breaker comes in, is when the IAM Members are placed in the AA seniority list where their SSN will used to place them among the 150.
 
 

 
 

 
It won't change anything for TWU Members in their current standing. The SSN will used only when an IAM Member has the same Classification and Date of Hire as a TWU and in that case the SSN would be used. Those TWU Members in the same class, will continue to be in the spots as they are today, relative to the other in their class. The TWU will not be reshuffled according to SSN.
 
This is the least disruptive way for each side.

 
Well in your first post quoted above you stated that the AA employee will use their SSN to combine with the 150 and the order of the 150 won't change. So how do you keep a younger AA person with a lower number leapfrogging above an older AA employee with a higher number, the SSN order of the AA people are not in sequential order. Either way someone will be affected, if age is used a US Airways person will be affected, if SSN is used an AA person will be affected.

 

[OldGuy@AA]

 
Quite obviously you're using your own dictionary in reading certain posts. I'd rather have the current CS Policy rather than the current IAM contractual language. In the Association, there is a better change to keep the current CS Policy rather than being forced into a more restrictive process. If there are changes to come to that then it would be done in a JCBA. Either way, we have a better chance to keep the CS Policy as is, with the Association than without it.
 
And no, I didn't say we were better off not having contractual language. I said we're better off not having the IAM contractual language as opposed to the current CS Policy.
 
I know you guys salivate when you believe you found a "smoking gun" to try and discredit someone that doesn't agree with your views. (and THAT'S the definition of a cult). But you should really take the time to read the actual words instead of creating your own to fit the agenda.
 
You know when you get the feeling that the posts are making headway and are effective. When the aim of the debate turns towards the person instead of the argument. When the words are twisted to try and create a different meaning. Thank you, for showing me the information shared is effective, but attacking me doesn't do a thing to make your points. It just creates hatred towards another union member simply because he doesn't agree. That's too bad.

In the first place Bob Owens has been on the front lines looking out for us all and although I do not agree with him that the TWU can be fixed, I have the utmost respect for him and he has shown his loyalty to his membership time and time again.  There is no hatred for you here, there is just frustration due to a constant barrage of apologetics for the TWU from you.  You even have a problem with the obvious... That the TWU orchestrated the yes vote on the TA by including a buyout package that convinced many to vote yes in order to prosper by it.  Nobody who Is going to be gone should be able to carry a TA that will punish the rest of us who will still be here.  Bob agrees with that but you don't.  The reason you don't is that the vote went your way and it doesn't bother you that many of your yes votes no longer work for AA.  Bob Owens has been in a leadership position for many years and always has been honest and his posts here will verify that.  The only agenda Bob has is to make things better for all of us.  We are not sure what your agenda is.

 

[scorpion 2]

Well, I guess that time frame by which all this was negotiated isn't important, but the facts clearly shows all the Equity was negotiated as agreed to before any CBA by any union was ratified which means the 17% needed by all the unions in the BK was already set and the Equity was already negotiated. Subsequently, the APA turned down their initial TA, their contract abrogated and they came back to vote on a second TA with the same 17% in cuts and 13.5% in Equity.
 
The Me Too was agreed to when the concessions were still supposed to be 20%, since it went down to 17% we also regained 3% of the concessions including the already agreed to Equity.
 
Nice try...

Don't worry the international guy on the equity committee didn't have a clue either. What does the me too (in your opinion) being agreed to when the concessions were 20% have to do with anything? That doesn't even make sense. Lets face it the twu (Little) was just trying to blow smoke up our arses.

 

[NYer]

 
 
 
Well in your first post quoted above you stated that the AA employee will use their SSN to combine with the 150 and the order of the 150 won't change. So how do you keep a younger AA person with a lower number leapfrogging above an older AA employee with a higher number, the SSN order of the AA people are not in sequential order. Either way someone will be affected, if age is used a US Airways person will be affected, if SSN is used an AA person will be affected.

 
That's not what the first quote says.
 
The SSN will not be used by TWU, it will be used by the IAM to dovetail their Members into our current list.
 
The perception that TWU Members will be reshuffled according to SSN is not accurate.

 

[NYer]

In the first place Bob Owens has been on the front lines looking out for us all and although I do not agree with him that the TWU can be fixed, I have the utmost respect for him and he has shown his loyalty to his membership time and time again.  There is no hatred for you here, there is just frustration due to a constant barrage of apologetics for the TWU from you.  You even have a problem with the obvious... That the TWU orchestrated the yes vote on the TA by including a buyout package that convinced many to vote yes in order to prosper by it.  Nobody who Is going to be gone should be able to carry a TA that will punish the rest of us who will still be here.  Bob agrees with that but you don't.  The reason you don't is that the vote went your way and it doesn't bother you that many of your yes votes no longer work for AA.  Bob Owens has been in a leadership position for many years and always has been honest and his posts here will verify that.  The only agenda Bob has is to make things better for all of us.  We are not sure what your agenda is.

 
Correct.I don't agree. I certainly have more faith in the Membership and their ability to realize the consequences of voting no on a bankruptcy contract. We weren't in regular negotiations and the outcome of a no vote isn't to go back and have the pot "sweetened." That was apparent with the APA turning down their 17% cuts, having their CBA abrogated and coming back to accept a deal with the same 17% in cuts. I'm sure Bob will chime in and tell us the 17% the pilots gave up was a clever ruse by the APA and AA in which they tricked the other unions, all the Secured and Unsecured Creditors, their financial experts and their lawyers.If you choose to believe that conspiracy theory then that is your choice, but it is being done without a shred of fact.
 
You can raise Bob on your shoulders all you want, especially if you believe he deserves it but it is highly suspect that anyone that doesn't agree with Bob is anti-union, a communist, a Marxist or any other label that suits the need. That type of reaction to those that disagree with a certain point of view has many names....and objective is not one of them.

 

[NYer]

Don't worry the international guy on the equity committee didn't have a clue either. What does the me too (in your opinion) being agreed to when the concessions were 20% have to do with anything? That doesn't even make sense. Lets face it the twu (Little) was just trying to blow smoke up our arses.

 
The amount quoted by the airline as their target savings from all the unions was 20%. Some of the TWU Title groups had agreements with the 20% total, while others were still struggling to reach that amount as well as that APFA. The APA was then offered the 17%. Those 20% agreements were modified to instead equal 17% because of the Me Too agreement.

 

[Slopoke]

 
That's not what the first quote says.
 
The SSN will not be used by TWU, it will be used by the IAM to dovetail their Members into our current list.
 
The perception that TWU Members will be reshuffled according to SSN is not accurate.

 
 
OK if that is the case, where would the two IAM members be placed among the 150 TWU represented members? The SSN serial numbers of the TWU side are going to be all over the place, they won't be in sequential order, or ascending or descending order.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

 
...The PEB, which is something that will never come to a legacy airline again would have at the very worst been at the levels of the Tentative Agreement which were available before the BK was filed....

 
"Something that will never come to a legacy airline again"?
 
So besides the PEB at AA, there was the PEB for NWA mechanics, and the PEB for UAL mechanics. All these occurred when the industry was far more fragmented, yet according to you, now that the industry has consolidated, and the surviving carriers  dominate the majority of domestic air travel,....a PEB is "something that will never come to a legacy airline again"?
 
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

 

[scorpion 2]

The amount quoted by the airline as their target savings from all the unions was 20%. Some of the TWU Title groups had agreements with the 20% total, while others were still struggling to reach that amount as well as that APFA. The APA was then offered the 17%. Those 20% agreements were modified to instead equal 17% because of the Me Too agreement.

I'm talking about the me-too (equity) scam perpetrated by the alliance partner the twu. You have so many on going arguments on this board you cant keep them straight. Are you on someone's payroll and getting paid by the post?

 

[swamt]

"Something that will never come to a legacy airline again"?
 
So besides the PEB at AA, there was the PEB for NWA mechanics, and the PEB for UAL mechanics. All these occurred when the industry was far more fragmented, yet according to you, now that the industry has consolidated, and the surviving carriers  dominate the majority of domestic air travel,....a PEB is "something that will never come to a legacy airline again"?
 
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

True that...

 

[Bob Owens]

There was no Section 1113 when CO IAM went on strike. Section 1113 was enacted by Congress because before then there were no negotiations when a company wanted to abrogate a CBA, it was treated like every other type of contract and they were abrogated.
Tell the whole truth Bob, not bits and pieces. You truly lose credibility with your half truth posts.

What are you talking about? 1113 applies to all labor contracts, nowhere in there does it say that contracts can be abrogated and workers cant strike.

 

[700UW]

Bob stop playing games.

You know the history behind 1113 there was no 1113 when the IAM went on strike against Lorenzo. Two courts have ruled bankruptcy law trumps the RLA.

And I know Sharon explained it quite clear to you.

So where did you get your JD at?

 

[737823]

I think you are obtuse.

Show me one lie, you are just like Overspeed.

I write one thing and you claim that I wrote something else, and then say I'm wrong or I lied.

Imagine that, someone who claims to be a labor leader saying that unless a law explicitly says you have the right to strike that you cant strike, its the opposite, the right to strike exists unless there is a specific restriction against it.

The RLA says that if carriers unilaterally change rates of pay or working conditions workers under the RLA can strike, other than BK how else could a carrier legally unilaterally change pay and working conditions? Legislation says we can strike but a Judicial decision says we cant sttike until we exhaust the Section 6 process.


Sharon told us no such thing because its not true. The laws are equal, however the appelate courts ruling trumps the law, and it wasnt the BK court that made the ruling.

First off I didnt say that 1113 existed back in 1983, you say I said it.

Are you sure the Unions were decertified by the Judge? Their contracts with the company was wiped out and maybe Lorenzo refused to negotiate with the Union but thats not a decertification. The members decertify, not the company. Are you claiming that BK courts have the right to decertify unions as the Collective Bargaining Agent? Once again, show me where 1113 says that workers can not strike if their contract is abrogated. I know that there was no 1113 in 1983 but show me where it says that Unions cant strike if their contract is abrogated. Even the judge in the NWA BK case said they could strike, it was another court that issued the injunction, you should know that.

You did go through this twice right?

You admitted a while back that you left USAIR, after you helped usher in two rounds of concessions, so who do you work for now?

Josh

 

[Bob Owens]

 

 It help each side keep the process their familiar with, as an example the Grievance process will still be argued by those directly elected by the TWU...and the same time when it comes to collective barganing is also helps to have a united front going for an industry leading contract.
 
We should be United in one Union, not split between two, on system Boards the Association will determine who sits on the board, at present in Maint if its a line issue the board member comes from 591. If this deal was really for the members they would welcome a vote. 
 
 The IAM can keep their IAMNPF and the TWU can keep their 401K, if that's what they choose. 
 
 
​Nowhere in any document does it say that, in fact the Pension document explicitly says they will seek to put us all in the IAMNPF. Nowhere in there does it say that members can choose individually to either stay in the 401 K or go to the iAMNPF.
 
One thing that is obvious is that NYer is on a mission to sell this Association, to do so he will lie, make things up and when all is said and done 
 
. --Funny, you've been arguing against the current process of negotiations and have blamed other Presidents, other Title groups and International Reps for the perceived interference in negotiations. Are you now saying you'd prefer the current system and process. If the TWU and/or the IAM process is not to your liking there is sufficient time to get enough cards to bring in a more palpable option of your choice.
 
No I'm showing that you are wrong and putting out misinformation. 
 
 
Under the Association they can transfer members back and forth between unions at will. Wow. It's not "at will" there is a process and there is participation from both sides in that process.
 
 
Both "sides" but neither the membership or the Locals have any say in it.
 
. --The tie-breaker will not re-shuffle everyone as all the TWU Members will remain in their current positions relative to each other. The tie-breaker comes in when an IAM Member has the same Classification and Date of Hire as the TWU Member, in which case the SSN will used in to keep the IAM Members in their current positions are related to each other. The alternative is to not have an agreement and take out chances with an Arbitrator. How's that worked in recent times?
 
 
Show us where you see that. See you come here under an alias, make all sorts of claims, then when it turns out to be a lie simply change your alias. 
 
 
 
 Then getting to a JCBA should be the priority and not having union Members fighting each other. When the TWU was first formed and was part of the CIO, they partnered with the IAM and were included into the AFL. That partnership in the past was positive, there is no reason this partnership can't also be positive. Bob may want to bring the negative of everything done by the TWU, but he also cherishes the ability to represent his Members. With the Association he and his Members are guaranteed to be able to continue that partnership. Is it really favorable to take a change a lose that while at the same time letting the IAM take over. It doesn't seem logical, especially if you love Bob so much.
 
You keep harping on the chance that the IAM could win, with one third the members its likely they would not even be able to get a showing of interest to  get on the ballot unless the TWU agreed to help them. 
 
 --And if the Association gives all Mechanics Industry Leading Wages, something that been sought after for so long, will you agree you were wrong. (of course, knowing your history there will certainly be something to rile against even if the number one issue is addressed)
 
yes and we know how you will define industry leading, you will get a $10 cola for the mechanics in Hawaii, the fact that we don't have mechanics in Hawaii wouldn't stop you from claiming that we have an industry leading contract. Its only industry leading if we all end up with industry leading. 

 

Its obvious that NYer, whoever he is, is on a Mission to sell this deal,(with 700 along for the ride as well) he will lie, twist and simply make things up to sell this Alliance, and of course he will do it from behind an alias so if he is successful and this deal goes through and all his lies are exposed his alias can simply disappear and nobody can hold him accountable. The pension document clearly states that they intend to negotiate us all in the IAMNPF, nowhere in there does it say anything about trying to give us the option to keep the 401K match or go to the $2X 20280 hour fixed contribution. He made  that up. The Association document also states they can switch members back and forth with no input from the members, in fact when you read the document everything covered is without any input from the members or the elected local leaders. 
 
If I believed that this ASSOCIATION was capable of producing a true industry leading contract I would favor it, but only a fool would believe that. We saw what the IAM agreed to with a company that was posting billions in profits, and they had no one to blame.