OP
Chuck Schalk
Veteran
- Nov 17, 2006
- 1,042
- 1,149
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #4,081
TWU negotiations.........what?
- Thread starter Chuck Schalk
- Start date
High Speed Steel
Veteran
- Feb 14, 2004
- 1,375
- 136
Here is the deal Chuck. I'm not interested in going down this path with you mainly because I have more respect for you than I do Bob. The question you posed to me in a former post of "Why don't you tell us your forward thinking and how to secure a better contract that will preserve jobs, benefits, and give us livable wages?" This Is were you and Bob have failed, this was what the "VOTE NO" video campaign was all about. So to date how has following this mindset truly benefited the membership? Was I truly wrong for voting Yes in 2010?
Your comments explain a lot of the problem. You are very misinformed about how the RLA works. If an impasse is declared, the union gets to exercise self help and impose their last offer. Not last best offer like Chuck said in the vote no video but last offer. The company also has the right to hire replacements if they want to. The union can stay out like AMFA at NWA and eventually get replaced or they can go back under the imposed contract like was also done at NWA.
The only ones that went back under an imposed contract were SCABS..Lets get that straight. Another thing we at NW AMFA in 2001 got anyone and everyone in aviation a raise whether you want to admit it or not the twu most certainly didn't gain you anything they ride and have ridden the coattails of real unions. Ok so AMFA NWA lost that strike no thanks to the IAM TWU and IBT but I at non union FX make more than I ever have under a union any union and that is thanks to AMFA and our NW 2001 contract and thats a fact. Good luck with that lapdog TWU you are going to need it.
The only ones that went back under an imposed contract were SCABS..Lets get that straight. Another thing we at NW AMFA in 2001 got anyone and everyone in aviation a raise whether you want to admit it or not the twu most certainly didn't gain you anything they ride and have ridden the coattails of real unions. Ok so AMFA NWA lost that strike no thanks to the IAM TWU and IBT but I at non union FX make more than I ever have under a union any union and that is thanks to AMFA and our NW 2001 contract and thats a fact. Good luck with that lapdog TWU you are going to need it.
High Speed Steel
Veteran
- Feb 14, 2004
- 1,375
- 136
And how many engines were outsourced for overhaul and how many were lost after the 2001 AMFA/NW agreement. Wasn't it only within a few short months after ratification that you folks lost core work that sustained your headcounts? What a shame, so many suffered under the AMFA's watch.... :huh:
Yes you were wrong in my opinion. With a yes vote, you were throwing all of the people under the age of 50 under the bus.
High Speed Steel
Veteran
- Feb 14, 2004
- 1,375
- 136
Hey Chuck, its been a little while, is the Calvalry coming?
strikeforce
Veteran
- Jan 18, 2011
- 1,224
- 253
And, that is a fact. In 2001, the TWU initially proposed a wage of $35 an hour and when our local president at 563 found out about AMFA's $62 wage proposal, the TWU went up to $55. I was an exexcutive board member at the time and I remember those negotiations. If it wasn't for AMFA at NW, today we wouldn't be earning anything close to what we're making, and for the TWU, IAM and all of these coat tail riding pathetic unions to watch our brothers getting shown the street without any support is an absolute travesty for our craft. Every single mechanic in aviation should have supported AMFA's cause. Now, the mechanics at WN, Alaska and every other carrier AMFA represents enjoys greater wages and much better benefits than any TWU, IAM mechanic out there. The joke's on US for sticking with our lap dog pathetic union. You can dispute the farm outs all you want, but comparing mechanic to mechanic wages and benefits btw AMFA mechanics and any other union on the planet that represents licensed mechanics....AMFA tops them all!!!!
TWU informer
Veteran
- Nov 4, 2003
- 7,550
- 3,731
We will see how this ends up, but as it stands right now the NO vote has thrown everyone over 50 under the bus with those under 50
At least that is the way I understand where we are currently at in negotiations.
odie01
Veteran
- May 11, 2010
- 1,321
- 473
That's right. And not many people know that the IAM gave away the farm at NWA two months before AMFA took over. AMFA was the twu's scapegoat, just like Bartman was Oct 14, 2003 for Cub fans.
Those of us in AO feel quite comfortable with the outcome of the failed T/A and realize the only raises to be had come in the form of OT. The only ones who seem to be whining about it are those in the back shops, as those in AO rarely even discuss the contract, negotiations, or anything union related. Having 20% on the dock loaded with SMA's and unlimited labor loaning within workgroups was a deal breaker. Accept it and take the OT.
High Speed Steel
Veteran
- Feb 14, 2004
- 1,375
- 136
Hey, look at the bright side. Its OK to be wrong, you don't have to agree with me... 
OP
Chuck Schalk
Veteran
- Nov 17, 2006
- 1,042
- 1,149
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #4,092
Just explain why you voted yes, rather than why I voted no.
was i wrong for voting no to:
a base pay increase on an average of 40 cents per year?
2003 base pay 25.25 2012 base pay 28.86 (TA voted down)
equals $3.61 raise over 9 years = 40 cents a year! ( Not ok with me)
NO RETRO for 3 years of stalling tactics (not OK with me)
NO retiree medical (not ok with me)
OR accruing 8 sick days per year and paying 20 sick days per month for retiree medical at todays rate per month. (subject to increase every 3 years) (not ok with me)
NO shift differential (not OK with me)
NO double time after 4 hours of overtime (not OK with me)
Giving management the right to evaluate and demote a crew chief past 6 months probation (not ok with me)
10 days IOD (80days to 10unacceptable and not ok with me)
1 week vacation gone every year ( not ok with me)
any letters of discipline due to slowdown or curtailiment of work will not be removed as per article 28 D (not ok with me)
Part time employees article 43, (not OK with me, full time only)
replacing AMT's for Support Mechanics airframe (10 dollars less an hour, divides us more) (not Ok with me)
article 1 proposal L- other labor protective provisions
In my opinon; gives the company the green light to piece off work as long as the new company picks up our employees.
anyone else can jump in some things I may have missed
Overspeed
Veteran
- Jun 27, 2011
- 3,245
- 1,065
Yes AMFA tops everyone in higher pay for fewer people. I agree.
strikeforce
Veteran
- Jan 18, 2011
- 1,224
- 253
And, one day AA will have fewer people and lower wages and more expensive benefits. The four 757's is only the start.
Overspeed
Veteran
- Jun 27, 2011
- 3,245
- 1,065
So Chuck how much progress on fixing all the inequities you have mentioned? The mediator has left the building so talks may or may not continue. So in November we will be asking for release and from what my president has said. Will that be the action that get's us everything you were not ok with? If not then what? Who will you blame then? You are great at picking things apart so I take it if everything listed above is fixed to your liking then we will have a TA.
