TWU and IAM representation alliance vote

[Bob Owens]

Have to give you this one Bob. I certainly didn't think it out too well when I drew up my analogy. So I'm guessing that you feel the better solution is to have that fight and also maybe have a good portion of our combined group hating each other because they lost? I guess that you're ok with that collateral damage and having even more people among the combined group having no interest in being a part of any future efforts by whatever union we end up with?

You're a student of Labor and you know that their influence has been getting weaker for too many years now. If not forming and supporting alliances Bob then what's your solution to stop the hemorrhaging? Do you have a better idea?

I can't do anything now but wait to see like everyone else how the Leaders handle this. Maybe it's just Political theater or maybe it is something worse? We'll see? I don't think the IAM is going to back out like you want and I think it would take both groups wanting to, to invalidate the agreement? And I guess those gains that are sitting on the table right now (my opinion) will need to sit? Hopefully a stiff wind doesn't come and blow them away in the meantime?

Who says there needs to be a fight? As long as the older guys at PMUS get to keep their IAMNPF they have nothing to be sore about, no collateral damage unless the IAM wants to be spiteful.  If the IAM was going to allow TWU members under the Alliance to go into the IAMPF then why not allow those who are in it to stay in it? Like the credit union-once a member, always a member. Many of the younger guys from PMUS will be glad to see the IAM go and opt out of a pension plan that handcuffs them to both the IAM and US-now AA. You make it sound like all those guys are devoted to the IAM but not long ago over 50% of the mechanics signed IBT cards, yes the vote failed but you can't claim that all those guys would be bitter about going into the TWU where they would be paying less in dues than they do now? Some may be, but in five years most of them will be gone. 
 
I don't think there will be a fight because I don't think the IAM will be able to get enough cards from AA guys to get on the ballot. They can thank their latest agreement for that. No profit sharing, not even asking for what Delta gets, a concessionary deal with a company making billions, pathetic.  

 

[Bob Owens]

I am still waiting on my source to get a copy of the letter.
 
http://www.goiam.org/uploadedFiles/Letter_t.V.Delle-Femine.8.9.05.pdf?LangType=1033
 
Here is some interesting reading.
 
http://www.labornet.org/news/0000/looscan.htm
 
 
Northwest to Fly Without Union Mechanics
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2005/08/11/ap2178540.html
 
Northwest Flight Attendants Vote on Strike
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/09/AR2005080900685.html
 
http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2005/kutalikjohnson030905.html
 

Yes I walked the picket lines with the NWA mechanics, but no my Union did not support that. I've also walked with Flight Attendants, Postal Workers, Verizon and several other Unions, sometimes my Union supported them, sometimes they didn't. They always should. 

 

[TRAVIS]

Who says there needs to be a fight? As long as the older guys at PMUS get to keep their IAMNPF they have nothing to be sore about, no collateral damage unless the IAM wants to be spiteful.  If the IAM was going to allow TWU members under the Alliance to go into the IAMPF then why not allow those who are in it to stay in it? Like the credit union-once a member, always a member. Many of the younger guys from PMUS will be glad to see the IAM go and opt out of a pension plan that handcuffs them to both the IAM and US-now AA. You make it sound like all those guys are devoted to the IAM but not long ago over 50% of the mechanics signed IBT cards, yes the vote failed but you can't claim that all those guys would be bitter about going into the TWU where they would be paying less in dues than they do now? Some may be, but in five years most of them will be gone. 
 
I don't think there will be a fight because I don't think the IAM will be able to get enough cards from AA guys to get on the ballot. They can thank their latest agreement for that. No profit sharing, not even asking for what Delta gets, a concessionary deal with a company making billions, pathetic.  

Bob I don't think the IAM could 51% of the total US members if you add in the members on layoff looking for a yes vote for the IAM!!!
Like You said that last contract pretty much shot them in the foot and they are so Arrogant they cant see it!

 

[TRAVIS]

And of course.....
 
October 27, 2014
 
Dear Brother Klima:
I am in receipt of your letter dated October 24, 2014, via your email.  I will address the primary topic of your letter first, before proceeding into your embellishing account of the association’s very existence and your inclusion of me in your email.
 
I can certainly understand, from your perspective, the need and urgency for negotiations training, by IAM, based on the recently ratified agreement with the “New American” for your M&R group.  As I also recall, IAM made it clear they would not participate in pre-merger talks with US Airways management because they were in negotiations and the former TWU International President chose to go it alone with them.  What we have since found out is that was a critical mistake by the IAM and former TWU representatives, because other represented groups were able to negotiate substantial gains during that time for all their members.  This came at a time when US Airways management was ripe for negotiating, because they knew they needed support from the unions in getting their deal to lead the “New American” approved.  And then finally, after several years of fruitless negotiations with US Airways, IAM had the opportunity of a lifetime dropped into its lap at the bargaining table when the merger with American created the world’s largest airline.  Even as the “New American” announced record setting profits and management once again awarded themselves with millions of dollars in incentive pay, the IAM M&R negotiating committee fumbled away the opportunity for an industry leading pay-rate by agreeing to a paltry pay raise that only equaled what Legacy American management achieved through the 1113 bankruptcy process.  While Local 591 provided written support for IAM to use as leverage in negotiations and Local 591 members refused to work US Airways metal, outside of Scope the IAM Agreement, my membership watched in horror as IAM endorsed the M&R Agreement to its members. That new Agreement gave “any” American Airlines employee, not TWU member, the opportunity to do IAM work - in exchange for a layoff clause.  That language alone has provided the “New American” with significant synergies needed by management that they promised to shareholders and work to be done by non-union and union members, outside the Scope of the M&R Agreement, on US Airways metal.  At best, what I saw from the endorsement for ratification, of the M&R Agreement, was a willingness by IAM to accept the “trust us” mantra of the “New American” management team.  In my world, actions speak louder than words and after nearly of year working under the “New American” management structure and seeing the IAM’s ratified Agreement with them, I expect nothing less than a significant battle with management when the time comes to negotiate a combined airline Agreement. 
 
As for your requested attendance at the IAM facility, I will not be attending because: (a) the “Association” has not been approved by the NMB, ( B) nor has an affirmation vote in support of the “Association” by the respective TWU & IAM membership groups taken place.  Furthermore, I am not interested in learning how IAM has historically bargained. I have read the last two IAM negotiated Agreements with US Airways, cover-to-cover, and the results speak for themselves.  I can also promise you that the IAM cannot properly prepare a negotiating team with a curriculum that includes “guests, trainers, and speakers” while also planning to “develop negotiating goals, a communications strategy, and surveys for proposals” all in one week.  To believe that such a shortsighted strategy could work is both naive and a disservice to the dues paying members.  As a TWU President, before any effective “joint” negotiating plan can materialize, the NMB must first accept the “Association,” and an affirmation vote of both the TWU and IAM membership’s groups must then take place, and then and only then can a bargaining strategy of the “Association” be developed.
 
I did notice one item of truth in your letter; TWU does provide their Local’s with “a certain level of autonomy.”  While still bureaucratic, the TWU International Constitution does allow for a Local to not only question, but also properly challenge the organization at times.  I have read and do not see where the IAM Constitution, nor the Association Agreement, allows for the same.  President Lombardo has been clear that he intends to allow locally elected leaders, to represent the TWU membership (with support from TWU International) and not be a top down dictatorship that tells the membership what is in their best interest.  As you are also aware, President Lombardo continues to work on overcoming the past TWU leaders and International Representative’s shortcomings.  Another benefit of the autonomy TWU organizationally provides it Local’s, is our ability to communicate openly with our members.  Do locally elected IAM Presidents enjoy the same freedom of speech when representing their members criticizing and challenging the IAM District or International Lodge?  During the Local 591 membership meetings throughout the country the Local 591 Executive Board and myself have yet to find any current TWU represented station interested in being transitioned to IAM.  Members are vocal in expressing their apprehension, based on personal accounts and discussions with IAM members in these “joint represented” cities.  What I have heard from them is the noticeable difference on the availability of fact-based information from locally elected representatives and how TWU takes a “hands-on” grievance handling in the station from start to finish.  Based on my member’s observations in these “joint” cities, I cannot, in good conscious, support or agree that any Local 591 member should be forced to give up their TWU membership, for the IAM, in the “Association.”  I have also recently been told that in several of these cities, IAM representatives have told members that if they leave the IAM or vote against the Association, they will lose their pension.  This is simply not a true statement, it seems that someone within IAM has created a campaign of fear and intimidation regarding the IAM pension; which is a classic management diversion strategy.  I believe very strongly that IAM has an immediate responsibility to correct this falsehood to the IAM membership in writing.
 
Finally, with regard to your comment in your email which states the following: “I have tried to include all of the TWU presidents in the copy line. I would appreciate your help in assuring all of them get a copy. I don't know most of them except Gary Peterson and I want to be sure he gets his invitation since he played such a big role as an architect and early supporter of the Alliance Associations.”
You clearly knew that my role, while I was President of TWU Local 565, during the briefings at the IAM facility in Maryland, was to learn about the history of IAM, receive a brief overview of the IAM pension fund that included an explanation on why TWU may want to participate, and finally to participate in a discussion on what “an alliance between TWU and IAM might look like.”  At the time of the meeting, I was there to do nothing more than collect the data on IAM and report back on the information provided and any items discussed to the AA TWU President Council. It is absolutely a fib to say that I “played such a big role as an architect and early supporter of the Alliance Associations” simply because I was authorized to attend the briefings at the IAM facility, by the AA TWU Presidents Council. Furthermore, and for the IAM’s clarity of facts, former TWU International President Little consummated the “Association Agreement,” which was another tyrannical mistake that lead to his groups demise, without any vote of support for its approval by the AA TWU Presidents Council.
 
That said, I can only take your above comment as an attempt to smear my name, due to my Local’s objection to the “Association” currently before the NMB.  Clearly, you have no idea of the relationship that exists between myself and the other TWU Presidents listed in the email, all of them have already been debriefed on the facts of how the “Association” came to be.  The problem with a tactic like this is that it comes with an inherent flaw; you do not know the audience you wrote to. Up until now, the objections before the NMB came from Local 591 and through thousands of signed petitions by TWU members, but by trying to use my name in an effort to move the IAM’s organizational agenda forward, veiled in training for the “Association,” by inviting the TWU Presidents is weak at best.  You need to remember that while IAM may be a bigger organization overall than TWU, that on the American property IAM is much smaller than TWU.  I am also not sure why you believe that IAM can speak from a position of power when IAM is clearly in the minority, and by a sizeable margin in Maintenance and Related.  So although you may be under the impression, from your previous encounters with former TWU representatives, that you can somehow invoke a sense of fear or intimidation, within Local 591 no such fear exists. 
 
In closing, while IAM International President Buffenbarger and former TWU International President Little may have entered in the “Association Agreement,” the current TWU leadership and membership did not.  If the NMB actually allows the “Association” to be on a ballot, and if the “Association” were to be successful in winning the election for representation, you can rest assured that I am fully prepared to enter negotiations, for a Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement, on behalf of the members I am elected to represent. 
 
Fraternally,
Gary G. Peterson
[SIZE=13.5pt]President[/SIZE]

GO Peterson tell'em like it is!

 

[swamt]

Nope. Wouldn't be able to sell anything to those of you on this thread who have already made your minds up apparently a very very very long time ago. This certainly adds a great shot in the arm to what you guys are aiming to achieve now doesn't it.

You see we were all smart from long ago.  We all seen this crap coming from far away.  All this bickering is only the beginning.  Not only will it cost a large amount of cash due to all internal differences must go to arbitration and arbitrations cost alot of freakin money, PLUS, one membership will be paying twice the cost as both sides must fund the arbitration, and this does not account for the money that all the lawyers will be be drawing from as they will just suspend and postpone to keep on taking the draws of income provided to them by this alliance association BS.  They money pit will never stop and no wonder all the attorneys from both sides are fully agreeing to do this.
 
Also, you just gotta love the promise by the alliance to provide "industry leading contract"  after JCBA is reached.  Now let's see, the TWU and IAM will go from the bottom of the industry to the top of the industry in one single contract step,  no way will this happen gentlemen, no way.  This would mean the alliance will have to restore "everything" lost in all and past BK's, bring your pay above SWA's, Fed-Ex, and UPS (which would equal to over 53 per hour), let's not forget the industry leading 401K match that they will have to nego above 10% with match being dollar for dollar etc...   It just is not going to happen guys, and for the alliance to be promising this crap and some of you believing it is just pathetic to sit here and watch.  Here is the promise of the industry leading contract during these JCBA nego's, This quote is directly from the letters provided by NYer (BTW thx for posting)
 
"preparing for negociations that will result in the best airline contracts in the industry with the most secure pension available."
 
REALLY???  ^^^^^^^

 

[AMFAinMIAMI]

SWAMT
 
You have been a supporter of the fight to bring AMFA here to AA, I have a question for you why?
 
Were you at one time an AA employee?
 
Your can better help our cause if you can get your AMFA Brothers to get involved as well Not just WNMECH but all at your station, Getting the regional Directors involved, the NEC.
 
This fight will show the industry that AMFA's Leadership wants to truly lead the industry in representation of the mechanics class and craft. 
 
This all needs to happen before the NMB comes back with its ruling, one way or the other.
 
You have talked in great support now its time for you as a AMFA member to put your best effort in getting the support we Need from the AMFA Leaders to have this drive succeed. 

 

[700UW]

Translation:
 
We dont and cant get enough cards.

 

[AMFAinMIAMI]

Translation:
 
We dont and cant get enough cards.

 
If we don't have or get enough cards that will be on the mechanics of the NEW AA.
 
Both the US/AA mechanics will then have to live with what ever happens down the road.
 
 
But we can all see that the IAM's top kindergarten student who does not know anything about whats going on with the mechanics class and craft and only knows what his google tells him is still attempting to gain favor with the IAM which he is so ate up with.
 
But thanks for the translation. DH

 

[MetalMover]

Nope. Wouldn't be able to sell anything to those of you on this thread who have already made your minds up apparently a very very very long time ago. This certainly adds a great shot in the arm to what you guys are aiming to achieve now doesn't it.

Not that anyone could've predicted this problem THIS SOON with the alliance BEFORE it gets approved, but this "group-hug-koom-by-ya-let's-get married-and rule-the-world sham" will have more than it's share of problems. What do you think will happen should the alliance be in place and negotiations get underway? IAM and TWU each have different contractual preferences they BOTH will want to preserve. Here you have the IAM minority already trying to dictate and circumvent what occurs. 
NO TO THE ALLIANCE!

 

[Bob Owens]

You see we were all smart from long ago.  We all seen this crap coming from far away.  All this bickering is only the beginning.  Not only will it cost a large amount of cash due to all internal differences must go to arbitration and arbitrations cost alot of freakin money, PLUS, one membership will be paying twice the cost as both sides must fund the arbitration, and this does not account for the money that all the lawyers will be be drawing from as they will just suspend and postpone to keep on taking the draws of income provided to them by this alliance association BS.  They money pit will never stop and no wonder all the attorneys from both sides are fully agreeing to do this.
 
Also, you just gotta love the promise by the alliance to provide "industry leading contract"  after JCBA is reached.  Now let's see, the TWU and IAM will go from the bottom of the industry to the top of the industry in one single contract step,  no way will this happen gentlemen, no way.  This would mean the alliance will have to restore "everything" lost in all and past BK's, bring your pay above SWA's, Fed-Ex, and UPS (which would equal to over 53 per hour), let's not forget the industry leading 401K match that they will have to nego above 10% with match being dollar for dollar etc...   It just is not going to happen guys, and for the alliance to be promising this crap and some of you believing it is just pathetic to sit here and watch.  Here is the promise of the industry leading contract during these JCBA nego's, This quote is directly from the letters provided by NYer (BTW thx for posting)
 
"preparing for negociations that will result in the best airline contracts in the industry with the most secure pension available."
 
REALLY???  ^^^^^^^

Guess it depends on how you define "industry" For many years it included all the larger carriers, then when that became inconvenient the company changed the definition to only other large carriers that went through bankruptcy and our International unquestioningly adopted this new definition, even though Fed Ex, SWa and UPS still use the more accurate one. 
 
 
We are, or should be used to "industry leading" which really isn't and I'm sure that the IAM has it all planned out. With the TWU we had what was referred to as an industry Leading pension back when I hired on, more specifically an industry leading multiplier. The Union put out all sorts of graphs showing how a member with 30 years in the plan at AA earning the same as his counterpart at UAL would get hundreds of dollars more. What they left out is that in order for the AA guy to have 30 years in the plan he had to have 31 years with the company but at UAL he had to have just 30. So the truth was that if two workers started the same day, one at UAL and one at AA and they earned the same amount (we usually lagged UAL) and they both retired the same day 30 years later the UAL guy would get more than the AA guy because the AA guy would only have 29 years in the plan. That didn't stop the union from selling it as industry leading, and using that industry leading pension as an excuse for ten sick days instead of 12 and six weeks max vacation instead of seven , and straight time pay for training etc etc etc. 
 
We saw "industry leading" again from Overspeed, when the company increased the MRT, but then changed the language so that they could have 24-7 coverage without paying anyone the new higher MRT-but on paper they would still claim "industry Leading" even if fewer people saw that than the cola that Hawaii mechanics at UAL got-which of course was not counted by Overspeed.
 
Call me cynical but I have no doubt that the IAM plans to have a deal that they will try and sell as "industry leading". At the same time it will be zero cost for the company, no its operating budget will reflect a cost but bottom line (after the debt owed to the pension is written off) it will be ZERO cost. How will they do this? By throwing us all in the IAMNPF. The hundreds of millions saved by eliminating the 60 without penalty rule will provide more than enough to pay for an industry leading contract. Our loss will be the PMUS mechanics gain. In addition to the savings by dumping our pensions into the IAMNPF the company would save roughly $1200 per mechanic per year by just giving the IAMNPF the fixed amount of $4160 per year vs around a $5400/year match (with 12%OT factored in). Thats over $15 million a year right there.  Enough to get us the same vacation, Holiday and sick time as PMUS. So we lose five more years of our lives and can't work as a mechanic if we leave AA and our pension is at risk and can be cut even after we retire.
 
They never said it was the best pension available, they said it was the most secure, but even thats a lie, how secure can it be if they can cut it? I want my AA pension to stay exactly where it is. 

 

[scorpion 2]

 
Corrected the part you left out. "The best airline contracts in the industry with the most secure pension available" was bolded and underlined in the copy put out by the IAM under their header. 
 
 
the most "secure" pension available
 
 
Pension-singular, no option to not be in that most secure pension indicated there. Nor will there be because with the reduced funding DB plans like the IAMNPF rely on everybody paying in while some die without ever collecting a penny. 
 
 
Well I have Social Security, I have my frozen AA pension and now I have a 401k match. I'd rather see us go for a better match on all wages earned (Somewhere between the FAs 9% and the pilots 14%) than lose the ability to retire at 60 without penalty, or 55 with 15% penalty and keep the option to work somewhere else with the skills I have than settle for the "most 'secure' pension available". 
 
If we get rolled into the IAMNPF and lose the ability to retire at 60 without penalty (and 3% penalty per year prior to 60) millions of dollars worth of liability (essentially monies owed to us) would simply disappear off the balance sheets for American Airlines. What they could not get in BK they will have succeeded in getting while showing Billions in profits. The Association would then use that, plus future savings from not having to match all hours worked and already agreed to increased pay rates to give the multi billion profit earning AA a zero cost contract that they would then sell as "industry leading". Sure AA may say that the deal represents hundreds of millions in improvements but the fact is we would be paying for that with the concessions to our pension and clearing hundreds of millions off AA's debt. 
 
So tell us NYer, how much of a penalty would we incur should we decide to leave AA at 55 and work somewhere lee under the IAMNPF? Right now under the AA plan we would see a 15% penalty on our DB plan and could take 100% of the 401K, and if we were hired by SWA or UPS or Fed Ex we could collect our AA Pension while moving up the scales to their much higher topped out rate. Our plan at AA gives us mobility and portability which makes it harder for the employer to abuse us (especially younger or less senior workers)  while the IAMNPF locks us into AA with even even more punitive terms than the company sponsored Pensions.
 
The pensions were used at both AA and US to get us into the worst deals in the industry, deals that in many respects are inferior to Non-union (1 week of VC for first five years, five holidays with half pay if worked, 5 sick days @ half pay for the first two on each occurance-below NYC mandated minimums, etc). The terms of the IAMNPF are great for the company, it gives them a defined, controllable pension cost. Want to reduce pension costs? Simple, don't hire more workers and make the ones you have work more hours. Once the 2080 hours are paid they don't have to pay any more. They wouldn't have to carry pension liability on their balance sheets because they would pass that off to the IAMNPF. If they fall short they simply cut your pension. So you are sitting at home, retired,  and you get a letter from the IAMNPF stating that instead of getting $2000/month you are now getting only $1500, so you dust off your tools and go to the nearest airport looking for work to make up for the cut only to get another letter saying that since you are once again working you get nothing. Under what we have now AA would still have to pay and they can't cut what we have earned. 
 

• 
•  
• 
  

The twu's retirement guy for local 514 admitted this could happen. He did say the membership would have to vote on it first but sadly it would pass if it came to a vote. I posted several weeks ago that even the retirement counselor admitted you could take the under funded part of the pension and throw half of it out in the form of raises and benefits to make it look like we were getting a really sweet deal but in the end we are not getting squat. There is no shortfall in the rest of the underfunded part if the rules are changed. This is no scare tactic by any means just business 101. The IAMNPF wont be taking on an underfunded plan as some try to say on these boards because they play by a completely different set of guidelines than the frozen AA plan.  Why do we need the IAM plan anyway lets just unfreeze ours!

 

[Bob Owens]

Not that anyone could've predicted this problem THIS SOON with the alliance BEFORE it gets approved, but this "group-hug-koom-by-ya-let's-get married-and rule-the-world sham" will have more than it's share of problems. What do you think will happen should the alliance be in place and negotiations get underway? IAM and TWU each have different contractual preferences they BOTH will want to preserve. Here you have the IAM minority already trying to dictate and circumvent what occurs. 
NO TO THE ALLIANCE!

If the Alliance goes through it will all be done the IAM/US way, just look at what was already agreed to as far as seniority integration, the pension, Negotiations, local Union input etc etc. Everything in the Alliance has us changing to the IAM way, not the other way around. 

 

[Bob Owens]

The twu's retirement guy for local 514 admitted this could happen. He did say the membership would have to vote on it first but sadly it would pass if it came to a vote. I posted several weeks ago that even the retirement counselor admitted you could take the under funded part of the pension and throw half of it out in the form of raises and benefits to make it look like we were getting a really sweet deal but in the end we are not getting squat. There is no shortfaosite , pll in the rest of the underfunded part if the rules are changed. This is no scare tactic by any means just business 101. The IAMNPF wont be taking on an underfunded plan as some try to say on these boards because they play by a completely different set of guidelines than the frozen AA plan.  Why do we need the IAM plan anyway lets just unfreeze ours!

Exactly, just changing it from 60 to 65 eliminates Millions of dollars of liability. Think about it, your life expectancy won't increase if you work longer, probably the opposite, so less money has to be put away in order to fund the pension. AA can't change it, its locked in, but if we agree to move it into the IAMPF all bets are off and millions of dollars of liability for AA would simply vanish. Thats our money that would disappear. We gave concessions in 2003 to save that, and again in 2012, but with one vote it could vanish into the IAMNPF to finance what we we should getting and never should have given up anyway. 

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

I am still waiting on my source to get a copy of the letter.
 
http://www.goiam.org/uploadedFiles/Letter_t.V.Delle-Femine.8.9.05.pdf?LangType=1033
 
Here is some interesting reading.
 
http://www.labornet.org/news/0000/looscan.htm
 
 
Northwest to Fly Without Union Mechanics
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2005/08/11/ap2178540.html
 
Northwest Flight Attendants Vote on Strike
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/09/AR2005080900685.html
 
http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2005/kutalikjohnson030905.html
 

 
Okay, well then, while you're waiting why don't you take a moment and visit the DOL website and provide the link that shows the DOL still classifies Aircraft Mechanics as "unskilled labor".
 
You wouldn't want the rest of the board thinking you're a liar would you?

 

[700UW]

Okay, well then, while you're waiting why don't you take a moment and visit the DOL website and provide the link that shows the DOL still classifies Aircraft Mechanics as "unskilled labor".
 
You wouldn't want the rest of the board thinking you're a liar would you?

Why don't YOU show us where they are considered skilled labor by the DOL.