TWU and IAM representation alliance vote

[Bob Owens]

 
 
 
 
So do you support the Alliance or not? You can't say you support it but are against what the Alliance has already stated.

Yes I support the Alliance but also yes I wish we had had an internal union vote on it first. I also don't want to fight against another Union though. I'd prefer we take our fight to the company instead.
 
 

Who says the Unions have to fight? Why cant they do what they tell the members to do and do whats best for us all instead of putting their own immediate self interests first and one of them simply bow out? "Splitting the baby" only helps AA. Read the alliance document and its pretty easy to see that this was not formed for our interests. 
 
 
. 
 We won't be in BK for that decision and it will take 4 parties to decide anyway. The IAM, TWU, The Company and Ultimately the membership. Again if it was forced on us I'll be right there in the front row with you throwing tomatoes. I'll support a choice between the two options.   
 
If you support a choice between the IAMPF or our 401K then you should not be supporting the Alliance, they already made it clear they want us in the IAMPF and the TWU gave the IAM the reigns for the first two years.  The company would love to throw a flat sum of $2/hr vs matching 5.5% on all hours wages paid, it would save them milllions, that means millions less to fund our retirement. 
 
 Bankruptcy and the laws as they are written that people do nothing about are what forced us out of the pre-funding. We won't be in BK for that decision and it will take 4 parties to decide anyway. The IAM, TWU, The Company and Ultimately the membership. Again if it was forced on us I'll be right there in the front row with you throwing tomatoes. I'll support a choice between the two options  
 
Not really, had our agreement been abrogated you could say we were forced, but we voted for this. The ruling that said that Airline Unions cant strike even if the contract has been abrogated came down in 2006? So what have the Unions done to correct this while collecting millions of dollars in members dues? NOT A DAMN THING? Instead they want us to support much broader bankruptcy reform so companys cant take away other workers pensions, but all those other workerrs at least have the right to strike if their contract is abrogated. 
 

It's funny because when I talked on the phone with you years ago you were the one who told me that you liked Jim Little when I wasn't so sure. 
 
Now that's funny. May have said I liked that he was embracing technology but I doubt I ever said I liked him. 
 

As for your Prima Donna comment, yes. Some FSC do think of you guys that way. But it's because too many make it painfully obvious how they look down on us when in our minds they forgot where they came from. (not all of course) Many mechanics were former FSC's first.
 
Yes and oddly enough those are the ones who are the most severe. 
 

I want to see you be the top paid in the industry but I want to be top paid too. Some people have no problem becoming the top paid though off the backs of others. I have a problem with that.   
 
How far from the top are you? $3/hr? We are around $15/hr below the top just on wages alone. I doubt there are any FSCs out there earning $15 and hour more than you guys. 

 

[Bob Owens]

How did you reach that conclusion? FedEx is larger than AA by most measures.

The point is, if you have 15,000 mechanics it is makes negotiations more difficult than if you have a larger company with substantially less mechanics. It's basic math.

The original point is that many want to change the TWU and one of the arguments is the pay rates at FedEx and UPS are superior to AA. At the same time, AMFA has a wage comparison in their SWA contract to which their compare wages to other mechanics within the industry but it doesn't include FedEx or UPS.

Basic math? Do you even know what that means? 
 
I have documents where UPS does a comparison and it does include AA, UA etc. AA doesn't want to compare to even SWA anymore, they used to but now its not convenient. Since when does labor simply allow the company to pick and choose which competitors it wants to compare to? 
 
You keep making the same statements over and over again as if it means something and ignore the fact that what you are citing was always the case, even when we were all paid around the same. SWA, FEd Ex and UPS NEVER had the scope of in house OH that AA or the other legacies had.
 
Prior to 9-11 AA had the most liberal outsourcing language in the industry, up to 50%, and that went all the way back to CR Smith. AA never sought to exploit that because of all the other concessions they were able to get, why ship it out when you can do it in house and pay less? In 2003 AA got B-scale with a 12 year progression and max 4 weeks VC, the best its competitors could get out of their Unions was 5 year B-scale that started out $4/hr higher than AA with 6 weeks max vacation. Topped out wages were around the same back then but the super long progressions and lower starting wage save AA millions, until they couldn't attract or retain talent, then they put in Flex Rates and shortened the progression. Then in 1995 AA got super cheap SRPs. Since at least 1983 AA has had, and continues to have the lowest average hourly cost for AMTs in the industry. In fact even if topped out A&Ps made just as much as their peers at UAL and Delta AA would still have the lowest average hourly cost as long as they kept TUL and AFW. If AA were to switch to outsourcing they would lose any cost advantage, in fact it would probably reverse, AA would end up with the highest costs because being a late entry into that market along with an industrywide inability to attract and retain talent the MROs would charge AA substantially higher rates than they charge AA' competitors who they have been doing business with for years. 

 

[Bob Owens]

So by that reasoning the larger the company is, the less the employees should make?

So I guess that justifies Walmarts wages as well, but only if they pay some union dues. If Walmart just allowed their workers to Unionize then all would be Ok, and Walmart workers should not expect NYers type of Union to negotiate higher wages but instead negotiate "job saving" contracts. NYer would tell his Walmart members that they should be glad that the Union got them bottom of the industry wages so more of them would have jobs. He would cite how Kmart and Home Depot have so many fewer workers and that's why workers at those companies are paid more and get better benefits. . 

 

[TRAVIS]

That's it! BOB you go get the mop I'm tired. LOL

 

[swamt]

How did you reach that conclusion? FedEx is larger than AA by most measures.

The point is, if you have 15,000 mechanics it is makes negotiations more difficult than if you have a larger company with substantially less mechanics. It's basic math.

The original point is that many want to change the TWU and one of the arguments is the pay rates at FedEx and UPS are superior to AA. At the same time, AMFA has a wage comparison in their SWA contract to which their compare wages to other mechanics within the industry but it doesn't include FedEx or UPS.

Way wrong buddy.  Do your homework before you spout off chief...

 

[NYer]

Basic math? Do you even know what that means? 
 
I have documents where UPS does a comparison and it does include AA, UA etc. AA doesn't want to compare to even SWA anymore, they used to but now its not convenient. Since when does labor simply allow the company to pick and choose which competitors it wants to compare to? --That is a question that none of the unions who currently represent mechanics in the airline sector haven't been able to answer. Even AMFA has comparisons to other passenger airlines and doesn't inlcude freight carriers. For UPS, it's to their benefit to compare others since it undoubtedly drives down the compensation level.
 
You keep making the same statements over and over again as if it means something and ignore the fact that what you are citing was always the case, even when we were all paid around the same. SWA, FEd Ex and UPS NEVER had the scope of in house OH that AA or the other legacies had. --And because the alternative for those carriers was to raise the level of compensation which was subsidized by their ability to have maintenance work done at a much lower expense. IF you believe it is advantageous to allow the outsourcing of the heavy maintenance in order to reap the same hourly compensation to those that remain, then just say so. That seems to be the alternative of being the highest paid in the industry...outsourcing.
 
Prior to 9-11 AA had the most liberal outsourcing language in the industry, up to 50%, and that went all the way back to CR Smith. AA never sought to exploit that because of all the other concessions they were able to get, why ship it out when you can do it in house and pay less? In 2003 AA got B-scale with a 12 year progression and max 4 weeks VC, the best its competitors could get out of their Unions was 5 year B-scale that started out $4/hr higher than AA with 6 weeks max vacation. Topped out wages were around the same back then but the super long progressions and lower starting wage save AA millions, until they couldn't attract or retain talent, then they put in Flex Rates and shortened the progression. Then in 1995 AA got super cheap SRPs. Since at least 1983 AA has had, and continues to have the lowest average hourly cost for AMTs in the industry. In fact even if topped out A&Ps made just as much as their peers at UAL and Delta AA would still have the lowest average hourly cost as long as they kept TUL and AFW. If AA were to switch to outsourcing they would lose any cost advantage, in fact it would probably reverse, AA would end up with the highest costs because being a late entry into that market along with an industrywide inability to attract and retain talent the MROs would charge AA substantially higher rates than they charge AA' competitors who they have been doing business with for years. --So your argument is that there would be no cost advantage to outsource because you believe the MRO's would charge AA more than any other airline they currently service. I guess it's pretty impressive that you have the pulse of the MRO industry or have some insider information that lead you to your conclusion. Be that as it may, I guess that's great news and it will allow the Maintenance negotiatiators to exploit that issue in a manner that will allow us to keep the OH work and get industry leading compensation.
 
There should be no excuse to be able to achieve those goals. For years the argument was that Fleet kept us down. Then it was Little & Videtich that kept us down. Well, those things have been cleared off the table and it should be full steam ahead in getting what we're supposed to get. You guys are in a position to make all your assertions on compensation come true. This is the time. There should be no more excuses....That's exciting, can't wait to have you guys fulfill what you've told us it possible...Carry on.

 

[NYer]

Way wrong buddy.  Do your homework before you spout off chief...

 
Then enlighten us...

 

[Flying low]

How did you reach that conclusion? FedEx is larger than AA by most measures.

Maybe I'm wrong but according to http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UPS_Airlines , they average 237 aircraft. So, I'm thinking AA is larger than UPS.

Without going back through the posts, I do believe that you said AMFA didn't use UPS in wage comparisons. I simply said that our beloved TWU didn't use UPS for wage comparisons either.

Why not just say that the AMT's regardless of union would love to use UPS in wage comparisons, no passenger airline uses a freight carrier to compare wages.

 

[blue collar]

Why not just say that the AMT's regardless of union would love to use UPS in wage comparisons, no passenger airline uses a freight carrier to compare wages.

Our (WN) dispatchers successfully used UPS to compare wages, against the wishes of the company. The arbitrator agreed with the dispatchers. We (AMTs)haven't talked money yet, but I don't see why we wouldn't use UPS to compare wages - we perform the same work, which is the same argument that the dispatchers used.

 

[swamt]

 
Then enlighten us...

The AMFA/SWA contract has no wage comparison to any airline what-so-ever.  

 

[Realityck]

How did you reach that conclusion? FedEx is larger than AA by most measures.

The point is, if you have 15,000 mechanics it is makes negotiations more difficult than if you have a larger company with substantially less mechanics. It's basic math.

The original point is that many want to change the TWU and one of the arguments is the pay rates at FedEx and UPS are superior to AA. At the same time, AMFA has a wage comparison in their SWA contract to which their compare wages to other mechanics within the industry but it doesn't include FedEx or UPS.

 
 
 




The pay comparison you are speaking of was at Alaska, not Southwest. At Alaska, AMFA accepted the following carriers for purposes of comparison – Southwest, Delta, JetBlue, United, American, Frontier, and USAirways. FedEx and UPS were not included.

 

[swamt]

Our (WN) dispatchers successfully used UPS to compare wages, against the wishes of the company. The arbitrator agreed with the dispatchers. We (AMTs)haven't talked money yet, but I don't see why we wouldn't use UPS to compare wages - we perform the same work, which is the same argument that the dispatchers used.

I know this is knit picking but there is a difference.   I do believe the dispatchers were using mediation and not yet in arbitration.  The mediator was successful in the comparison to UPS, as dispatchers at both airlines do the exact same jobs.  And since that ruling has already been issued, I am quite positive another arbitrator would agree that the mechanics at both UPS and SWA also do the same jobs, the only difference is we are responsible for millions upon millions of passengers and human lives.  Just like the pilots do at each of the carriers, we fly humans, UPS flies packages  Big difference.
I have been told that this comparison will be used during the economic talks.  Maybe the company can drag this out long enough for UPS to get an agreement with their current contract and they will raise the bar once again.  We will patiently wait for our contract to get hashed out.  The longer we wait the better off we will be.  However, IMO, I foresee mediation and possible arbitration in our future if the company continues down the path they are taking with all the groups.   Once again, comparing packages to passengers, and just like the pilots that are paid so well for the lives in there hands, it is a hell of alot more responsibility on our end, and the pay difference should reflect that...

 

[700UW]

I seriously doubt AMFA would agree to binding arbitration at WN.  You lose all your bargaining power.

 

[NYer]

The AMFA/SWA contract has no wage comparison to any airline what-so-ever.

You're correct, my mistake. It is the other AMFA represented airline...Alaska.

 

[NYer]

Maybe I'm wrong but according to http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UPS_Airlines , they average 237 aircraft. So, I'm thinking AA is larger than UPS.
Without going back through the posts, I do believe that you said AMFA didn't use UPS in wage comparisons. I simply said that our beloved TWU didn't use UPS for wage comparisons either.
Why not just say that the AMT's regardless of union would love to use UPS in wage comparisons, no passenger airline uses a freight carrier to compare wages.

AA may have more aircraft, but UPS is a larger company with three times more employees and substantially higher revenues.