TWU Negotiations A Failed Strategy

[Duke787]

If you are not prepared to strike for a better deal then you dont deserve one.



Wrong, SMAs would work and sign off their own work on anything except powerplant. The new language defining a Maintenance Base in the TA was open. When the company was asked what would stop the company from inculding ORD, JFK or any other current line station with a hangar as a maintenance base his reply was "Nothing"(this happened at one of the Stores sessions). So if that contract had passed they could have declared ORD a maintenance base and staffed 20% of ORD with SMAs. They could do anything you do except run engines or sign off work on engines.




We will if you grow and pair and are willing to strike if there isnt any retro.

I went to the meeting that Dell had at ORD for AMFA right after we voted in the concessions. Dell said "I would never take a concession without a snap back". Then UAL took concession no snap back with AMFA as their union. What I'm getting at, is that Dell was full of rhetoric at the meeting, and I believe you are full of rhetoric. If we ever sign a contract I doubt it will be any better then what was voted down. I hope I'm wrong, but I doubt it.

No reason to be insulting because I have a different point of view then you, insults will not convince me to be believe your rhetoric, actions will, all you ex-AMFA guys talk tough, but I have yet to see any results. Remember we all lose in a strike. When the FA's went on stike their union called for a 10 strike.They new how long they were going to be out, plus they were a lot younger then.

Thanks for the clarification on the SMA's.

 

[Frank Szabo]

Deleted

 

[Frank Szabo]

If you are not prepared to strike for a better deal then you dont deserve one.



Wrong, SMAs would work and sign off their own work on anything except powerplant. The new language defining a Maintenance Base in the TA was open. When the company was asked what would stop the company from inculding ORD, JFK or any other current line station with a hangar as a maintenance base his reply was "Nothing"(this happened at one of the Stores sessions). So if that contract had passed they could have declared ORD a maintenance base and staffed 20% of ORD with SMAs. They could do anything you do except run engines or sign off work on engines.




We will if you grow and pair and are willing to strike if there isnt any retro.

I'm getting rather tired of this "strike" rhetoric. Little Jimmy will not call a strike unless it fits into the company's plans and AMR OKs it - everybody with any sense knows this. Commercial aircraft cannot fly without pilots (yet) nor carry passengers without a proper number of FAs for safety reasons.

We, however, are in a much less enviable position and to keep harping about striking is irresponsible. A strike is designed to disrupt operations and in our position, that can be better accomplished in ways other than walking off the job at the behest of the so-called "representation" we're presently trying to replace.

Next question - this being the case (and we all know it is), why would anyone pay any attention to a strike declaration by the so-called "leader" of a "union" that is obviously a better representative of the company to the detriment of its membership, while there's a drive on to replace it??

Anything done by Little will be at the direction of his true master and benefactor, AMR corporate at Centrepork.

Why are you representing the problem to anything other than this, Bob?

 

[odie01]

I'm getting rather tired of this "strike" rhetoric. Little Jimmy will not call a strike unless it fits into the company's plans and AMR OKs it - everybody with any sense knows this.

Next question - this being the case (and we all know it is), why would anyone pay any attention to a strike declaration by the so-called "leader" of a "union" that is obviously a better representative of the company to the detriment of its membership?

Anything done but Little will be at the direction of his true master and benefactor, AMR corporate at Centrepork.

That's a good point Frank, its not our union its AA's. We go into negotiations playing go fish and the company plays chess. We get caught in "fools mate" every time, and we tip the king. We don't want to strike but we are in a union, and thats what all unions do, if they are forced to do so. I firmly believe if we would have went into negotiations with legal counsil, or some kind of paid professional help, we would be taken a little bit more seriously. All the money we pay in dues is waisted. Please stop giving us twu t-shirts, calendars, and cornhole cream and use that money for professional help!

 

[Bob Owens]

Bob,

Can you provide us any recent examples of AMT's Strikes in the Airline Industry that created Retro Pay that wasn't in the Company offer prior to the strike?

Can you give us any recent example of a successful AMT Strike in the Industry?

I just don't want you and others negotiating with the company based a willingness or bluff to strike and then when they call your bluff we are all out on the street from awhile and then return for basically what was on the table to begin with. If we go out, we don't return until we get what was demanded, otherwise we wasted our time.

I can appreciate your efforts to be more militant and radical than what we have experienced in the past. But I also don't have much faith in another TWU bluff strategy that in the end makes us look like fools.

You have not showed us any proposal, you have not showed any survey results. Yet you always advocate that we be willing to strike while following a blind premise and direction. I am not willing to follow that blind leadership to that level. What exactly are you asking us to be willing to strike over? Retro? How Much? ASM's? Restore and More? Strike over what Bob? Are you planning to attempt to make history with the TWU Membership and Consitution behind you? If so this seems a drastic change from your previous opinions of the TWU, and the only thing that has changed is you are now embedded in the negotiations. I have trouble accepting that much has changed just because you have been given more authority.

Good Luck though, we will all need it.


Just Sayin....

The last time they struck, AMTs at AA, they were successful. Granted that was 1969. In 2001 if the company had believed that you were not willing to strike you would have never seen retro. The willingness to strike for things is how things were won, most of the time they didnt have to demonstrate it, thats what we must be willing to do to get them back and keep them.

There's a reason why we see very few strikes by AMTs, because the company usually settles before a strike, or they have the NMB drag things out till the next recession, or the naysayers carry the day and we capitulate. But if the company knows that the union is not willing to strike then they will continue to take.

Are there risks? Yes. Is it possible that AA would get enough workers in 30 days with airport Access to replace us on the line? Maybe but very doubtful. This isnt 2005, and even then NWA had a hard time scraping up 1000 mechanics. It took them 18 months. AA needs at least 3000. The planes are full, not just ours but pretty much everyone elses as well, unlike 2005 where there was still excess capacity. The FAA is all over the airlines, again unlike 2005. If AA is having a hard time keeping compliant now how well do you think they would do if they could scrape up enough replacements? Look at the experience level of our management now. There's more experience on the floor. The AMFA strike at NWA was a conspiracy that involved labor in the destruction a union. The other unions helped NWA defeat AMFA. I dont see the pilots or FAs aligning with the company, in fact in the past they have usually helped us at least on an unofficial level.

NWA invested a lot of money to break AMFA, those who continually cite NWA are allowing the whole industry to capitalize on that investment, even though NWA no longer exists.

The risk of not being willing to strike is a job that you can no longer afford to keep.

You would not be asked to go on strike without being told what the demands are, we have not been released anyway. We meet with the company in December. Depending on how far we get with the changes we will have a better idea if its headed towards a strike or not. All I'm asking is that we get ready to strike if we dont get a deal that would restore what we gave up in 2003 and puts us in the right direction towards getting back the standard of living that we had prior to the concessions. It needs to be made clear that we find what the company is offering now is unacceptable, and if you havent quit then the only other way is to let them know that you are willing to strike to get what we need.

 

[Frank Szabo]

The last time they struck, AMTs at AA, they were successful. Granted that was 1969. In 2001 if the company had believed that you were not willing to strike you would have never seen retro. Thats how these things were won , thats what we must be willing to do to get them back and keep them.

There's a reason why we see very few strikes by AMTs, because the company usually settles before a strike, or they have the NMB drag things out till the next recession. But if the company knows that the union is not willing to strike then they will continue to take.

Are there risks? Yes. Is it possible that AA would get enough workers in 30 days with airport Access to replace us on the line? Maybe but very doubtful. This isnt 2005, and even then NWA had a hard time scraping up 1000 mechanics. It took them 18 months. AA needs at least 3000. The planes are full, not just ours but pretty much everyone elses as well, unlike 2005 where there was still excess capacity. The FAA is all over the airlines, again unlike 2005. If AA is having a hard time keeping compliant now how well do you think they would do if they could scrape up enough replacements? Look at the experience level of our management now. There's more experience on the floor. The AMFA strike at NWA was a conspiracy that involved labor in the destruction a union. The other unions helped NWA defeat AMFA. I dont see the pilots or FAs aligning with the company, in fact in the past they have usually helped us at least on an unofficial level.

NWA invested a lot of money to break AMFA, those who continually cite NWA are allowing the whole industry to capitalize on that investment, even though NWA no longer exists.

The risk of not being willing to strike is a job that you can no longer afford to keep.

Bob:

You and Chuck were removed from office in the past because of a loyalty question re: the TWU - this time around, you and Chuck have kept your positions - why is that?

Why do you advocate striking if called by a supposed "union" that represents the company far better than those who pay it dues every month?

Considering, as I said in another post, a strike will not be called by the company-owned union unless the company can get benefit from it at the expense of its workers, why do you continue to advocate a strike? The purpose of a strike is, bottom line, to do the company enough damage that it will bend it's point of view somewhat to our favor. That can be better accomplished inside rather than out.

Considering we are the most easily replaced workgroup of the three and the company would probably welcome a period of not having to pay us anything while it lined up replacement for our line, maintenance and overhaul duties (if it hasn't already), why should we be ready to do what they've planned for with the TWU's assistance?

WTF, Bob?? Why the change of attitude?

 

[Bob Owens]

Bob:

You and Chuck were removed from office in the past because of a loyalty question re: the TWU - this time around, you and Chuck have kept your positions - why is that?

Why do you advocate striking if called by a supposed "union" that represents the company far better than those who pay it dues every month?

Considering, as I said, a strike will not be called by the company-owned union unless the company can get benefit from it at the expense of its workers, why do you continue to advocate a strike?

WTF, Bob??

I was removed because I testified that my Loyalty was to the members who put me in office, not to the International.

My members put here to get a contract and try and make other changes to our union. We must get a contract that we can live with. The TWU is the union in place and the bargaining agent for the members. Thanks to the strong NO vote given by the membership, we (the members of the committee that were against the TA) have more leverage at getting a better deal. The International and the company thought the TA would pass, the International even stuffed the ballots with a subtle "vote yes" insert without ever even mentioning it to the committee just to make sure.

That Vote and the AMP drive no doubt have put the International on edge. All the members of the committee came from Locals that voted NO, however Don Videtich remains the chairman. We have been told that we own it, time will tell. I hope we dont have to strike, in fact I doubt we will have to, with the high load factors and reduced system capacity I think we would end up with either a more favorable settlement at the 11th hour of the 29day or a PEB, but everyone, including the NMB must know that we will fight to get something better. I think that the lack of signicant operational delays, cancellations and spontaneous job actions has given both the NMB and the company the impression that the status quo is acceptable. I think the NO vote shocked them all. Like I said before we will probably have a better indication of where we are headed after we meet in December, however Brundage's comments about "rearranging the furniture" leave me with the opinion that we are headed towards an impasse. There is no way they can meet our demands with the crumbs they offered. They have to give us a bigger peiece of that much bigger ($22 billion vs $18 billion)pie.

 

[Frank Szabo]

I was removed because I testified that my Loyalty was to the members who put me in office, not to the International.

I'm here to get a contract. A contract that we can live with. The TWU is the union in place and the bargaining agent for the members. Thanks to the strong NO vote given by the membership, we (the members of the committee that were against the TA) have more leverage at getting a better deal. That Vote and the AMP drive no doubt have put the International on edge. All the members of the committee came from Locals that voted NO, however Don Videtich remains the chairman. We have been told that we own it, time will tell. The International and the company thought the TA would pass, the International even stuffed the ballots with a subtle "vote yes" insert without ever even mentioning it to the committee just to make sure.

I hope we dont have to strike, in fact I doubt we will have to, with the high load factors and reduced system capacity I think we would end up with either a more favorable settlement at the 11th hour of the 29day or a PEB, but everyone, including the NMB must know that we will fight to get something better. I think that the lack of signicant operational delays, cancellations and spontaneous job actions has given both the NMB and the company the impression that the status quo is acceptable. Like I said before we will probably have a better indication of where we are headed after we meet in December, however Brundage's comments about "rearranging the furniture" leave me with the opinion that we are headed towards an impasse. There is no way they can meet our demands with the crumbs they offered. They have to give us a bigger peiece of that much bigger ($22 billion vs $18 billion)pie.

Nice deflection, even though one can deduce your loyalties have changed - now answer the question.

Knowing full well any call to strike American will be at the behest of and with the approval of AMR, why do you continue to advocate a strike that will, without a doubt, be exactly what the company wants - ie, getting us off the property so it's free to impliment solutions of its own choosing?

 

[Bob Owens]

Nice deflection, even though one can deduce your loyalties have changed - now answer the question.

Knowing full well any call to strike American will be at the behest of and with the approval of AMR, why do you continue to advocate a strike that will, without a doubt, be exactly what the company wants - ie, getting us off the property so it's free to impliment solutions of its own choosing?

My loyalties havent changed. Your loyalities on the other hand are questionable, why would you claim that we are the most easily replaced group? Most people who know a little about this industry admit that the two most critical groups, the hardest to replace, are the mechanics and the pilots. Why would you claim otherwise?

NWA had a hard time scraping up 1000 mechanics just a short while after thousands of mechanics were shed from dozens of airlines. What makes you think that AA would be able to do it now, five years after NWA struggled to get 1000?

Are you aware of the high rejection rate for recalls? Most of the FAs came back, most of the mechanics in the high cost areas like New York and California basically said "Bite Me". Some accepted the recall and simply didnt show. Are you aware of the fact that the FAA has only been issueing around 6000 new maint certs a year, since 2003?

My members can recall me at any time. 94% of them voted NO, they dont question where my loyalties are. Like I said the International did all they could to get the deal through, ie the inserts that were put in without even notifying the committee.

 

[Frank Szabo]

My loyalties havent changed. Your loyalities on the other hand are questionable, why would you claim that we are the most easily replaced group? Most people who know a little about this industry admit that the two most critical groups, the hardest to replace, are the mechanics and the pilots. Why would you claim otherwise?

I'm simply claiming there are many MROs out there that want any business they can get - AMR would have no problem at all with patronizing them in effect killing the base maintenance program.

NWA had a hard time scraping up 1000 mechanics just a short while after thousands of mechanics were shed from dozens of airlines. What makes you think that AA would be able to do it now, five years after NWA struggled to get 1000?

NWA took 2+ years to staff itself with replacement scab mechanics, all the time with del Femine saying "They won't be able to find the tools".

Are you aware of the high rejection rate for recalls? Most of the FAs came back, most of the mechanics in the high cost areas like New York and California basically said "Bite Me". Some accepted the recall and simply didnt show. Are you aware of the fact that the FAA has only been issueing around 6000 new maint certs a year, since 2003?

I'm very aware of the rejection rates - perhaps it might get you line guys some geo pay after all - you deserve it. As far as the 6k new maintenance certifications - sorry to hear it's so high. I'd very much like to see that at 1k or less. A "union" worth it's salt wouldn't have any problem steering prospective mechs away from the system as it's full of abuse and defacto bribing in the form of tuition paid to the aviation schools that, no doubt, finds its way back to the FAA reps.

My members can recall me at any time. 94% of them voted NO, they dont question where my loyalties are. Like I said the International did all they could to get the deal through, ie the inserts that were put in without even notifying the committee.

Things in the line world are evidently rather different from the overhaul world and I'll not argue that point.

My question wasn't about who can be recalled - my original question was about the wisdom of workers following the directive (the TWU taking us out on strike) of an entity that instead of representing the workers who pay it monthly dues said entity, in all reality, represents the sworn enemy of those workers. That's why there's a movement afoot to toss the TWU to the street and replace it with what many claim is a more responsive entity.

Since Little Jimmy, in effect, works for the company, is it wise tthat the membership do anything he might direct us to do? That was the original question.

 

[CIO]

M&R Negotiations Update - 11/19/10

By: Alan On: 11/19/2010 18:13:49In: M&R Committee Updates

The Maintenance and Related Negotiating Committee has a Mediation Conference scheduled with NMB Mediator Jack Kane and American Airlines management on December 14-17, 2010 in Hurst, Texas. This will be the first bargaining session in mediation since the rejection of the tentative agreement on August 24, 2010.

We will update the membership with information of the progress of this mediation session as information becomes available.

We would like to thank our members for your continued support and patience.

In Solidarity,
Your M&R Negotiating Committee

Stores Negotiations Update - 11/19/10

By: Alan On: 11/19/2010 1849In: Stores Committee Updates

The Stores Negotiating Committee has a Mediation Conference scheduled with NMB Mediator Jack Kane and American Airlines management on December 14-17, 2010 in Hurst, Texas. This will be the first bargaining session in mediation since the rejection of the tentative agreement on August 24, 2010.

We will update the membership with information of the progress of this mediation session as information becomes available.

We would like to thank our members for their continued support and patience.

In Solidarity,
TWU Stores Negotiating Committee

CIO,

 

[wirewinder]

That's a good point Frank, its not our union its AA's. We go into negotiations playing go fish and the company plays chess. We get caught in "fools mate" every time, and we tip the king. We don't want to strike but we are in a union, and thats what all unions do, if they are forced to do so. I firmly believe if we would have went into negotiations with legal counsil, or some kind of paid professional help, we would be taken a little bit more seriously. All the money we pay in dues is waisted. Please stop giving us twu t-shirts, calendars, and cornhole cream and use that money for professional help!

The idea of unions having legal counsel is only foreign to the aviation community. During the MCI furlough in 2005, some of our AA mechanics went to work at the Burlington Northern/Santa Fe railroad and they observed that each of the contract groups had their own legal counsel. The counsel was used during contract negotiations and during routine grievance hearings. It had the effect of eliminating harrassment and ensuring that hearings were a meeting of "equals". AA has about 53 full-time attorneys at Amon Carter Boulevard. Many of them are simply engaged in dealing with the average of 17 new suits that are filed against the company each week, mostly for lost luggage, missed connections to airlines or cruise ships, etc. We counter their strength with zero attorneys and usually only the voice that got into office by shouting down all of the competition. The Barrister vs. The Bully, ladies and gentlemen, place your bets.

 

[Duke787]

The idea of unions having legal counsel is only foreign to the aviation community. During the MCI furlough in 2005, some of our AA mechanics went to work at the Burlington Northern/Santa Fe railroad and they observed that each of the contract groups had their own legal counsel. The counsel was used during contract negotiations and during routine grievance hearings. It had the effect of eliminating harrassment and ensuring that hearings were a meeting of "equals". AA has about 53 full-time attorneys at Amon Carter Boulevard. Many of them are simply engaged in dealing with the average of 17 new suits that are filed against the company each week, mostly for lost luggage, missed connections to airlines or cruise ships, etc. We counter their strength with zero attorneys and usually only the voice that got into office by shouting down all of the competition. The Barrister vs. The Bully, ladies and gentlemen, place your bets.

What are you talking about, a guy who goes to A&P school or 4 plus years in the military, then gets a job as an airline mechanic, then works nights for a few years, then afternoons for a few years all the while going through all the different 40 hour aircraft schools is totally qualified to hash out a contract with lawyers who go to school for 6-8 years to become lawyers, and that's all they do. Don't worry we're going to get everything we want because our negotiators went to negotiation school for a month and talk a lot of "we're getting back everything they stole" rhetoric.

 

[787nightmare]

The idea of unions having legal counsel is only foreign to the aviation community. During the MCI furlough in 2005, some of our AA mechanics went to work at the Burlington Northern/Santa Fe railroad and they observed that each of the contract groups had their own legal counsel. The counsel was used during contract negotiations and during routine grievance hearings. It had the effect of eliminating harrassment and ensuring that hearings were a meeting of "equals". AA has about 53 full-time attorneys at Amon Carter Boulevard. Many of them are simply engaged in dealing with the average of 17 new suits that are filed against the company each week, mostly for lost luggage, missed connections to airlines or cruise ships, etc. We counter their strength with zero attorneys and usually only the voice that got into office by shouting down all of the competition. The Barrister vs. The Bully, ladies and gentlemen, place your bets.

Good post.
One can only conclude the M & R is seen as such an easy "push over" at contract time, the TWU doesn't see the need to budget for such an expenditure. And judging by the contracts in the past...who can blame them!
I'd bet my next check APA has some pretty sharp attorneys present at contract talks.

 

[TWU informer]

What are you guys talking about?

All we need is the willingness to strike, the belief that we cannot be replaced, and a Power Point Presentation.
That along with nice matching Polo Shirts with a TWU Logo and we are set.

Lawyers, we don't need no stinking Lawyers.

And don't forget that the 2/3rds voting NO really gave us some leverage.

:blink: :blink:

Just Sayin....