TWU and IAM representation alliance vote

[scorpion 2]

One reason the TWA/IAM guys were absorbed into the twu was because there wasn't a IAMNPF ponzi  scheme in place that needed those members funds. The TWA folks were brought into our defined benefit plan. Why is it that all the talk from the iam and twu involves the IAMNPF and not unfreezing our defined benefit and rolling the iam trust into ours? Why not  give them the years service that they have accrued under that plan and vest them into ours which is a much better plan?
 
Knowing how these two unions connive against their cash cow (dues payers) it would be no surprise to see a contract that looked fantastic but would be nothing more than a Trojan horse that handed our pension trust to the IAMNPF. The company would gladly put a portion of the under funded pension liability into a contract to make it look to good to be true but on the back side would allow them to dump hundreds of millions in pension liability onto the iam plan. The PBGC would love the deal because it gets them off the hook from any future liability, the IAMNPF would get an upfront windfall, the company would save millions in underfunded liability, and the twu could finally look like they know how to negotiate.
If the company and the two unions were in agreement to move the trust and they were able to promote it to the membership and get a yes vote on a contract then our trust could be moved. If any one doubts that this could happen then just place a call to the twu's retirement counselor and ask for yourself. As a matter of fact I challenge everyone on this forum to do that! 
Contracts get passed without much effort so to sweeten one with pension obligations would no big stretch.

 

[WeAAsles]

One reason the TWA/IAM guys were absorbed into the twu was because there wasn't a IAMNPF ponzi  scheme in place that needed those members funds. The TWA folks were brought into our defined benefit plan. Why is it that all the talk from the iam and twu involves the IAMNPF and not unfreezing our defined benefit and rolling the iam trust into ours? Why not  give them the years service that they have accrued under that plan and vest them into ours which is a much better plan?
 
Knowing how these two unions connive against their cash cow (dues payers) it would be no surprise to see a contract that looked fantastic but would be nothing more than a Trojan horse that handed our pension trust to the IAMNPF. The company would gladly put a portion of the under funded pension liability into a contract to make it look to good to be true but on the back side would allow them to dump hundreds of millions in pension liability onto the iam plan. The PBGC would love the deal because it gets them off the hook from any future liability, the IAMNPF would get an upfront windfall, the company would save millions in underfunded liability, and the twu could finally look like they know how to negotiate.
If the company and the two unions were in agreement to move the trust and they were able to promote it to the membership and get a yes vote on a contract then our trust could be moved. If any one doubts that this could happen then just place a call to the twu's retirement counselor and ask for yourself. As a matter of fact I challenge everyone on this forum to do that! 
Contracts get passed without much effort so to sweeten one with pension obligations would no big stretch.

NOT!!!!

Lot's of reading in this first link but the answer to your proposition is in there if you want to do the fact finding work. Maybe Bob should do a little reading?

http://www.dol.gov/EBSA/pensionreform.html

This one is much more condensed and simple.

http://mypension.iamnpf.org/media/72828/AFN_2013_plan_year.pdf

 

[scorpion 2]

Not to what?

 

[WeAAsles]

Not to what?

Our Pension is frozen and the underfunding is being made up by the company to shore it up to 100% and then it will be basically locked. It's not going to be reopened and placed at risk again as I'm sure that was part of the deal between the Company and the PBGC in the first place? The Government doesn't want any more underfunded pensions to become a liability on the PBGC that they may have to bail out some day in the future. It's another thing like the IAMPF taking over our pension that's not going to happen.

BTW here's another link that explains from the IAMPF's point of view why they reduced benefits for future retirees. And no they don't make any assurances that it couldn't happen again. Tell me any retirement option that is secure today including our 401k if the market tanks again in the future? Everything is tied into the Stock market.

http://mypension.iamnpf.org/media/13876/Q_n_A_response_to_mailing_jan_2011.pdf

 

[swamt]

I agree with others on here and I think NYer is here for other reasons then to gain info.  If he was truely reading all the post before he suddenly came here firing off post after post with questions that have already been discussed and answered on here long ago.

 

[Rogallo]

 
--What other Alliance do you speak of? The APA? The APFA?
 

 
How about the  CWA-IBT Customer Service Employee Association.
 
http://teamster.org/news/2014/09/american-airlines-us-airways-passenger-service-agents-vote-join-teamsters-cwa

 

[TRAVIS]

Someone pulled a yes vote! now it's only 5 duped people LOL

 

[Vortilon]

 

So you leave out that the other Alliance was put before the members before they went to the NMB  then say I leave out info?  You keep leaving out that the members gave their consent first, no such question has been put before either membership.
--What other Alliance do you speak of? The APA? The APFA?
 
I think I was pretty clear, the TWU is the only Union that has a legitimate showing of interest, the TWU should stay, the IAM should walk away. 
--I would bet the IAM and their Members would have a different take. So would the NMB if the IAM were forced to get the necessary to force a vote before the two unions. That, not your opinion, makes it a legitimate showing.
 
You also leave out that every elected TWU President from AA voted against the Alliance, and they were told that the TWU can't get out of it even if they wanted to. So as you try and paint resistance to the Alliance as some sort of AMFA conspiracy then explain why Presidents from Fleet Service would vote against it? Are they closet AMFA supporters as well in your book? 
--Who are these Presidents and when did this vote take place? Or do we take your word for it?
 
They don't want it because they know its a bad deal, a deal that was made to benefit the two unions and not the members who work at AA. 
--There dozens of Members that would disagree as they have taken advantage of the Preferential Hiring, which is made possible because of the Association.

 

 
 
NYer,  I would like you to come into any maintenance ready room here at DFW and try to sell your point of view.   You would be laughed at - at the very least.  More than likely - just run out of the room period.  Of course you already know this, which explains why we never see any d-bags from the international show their mugs around here..
 
You post about the AMFA card drives at AA as if the card drives were some sort of failed corporate takeover.   Truth be known, all the drives were started and ran by AA AMTs in their spare time.  A "grass roots" effort.  So, you want to insult some AMTs who are trying to better our union representation?  Are you suggesting there is something wrong with attempting to better our pay and benefits by getting better representation? 
 
You can't defend what the TWU has done to the M&R at AA.  Especially the line AMTs.  Don't piss on our legs and tell us it's raining.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Why not  give them the years service that they have accrued under that plan and vest them into ours which is a much better plan?

Ask yourself better for who and there is your answer 

 

[NYer]

 
Really? Just exactly what is left to sacrifice?
 
Sacrifice less.....Is this how you sell YOUR Association?
 
The word sacrifice is used far too often with the TWU and the IAMPF.
 
My pension need not be a sacrificial lamb for the IAM.

 
What is left to sacrifice? For someone like yourself, I suspect it is the very things you seem to take for granted today.

 

[NYer]

One reason the TWA/IAM guys were absorbed into the twu was because there wasn't a IAMNPF ponzi  scheme in place that needed those members funds. The TWA folks were brought into our defined benefit plan. Why is it that all the talk from the iam and twu involves the IAMNPF and not unfreezing our defined benefit and rolling the iam trust into ours? Why not  give them the years service that they have accrued under that plan and vest them into ours which is a much better plan?
 
Knowing how these two unions connive against their cash cow (dues payers) it would be no surprise to see a contract that looked fantastic but would be nothing more than a Trojan horse that handed our pension trust to the IAMNPF. The company would gladly put a portion of the under funded pension liability into a contract to make it look to good to be true but on the back side would allow them to dump hundreds of millions in pension liability onto the iam plan. The PBGC would love the deal because it gets them off the hook from any future liability, the IAMNPF would get an upfront windfall, the company would save millions in underfunded liability, and the twu could finally look like they know how to negotiate.
If the company and the two unions were in agreement to move the trust and they were able to promote it to the membership and get a yes vote on a contract then our trust could be moved. If any one doubts that this could happen then just place a call to the twu's retirement counselor and ask for yourself. As a matter of fact I challenge everyone on this forum to do that! 
Contracts get passed without much effort so to sweeten one with pension obligations would no big stretch.

 
Why in the world would the IAM agree to take underfunded liabilities that would only put their current Plan into a place where they would be forced to make changes in order to comply with federal law. Aside from the "conspiracy theory" aspect, it makes very little sense in the real world.
 
It's getting harder and harder to create negativity, isn't it.

 

[NYer]

I agree with others on here and I think NYer is here for other reasons then to gain info.  If he was truely reading all the post before he suddenly came here firing off post after post with questions that have already been discussed and answered on here long ago.

 
Just answering posts that are addressed to me, Swamt.

 

[NYer]

 
How about the  CWA-IBT Customer Service Employee Association.
 
http://teamster.org/news/2014/09/american-airlines-us-airways-passenger-service-agents-vote-join-teamsters-cwa

 
That's the wrong context of voting for an Association since it was already formed when the AA agents voted to join. The CWA-IBT Association, which happens to be the model for the current TWU-IAM Association, was originally voted on in October 2005. It brought the agents of the US Airways, who were CWA, and the America West agents who at that time were recently organized by the IBT, together. The CWA would represent the East agents and the IBT would represent the West agents on non-collective bargaining issues.They did have a vote.
 
Not sure that was what Bob was talking about in his post, but it may have been.

 

[dfw gen]

I don't believe there is a benefit, but I can see negative consequences of a vote going to the IAM side. As a TWU Member I'd rather stay with what I know and keep the current processes, like OT or keeping the 401K rather than be forced into their Pension plan. There are consequences and no one is talking about them.

A vote has no upside and a tremendous amount of risk. I'd rather not go through it just for the sake of it. Especially with a membership that has a poor history of voter turnout.[/quote

low voter turnout encouraged by the twu! easier to control the herd.

 

[737823]

The TWU has more Members, but if the IAM were able to get a couple of thousand cards from current TWU, they could apply for a vote with the NMB, it wouldn't be an automatic takeover.

The process of getting those cards and preparing for a vote would have both unions and Memberships going at each others throats. Let's say the TWU prevails after that (which would push negotiations further down the road), how long would it take before the former IAM Members begin another campaign to unseat the TWU in order to regain their Pension accruals and medical plans? We would be fighting each other for years.... just like the AMFA fiasco, but including ALL groups.

With the Association can avoid all that and have a better chance to maintain what we value and gain what we crave.

 
Who cares about the IAMNPF?  Despite the IAM's fear mongering tactics the USAIR members will not lose their vested benefits.  Based on what the IAM has delivered at USAIR I seriously doubt many AA mechanics or fleet would sign an IAM card, sure a few would but they would not have many takers.  To the TWU's credit they have proven they can negotiate industry leading contracts for fleet service like they did at WN, the IAM hasn't delivered industry leading agreements for either of the groups they represent at USAIR. 
 
Again at TWA the IAM knew their place and walked away without a fight. In 2001 the IAM was in a much stronger financial position and while it was a loss, losing those dues payers didn't have significant implications for their international district lodges.  This time around they are in a much weaker position having lost many manufacturing jobs, been de-certified at CO and NW.  There is a reason the IAM doesn't support industry consolidation, unlike other unions they have lost dues payers every single time, except absorbing a few passenger service agents from AirTran.
 
Josh