TWU vs. AMP Debate Comments

[High Speed Steel]

I would like to hear from aapittbull on how he believes the AMP would handle the current mediated TA that we have before us in the event that it is voted down.

With his knowledge of the pending amendable status of our TWU contract what would be negotiable if rejected by the membership?

What remedy would AMP take to get an amendable contract while in mediation?

 

[Birdman]

CIO, it would appear from this post on another thread that your statement, "keep work in house that is no longer performed at any other carrier", would be false. I also believe Delta still performs heavy maintenance in Atlanta. I will try and confirm that. So far your record on stating fact is not looking very credible. BTW, what other airline mechanics are represented by the TWU?

Your not the only airline doing heavy maintenance inhouse, in CLT for US we overhaul the 737s, 757s, some checks on the A320 family, an occasional widebody too, and in PIT we overhaul the A320 family and in PHX we do C-checks.

 

[aapitbull]

I would like to hear from aapittbull on how he believes the AMP would handle the current mediated TA that we have before us in the event that it is voted down.

With his knowledge of the pending amendable status of our TWU contract what would be negotiable if rejected by the membership?

What remedy would AMP take to get an amendable contract while in mediation?

Well if was up to me a would start over it is very difficult to say what I would change I can tell you I see the ASM, pensions for the new hires the dwh hangar , retiree medical, shop mechanics, crew chief langauge as their wish list and as such are bargsining chips but without knowing what they are ready to give us it hard to say what we should do but thats just thoughts off the top of my head.

I will say I do think given what we gave up in concessions plus what they admit we have saved them addtionally through work rule changes plus the fact that we have lost over 3000 members since 04 we could go in front of a peb and do far better than the conncession on the table right now or binding arbritration but i would not suggest that.

There has been alot of talk of another Taesl like venture with G.E. as long as there are protections for our work and there was somrthing in it for us we could talk about it the truth is its not easy to find mechanic's, machinist,welders,plumbers ,millrights, electricans platers automotive etc we cannot continue to negotaite away are skills.

Now I know this is not the best but without knowing their postions it is hard to be specific.

 

[High Speed Steel]

Well if was up to me a would start over it is very difficult to say what I would change I can tell you I see the ASM, pensions for the new hires the dwh hangar , retiree medical, shop mechanics, crew chief langauge as their wish list and as such are bargsining chips but without knowing what they are ready to give us it hard to say what we should do but thats just thoughts off the top of my head.

I will say I do think given what we gave up in concessions plus what they admit we have saved them addtionally through work rule changes plus the fact that we have lost over 3000 members since 04 we could go in front of a peb and do far better than the conncession on the table right now or binding arbritration but i would not suggest that.

There has been alot of talk of another Taesl like venture with G.E. as long as there are protections for our work and there was somrthing in it for us we could talk about it the truth is its not easy to find mechanic's, machinist,welders,plumbers ,millrights, electricans platers automotive etc we cannot continue to negotaite away are skills.

Now I know this is not the best but without knowing their postions it is hard to be specific.

When you say start over, would the AMP start over from 4-14-2003 the peak of the AA/TWU 2001 agreement?

 

[aapitbull]

When you say start over, would the AMP start over from 4-14-2003 the peak of the AA/TWU 2001 agreement?

Whatever conversation over, and by the way it's not up to me.

 

[Ralph]

There are now 7 posts in the debate forum, and 6 pages of posts in the comments thread--almost NONE of them comments about the debate. Despite my requests that this thread be restricted to comments about the debate and what is posted there, you all insist on arguing back and forth with each other. There are ample threads available for that. If we cannot wait for the debaters to say something before we put our two cents in, then this thread is not needed.

If you don't like what someone else posts in this thread, leave it to the debaters to respond. I have asked them to respond to comments in the debate forum. A few of you have brought up some good points that I think the debaters should address.

I'm giving it this weekend, and if the comments continue to be about everything you ever thought needed to be said about TWU or AMP, then this thread will be closed as not needed.

 

[Heavy C]

CIO apparently skipped over DEBATE article #2. The comparisons between the TWU constitution VS. the AMP constitution. All that was mentioned was AMFA this and AMFA that. I would like him to breakdown the specifics of why the TWU constitution is better than the AMP constitution, in his opinion. Please stick to the DEBATE articles set forth in front of you by the FORUM. RE: CIO posts #7 & #8.

 

[Deleted member 14439]

OUTSTANDING POST Dave !!! Bravo Zulu !!

 

[tech2101]

History of the Union is very important. You can visit: www.twu.org to read more.

History of the debater is also very important. Giving ones background at the beginning of an open forum debate is common practice. That background always includes a overview of that person's CV or Resume.

I would like to know who worked where and for how long to give some context to where the debater gets his/her positions from.

That is especially critical in a debate about a union organizing campaign. If you are unwilling to say for who you worked and for how long, it only lessens credibility. Also, if you have any monetary ties, full disclosure would be in order.

Until all the above happens, I will take your debate points with a grain of salt.

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

POST 7 and POST 8

Was that your rebuttle to the Constitution comparisons between the TWU and AMP
The only thing I got from your statement was that the twu repesents a variety of title groups. Nothing more

looks like the AMP constitution has some good points for the members especially having the incomes of the officers tied to that of its members incomes.

 

[MikeCobbAFW]

RE: Post #9 by CIO



CIO,

Interesting how the outsource percentage numbers really change when you use them.
Compared to when the TWU leadership uses them.

TWU Leadership has claimed on many occasions that the outsource percentage is between 18-20% at AA excluding 100% outsource of TAESL enigine component rework. That is kinda like AA using "excluding special charges" when reporting profits. In addition Steve Luis and the TWU negotiating committee submitted a proposal in negotiations attempting to secure a 20.6% percent cap. Now you show up here as a Debator representing the TWU and all of the sudden the TWU now has a 10% outsource rate. Do you honestly believe the negotiations proposal was to concede another 10% in outsourcing of work?

After watching the results of the 150+ grievances filed over the 100% overhaul outsource of the CFM56 engine last fall it is clear to me that it is not the TWU negotiated scope language that is keeping our work in house. It is what AA Mangement wants to do at this time. The CFM56 outsource showed all of us that the TWU has failed to secure scope language that protects our work. Yet you want to twist the facts during the debate and make it appear the TWU is flawless and doing much better than most. The FACT is AA wants to do their own maintenance at this time and if that desire changes you and the TWU will NOT stop a damn bit of what they want to outsource from leaving the property.

The TWU scope language is not what has kept the work in-house it is the concessions that created jobs at less pay than most MRO's using new classifcations called SRP/OSM/SMA. The difference in outsource percentages compared other carriers are not what you claim. And whatever the percentage difference actually is we the union members have purchased those differences with concessions in pay and benefits. Is that what you are banging your proud drum about in this debate? You really do seem to be ready to celebrate these facts while many of us are embarrased.

The TWU wants me to subsidize the Democratic Party via my paycheck. The Democratic Party wants me to subsidize unemployed workers and massive Government with payroll taxes from my paycheck. And the TWU wants me to subsidize jobs and mismanagement of the maintenance base with concessions. I don't know about you but my family cannot afford much more of these TWU subsidies so you can use them to defend that which needs to be changed and replaced.

Those AMT's at other airlines have been faced several times in their negotiations within the last 20 years with Airline Management demanding a wage scale match with the last TWU concession or a cost match to some other crack pot concession scheme negotiated by the TWU. Those AMT's were not as quick to cave like the TWU has here at AA and thus they have different outsource percentages than AA. So what? That is the way their voting majority voted to live by. How many of the other legacy carriers are working under a contract signed by their International Union "Without Further Ratifcation" of their membership? And to top that it was signed right after the the International Officer claimed the only way to have a legitimate contract is to re-vote? NONE You do remember James C. Littles' claim that the only way the labor agreement can be credible is to re-vote? That is our current 7+ year agreement we are working under today CIO.

Maybe if the TWU would stop leading the industry in concession bargaining or if we just sign the AMP cards and get rid of TWU once and for all, those other unions at the lagacy carriers wouldn't have to keep bellying up their own demise trying to keep up with the most docile union in the industry. Ever think about that fact CIO?

Everything you post is laced with fear as if you have been worshipping some cult instead of being a union man. How many Labor Leaders have you ever read about in history that exhibit fear and cowardice the way you do? NONE

The fact is under a Union Consitution like AMP the membership is really the supreme authority. If the membership wanted to secure more outsource protection via more concessions that would still be their option under AMP. If the membership wanted to allow more outsourcing in exchange for reversing some concession that would their choice also.

You seem to really fear allowing the membership to become the controlling force behind the Union Label.
Why is that? Are you one of those that believes we are just plain stupid and we need folks like yourself using heavy handed TWU tactics and leadership appointments to save us from oursleves?

REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENED AT OTHER AIRLINES.
REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH AMFA AT NORTHWEST
REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH AMFA AT UNITED
That does NOT mean those things will happen here ar AA just because we fiinally oust the most docile union in the indsutry.

Speaking of your contiued use of the UAL Mechaniics dumping AMFA and going TEAMSTERS.
I would rather have the TEAMSTERS than the TWU but as long as we are TWU they will never accept authorization cards. We have no other options available to remove the TWU because of anti-freedom no raid agreements.
The way see it, we could go AMP and if that doesnt work out we would then have more oprions than we have today. And your debate postings do not cause me fear at all, they confirm that we do have many options once we leave the TWU and the AFL-CIO control modules that restrict membership choice of representation.

What would be wrong with trying AMP and if that fails going TEAMSTERS?
We would damn sure be better off than than we are today.

So dispense with your cult like fear and man up a little.

This post sums up the feelings of most of the Union brothers and sisters that I know here at AFW, ORD, and DFW. Does any one know if the same is true at TUL, JFK, LAX, and others. The seemingly blind following of this concessions leading contract Union is truly "cult-like". My hope is that our membership will try to set aside their fears at least momentarily and keep an open mind in the on-going discussions related to aquiring a Union that has a little more backbone and stand up for the good of its dues paying membership. The International needs to ask US what is missing or wrong with this current TA? I'm speechless.

 

[Ralph]

I would strongly suggest that all of you go to the top of the American Airlines forum and read the rules carefully. Pay particular attention to...

10. No identification of other posters by their real names attempted or otherwise without permission. This is an automatic 14 day suspension.

One of you has already attempted to violate this rule. Now, you may think you can do it without me catching you, but as they say in Las Vegas, I wouldn't call that bet if I were you.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

Just a few points of clarification from someone who is and has been at UAL through the AMFA/IBT transition.

***Note to Ralph this isn't an attempt to muddy the waters, its just clarification for some of the inaccuracies in CIO debate posts that mention AMFA-UAL***

Heavy Maintenance Outsourcing:

As Eric alluded to, all UAL heavy maintenance was lost under the IAM before AMFAs certification on UAL in July of 2003.

Contract Negotiations:

AMFA never negotiated under section 6 at UAL. All negotiations were under 1113 in the UAL bankruptcy.

While many can speculate pros and cons with equal vigor on what "might" have happened it they had ever had the chance at traditional negotiations, I'd like to point out that even in bankruptcy and all the misery it entails AMFA was successful on many fronts protecting its members, for example: Actual contract language to audit UALs books on the 20% outsourcing limit with an independent Auditor. Protection language for the 3 C-check lines remaining at SFO, as well as protection for associated support shops. An industry leading MSAP program.

The Teamster Campaign:

The IBT victory was more a Pie-in-the-sky grab than a rejection of AMFAs philosophy.

They promised to open our contract early: They Didn't

They promised to get us a pension outside of negotiations: They Didn't (and UAL just rejected the WCTPP in negotiations)

They promised no secret LOAs without membership ratification: They wrote numerous LOAs-No membership vote

They promised outsourcing protection from the strength of 1.4 million members: Almost 1000 AMTs were furloughed inside the IBTs 1st year.


The Teamsters have a formidable organizing dept, but once they were gone, the promises went with them. Its worthy of note, there are not one, but two drives to oust the IBT from UAL....an IAM drive, and an AMFA drive. We may not be able to agree on which direction we wish to go, but we all agree we need to leave the teamsters.

Flight Attendant Unions:

In your current list of FA unions you forgot the IAM....they represent CAL FAs.

 

[High Speed Steel]

RE: Post #8 by CIO


I find this to be of significant interest. The CAPA announced on July 27,2010 an alliance with the TWU/AFL-CIO in addressing security and safety issues through the development of the American Aviation Labor Alliance. It seems the APA has noticed the importance of Union alliances.

I read that APA and APFA are somehow models for AMP. But, as I look around the industry and I don’t see any mechanic and related group at a major carrier represented by an in-house union. I doubt this is a coincidence. We face very different problems and they simply don’t face the same kind of threats of foreign and domestic outsourcing. But, I know that both unions want the support of the AFL-CIO and the rest of the labor movement and have asked the TWU to help them. I also know that the APFA is now the last of the in-house flight attendant unions. The rest are part of AFA, the IBT, or the TWU.

Here is a link that you really need to read.:

http://www.capapilot...tions-announced

 

[eolesen]

Pilots and flight attendants dont' face foreign or domestic outsourcing? Before you start saying that nobody faces the same challenges that mechanics do, you might want to talk with people in those workgroups and get a little perspective.

What do you call branded operations like American Eagle/Connection, Continental Express, United Express, or Delta Connection?....

It's essentially domestic outsourcing when you're using someone not owned by the parent airline, and C or D scale when it is owned by the parent airline.... To some degree, alliance and codeshare flying could constitute foreign outsourcing if the US carrier is simply giving up markets (as opposed to the reciprocity/revenue sharing model proposed for AA/BA/IB and used by other alliances, which is based on relative seat share)

Then there's foreign national crew bases like what UA used to have in droves, and I'm sure AA would love to use better than they already do.

Fact is that the independent pilot unions like SWAPA and APA managed to stay off things that ALPA couldn't. Even the former Continental pilots union did pretty well with their scope clause -- they allowed things like unlimited 50 seat operations, but you didn't see CO running 70 and 90 seaters. With ALPA carriers, you've got everything up to 90 seaters being flown by outsourcers.