The $2.55 line premium was the companys proposal, meant to cause division, after the TA was rejected the full committee, where the majority had already voted to accept the TA, threw in a lot of stuff to, in my opinion, ensure that the guys who were assigned to the sub-committee (the guys who voted NO) could not get an agreement. (I voted against forming the sub-committee and was nominated and put on the committee by the same people who voted YES to the TA). I'm convinced that some of these guys would even vote to accept less than what we turned down just so they can say they were right. The base guys pushed for a $2 base premium as a way of saying that the $2.55 line premium will not fly in Tulsa. The impression I got is the objection stems from the majority in Tulsa who dont feel the guys who work the gates in Tulsa should make that much more than guys that work the hangars, and they have the votes to get what they want, whether we like it or not. So we figured go back to 2001 book on the line premiums and push for chart rate increases a cost of living based premium which has a better chance of selling in the bases. While this lowers the post TA table position its still more than our pre TA table position (which creates a barrier with the NMB) and the total is higher than the rejected TA.
TWU negotiations.........what?
- Thread starter Chuck Schalk
- Start date
The $2.55 line premium was the companys proposal, meant to cause division, after the TA was rejected the full committee, where the majority had already voted to accept the TA, threw in a lot of stuff to, in my opinion, ensure that the guys who were assigned to the sub-committee (the guys who voted NO) could not get an agreement. (I voted against forming the sub-committee and was nominated and put on the committee by the same people who voted YES to the TA). I'm convinced that some of these guys would even vote to accept less than what we turned down just so they can say they were right. The base guys pushed for a $2 base premium as a way of saying that the $2.55 line premium will not fly in Tulsa. The impression I got is the objection stems from the majority in Tulsa who dont feel the guys who work the gates in Tulsa should make that much more than guys that work the hangars, and they have the votes to get what they want, whether we like it or not. So we figured go back to 2001 book on the line premiums and push for chart rate increases a cost of living based premium which has a better chance of selling in the bases. While this lowers the post TA table position its still more than our pre TA table position (which creates a barrier with the NMB) and the total is higher than the rejected TA.
strikeforce
Veteran
- Jan 18, 2011
- 1,224
- 253
What you just explained above has caused bitter animosity between Line and OH. The union will never have harmony as long as TUL interfares with Line's potential earnings. I understand the TWU is an Industrial union and it believes all mechanics deserve equal pay, and it's something most line guys will never agree with, especially given the fact that line guys across the ramp at UPS and Fed Ex make 50% more than us. When I review T/A's I don't look to see what TUL is offered.....I look at what I'm offered. I can careless if they're offered $20 an hour more than me.....god bless them....but, I do care when TUL, Fleet, and any other work group is more worried about what the Line is getting and they are not getting, and go out of their way to eliminate wages that affect people outside their local.
The union has a structural problem within the ranks, and until this is corrected WE will never have UNITY.
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
Just except the total amount as Economic compensation above what the line premium is now. This would stop the division on that issue. While I still do not understand why the line requires a "Line Premium", I would be okay with the total amount being somewhere around $5.00 hr above the chart rate, in the form of economic pay.
The Structural problem is not so much within the ranks of the mechanics, but that which lies in the structure of "Industrial Unionism"
strikeforce
Veteran
- Jan 18, 2011
- 1,224
- 253
The Line requires "Line Premium" because in my opinion WE are required to work 24/7 365 days a year, something TUL refuses to accept. WE don't get Christmas and New Years week off, and we're sort of like AA's firemen....just a little extra for working "live trips". Not saying you can't do it, but TUL & AFW aren't in any hurry to fix airplanes on the fly! That's my reasoning behind the extra $2.55, and I still think AA's getting it on the cheap. $5 will suffice, $10 would be great! Buck, now give your reasoning behind the $2 "Base Premium" TUL is looking to get?
Economic Pay.....Line Pay.....whatever you want to call it......doesn't really matter!
Don't get me wrong, we're all aircraft mechanics and deserve equal pay for our responsibilities, but the type of service we offer to AA is night and day. OH has it's own market value, and Line Maint. has it's own offering. The mechanic working a "live trip" where passenger inconvenience is critical is much more "valuable" to AA that minute than a mechanic working OH that has an aircraft sitting around for days. Understand the difference??? I have nothing against OH mechanics making a decent wage because that's all I'm looking to make as well, but OH is up against MRO's that pay less than minimum wages, and Line Maint. is still considered a "premium" market because of the value it provides AA and other carriers during critical flights. Without Line Maint. AA doesn't fly at dawn, noon or dusk!
High Speed Steel
Veteran
- Feb 14, 2004
- 1,375
- 136
You may want to get your facts straight before you go spouting off. This is forced "unpaid" time off to the sum of $1,288.00 for an A&P at the base. Your current .55 X's 2080 hrs. comes to $1,144.00, plus you receive $1,288.00 for 40 hrs. of work, so when you add the two together it comes to $2,432.00... So who's really getting screwed here?
toroshark
Senior
- Mar 12, 2003
- 266
- 294
We are all getting screwed. The Intl. should have formally requested a release at the end of last week's session. I don't want to hear that B.S. about a majority of the negotiating committee has to vote for it either. What the hell was the " I vote NO and authorize a strike" block on the ballots for the failed T/A. It appears to me the MEMBERSHIP spoke then. I dont care what the vote of some of Phat Don's playthings adds up to. WE VOTED to authorize a strike!
Frank Szabo
Veteran
The BS on the ballot only applied if the Grand PooBah was told to request a realease by the company which obviously hasn't gotten all their ducks in a row - yet.
I'm sure they're working their incompetent arses off as we speak ...
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
Question asked! The base mechanic does not need a base premium, at least at the behest of the line mechanic. This is another Industrial Union ploy. If you are going to be angry, be angry at Industrial Unionism. I believe that in this case it is a positioning negotiation tactic, which is design to further drive a wedge between the line and OH. But I cannot understand why it is used by the union side, except to appease Tulsa, which has the voting power to push a T/A through.
TWU informer
Veteran
- Nov 4, 2003
- 7,550
- 3,731
So TWU requested a release when chances were slim and none of getting it granted, but when the mediator all but declared impasse there was no such request? Hmmmmm....imagine that.
I agree. We've done pretty much everything the NMB has asked, yet they walked away from negotiations. My question is where on the NMB Flow chart does it say where the NMB can simply refuse to mediate yet still hold us on Ice? I missed that box.
http://www.nmb.gov/publicinfo/collbarg2.pdf
I dont even see where a request for release is required once they make such a determination, according to the chart if they determine that further mediation will not help they are supposed to proffer binding arbitration or release us, not put us on Ice.
How are people expected to respect the laws of our Government when the law says one thing but the government does the opposite?
Their website also says this:
We started negotiating in the fall of 2007, nearly four years ago with a lowball offer. The company never budged, in fact since 2007 they have taken hundreds of millions off the table by adding three years of zero increases (either structural or one time signing bonuses) to their table position.
After 3 years of Negotiations the committee, by majority vote (with opposition) decided to have the membership vote on the companys May 2010 offer as is, no counter proposals, no negotiating, it was presented to the members as it was to the committee. The membership rejected it. We started all over again and agreed to keep 20 of 47 Articles from the Rejected TA as is. We renegotiated 17 more, in most cases agreeing to the company's demands, things that increase efficiency and save the company money, we have 10 Articles left. We offered 10% on the ASMs despite the fact that when negotiations started they were looking for 8%. All we required was that workers in the stations that would be adversely affected as a result of increased Regional Flying be protected in those stations. That should not be a big deal since management claimed that Regional growth would fuel mainline growth.
If the NMB was saying "No we wont release you because we feel that we may make progress by continued discussion" like they said in 2010, thats one thing, if they said "You have a TA and need to let your members vote on it" like they did to fleet thats another, but when they say that they arent scheduling any more meetings because they dont feel it will be productive the chart spells out what the next course of action is. Proffer binding arbitration or 30 day clock starts. If the country cant afford to allow us to go on strike then it moves to the President, if his PEB cant come up with a solution then its up to Congress to allow us to strike or come up with a resolution.
s80 wrenchhead
Member
- Apr 13, 2004
- 23
- 3
How can this not mean, Release?
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
I wonder how other negotiation within the airline industry are going? Labor turmoil could be a big headache or embarrassment for the current administration, especially while campaigning.
Are others being told to continue butting heads as the NMB walks away?
Are others being told to continue butting heads as the NMB walks away?
strikeforce
Veteran
- Jan 18, 2011
- 1,224
- 253
My inside sources tell me you can take a "PAID" vacation week during Christmas/New Years break, right?
I don't have the luxury or seniority horsepower to get Christmas or New Years off! Been that way for 20+ years.
So, if I want those holidays off....I need to CSO, which is also an unpaid holiday off. You at least get to spend time with family while I go and save the airline. Not worth the measly $400 I make working the holidays! So, who's really getting screwed here.....hmmmm!
As far as .55 for line pay......seems the company recognizes the value of the line mechanic by at least offering $1.80. That's $1.25 more than you or the union value the line.
If your jealous of the Line making an extra $1144 for working 24/7 and 365 days a year......come work and live in Chicago.
I like Chicago, but I don't like people that live inTulsa or any other city determining my purchasing power. I wouldn't go out of my way to take away wages or benefits offered to you by the company just because it's not offered to me. Like I told Buck....I can care less if TUL makes $10, $20 or $30 more than Line.....I don't work there. Look, if TUL can market itself to where they can command $40 an hour, good for you, but I know the Line can demand up to $50 an hour and probably get it because there are carriers paying that rate.
strikeforce
Veteran
- Jan 18, 2011
- 1,224
- 253
Well Buck, don't you think it's time to get away from the Industrial unions and join a craft union??
The one thing Industrialized unions fail to do is "market" the services of the aircraft mechanics. The TWU motto is "a mechanic is a mechanic"....whether you're an aircraft mechanic, auto, plant, or facilities. They believe in equal pay for all. Absolute failure!
Take the pilot's.....they are all pilots, whether 747 or RJ, but they negotiate separate pay rates based on fleet specific and gross weight. Why don't they negotiate like industrial unions???? Do you think it's fair to pay a 747 captain the same as the RJ? The TWU would!
Why doesn't the RJ pilot complain that the 747 pilot is making two or three times as much? They're all pilots, right?
The same goes for aircraft mechanics.....we're all A&P's but Line and OH provide AA with different services. It's just unfortunate that Tulsa has to compete against MRO's paying meager wages and no benefits. Line will suffer just like Tulsa if more A&P's decide to work for less than standard rates. It's happening right now. There are AA, UAL and other carrier A&P's that work across the ramp for non-union contractors for less than AA wages, and no benefits, that are undercutting the union's efforts of gaining more wages and benefits. Why doesn't the union put a stop to this non-sense???? Tell me Buck???
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
I really do not know. However it has been my experience that the TWU philosophy keeps them from seeing the difference in crafts or skills within the union. It could very well be that a change in representation will have to take place. This could be devastating for the structure of the TWU industrial philosophy.
