UA/CO Merger Thread-Post Announcement

[767jetz]

What would you suggest the best way to deal with the seniority issue should be? Maybee the best thing would be to let the mechanics from both sides sit down with each and hash it out. It seems like the ibt has dug itself in a hole promising 2 different things to the 2 groups. Why don't they let the groups decide for themselves and save themselves the headache of lying to both groups?

I don't think ThirdSeatHero is saying it will go one way or another, since as he said it doesn't really affect him much. I think he's just trying to say that ibt sold them on one concept but now are trying a "bait and switch."

As a pilot I don't claim to know the politics or details behind your contracts and unions. Based on my experience, my opinion is that there will be some kind of compromise that will be considered acceptable to more than 50% of the membership so that ibt does not run the risk of getting voted off the property in favor of another union. It does sound to me like ibt put themselves in a precarious position by promising 2 different things to 2 groups, and now having to rectify that.

ThridSeatHero,
As with most contracts, the devil is in the details. If they promised you straight DOH but there is some small loophole in the writing, I'm sure they will exploit that loophole in order to save face. If that ends up being the case, then your gripe is certainly with ibt and not your CO counterparts. And the only way to rectify that is with a vote. If they truly lied to you, and a majority of others are unhappy with the result as well, then by all means vote their butts out and replace the ibt.

PS. It doesn't sound to me like you have a problem with the CO folks, only ibt. I just want to make sure THEY understand that. The last thing we need is employees fight among ourselves. It's easy to happen when a subject as sensitive as seniority is involved. Just look at the US Air pilots. Right now it's up to United's new management and our respective unions to do the right thing. If they don't then they are the ones we should ALL go after.

 

[767jetz]

News flash:

AMR CEO says UAL/Continental labor cost would rise

What a joke. Arpey is trying to rock the boat and make waves for UA/CO by scaring investors about rising costs n the wake of a merger.

First of all, any rising cost will be far offset by the expected annual savings due to synergies.

Second, AMR has been in contract negotiations with their pilots (and I think others) for quite some time. With Delta's labor winning increases and next UA, the industry standard is finally rising again. While he may enjoy a short term cost advantage, his employee groups will be looking for the same raises when their contracts expire. So in the end AMR's labor costs will also rise, or they face the risk of multiple strikes.

Either way, he's just blowing smoke.

 

[Richard]

Folks,

Please keep this thread on the topic of the merger itself. Do NOT make this all about labor disputes, etc. or it will be closed.

We will consider opening a separate thread for labor seniority and other LABOR integration issues, but that is not for this thread.

Thank you.

 

[FWAAA]

News flash:

AMR CEO says UAL/Continental labor cost would rise

What a joke. Arpey is trying to rock the boat and make waves for UA/CO by scaring investors about rising costs n the wake of a merger.

First of all, any rising cost will be far offset by the expected annual savings due to synergies.

So let me get this straight: The CEO of AMR tells the shareholders at their annual meeting that AMR's labor costs are substantially higher than its competitors like UA and CO but that the merger of those airlines will inevitably result in higher labor costs at the merged airline and that's got you bent out of shape? Aren't you happy that you stand to recover some of your bankruptcy-era wage and benefit concessions? Don't you want higher pay?

AA has resisted restoring the wages of its employees because its employees are already more costly than AA's legacy competitors. Nevertheless, AA's workgroups have demanded raises.

Second, AMR has been in contract negotiations with their pilots (and I think others) for quite some time. With Delta's labor winning increases and next UA, the industry standard is finally rising again. While he may enjoy a short term cost advantage, his employee groups will be looking for the same raises when their contracts expire. So in the end AMR's labor costs will also rise, or they face the risk of multiple strikes.

Either way, he's just blowing smoke.

Sounds to me like he's laying out the facts to his bosses, the shareholders of AMR.

Pay raises at DL and UA won't give AMR any "short-term cost advantage," they will merely lessen the cost disadvantage suffered by AMR. That said, I wish you guys luck at winning huge raises as that will help your competitors.

 

[767jetz]

So let me get this straight: The CEO of AMR tells the shareholders at their annual meeting that AMR's labor costs are substantially higher than its competitors like UA and CO but that the merger of those airlines will inevitably result in higher labor costs at the merged airline and that's got you bent out of shape? Aren't you happy that you stand to recover some of your bankruptcy-era wage and benefit concessions? Don't you want higher pay?

AA has resisted restoring the wages of its employees because its employees are already more costly than AA's legacy competitors. Nevertheless, AA's workgroups have demanded raises.



Sounds to me like he's laying out the facts to his bosses, the shareholders of AMR.

Pay raises at DL and UA won't give AMR any "short-term cost advantage," they will merely lessen the cost disadvantage suffered by AMR. That said, I wish you guys luck at winning huge raises as that will help your competitors.

Actually it is confusing because the article has been updated since I posted the first link. At first they made it sound like Arpey was saying UA/CO would have a disadvantage due to higher labor costs, implying that AMR would have an advantage. Now it sounds like he's saying AMR has a huge disadvantage and that rising costs at UA/CO will even the playing field.

I'm not sure what to make of it. Either the first edition of the report was inaccurate, or Arpey is backpedaling since it's hard to cry poverty with your employees and resist wage and benefit increases, while also implying that you will have a cost advantage.

 

[adiruwho]

I read in one of your post' you think the CAL contract is stronger. Could you please explain why you feel that way. And are you involved with the ibt in any capacity besides obviously being a CAL mechanic and being represented by them? Forgive me for all the questions, I just want to understand whats going on and am curious as to everyones position on this.

To answer your question simply SCOPE. There are other reasons as well as all contracts are rather complex, and I do not believe this is the proper venue to go through it line by line. However I'm sure that our friend Third Seat Hero can attest to the importance of this, as the reduction in scope negotiated under AMFA directly and indirectly led to the amount of bloodshed for UAL MX. I will make no mention more of AMFA's negotiating abilities as the NWA debacle says it all. You need to keep in mind also that UAL MX is still working under an AMfA contract and are in negotiations now with the IBT. I'm very sure that these issues are being addressed, and the negotiating committee has copies of ours to see where improvements can or should be made. Our contract is by no means perfect, and we are currently in mediation, when it ends your guess is as good as mine. Prior to the integration Union leadership from both sides will get together and hopefully come to an agreement joining best of both contracts. Not everyone will be happy with every single line item but that's how it goes. Hopefully I have answered your question.

As for the other yes, but by no means am I an officer or negotiating committee member

 

[whoop whoop]

To answer your question simply SCOPE. There are other reasons as well as all contracts are rather complex, and I do not believe this is the proper venue to go through it line by line. However I'm sure that our friend Third Seat Hero can attest to the importance of this, as the reduction in scope negotiated under AMFA directly and indirectly led to the amount of bloodshed for UAL MX. I will make no mention more of AMFA's negotiating abilities as the NWA debacle says it all. You need to keep in mind also that UAL MX is still working under an AMfA contract and are in negotiations now with the IBT. I'm very sure that these issues are being addressed, and the negotiating committee has copies of ours to see where improvements can or should be made. Our contract is by no means perfect, and we are currently in mediation, when it ends your guess is as good as mine. Prior to the integration Union leadership from both sides will get together and hopefully come to an agreement joining best of both contracts. Not everyone will be happy with every single line item but that's how it goes. Hopefully I have answered your question.

As for the other yes, but by no means am I an officer or negotiating committee member

Scope? How is CAL's scope better than UAL's? Please explain why you say scope, don't just say something and not give the reasons why, please. I am looking for valid information.
And by the way, it was under the IAM watch that the bloodshed happened. Do us all a favor, do not post things as fact if you either are misinformed or don't know. I was there, I was part of the bloodshed.
So, if you are not an officer or a shop steward, than how exactly are you tied into the ibt, again besides being a member? You never answered the question.

 

[adiruwho]

Scope? How is CAL's scope better than UAL's? Please explain why you say scope, don't just say something and not give the reasons why, please. I am looking for valid information.
And by the way, it was under the IAM watch that the bloodshed happened. Do us all a favor, do not post things as fact if you either are misinformed or don't know. I was there, I was part of the bloodshed.
So, if you are not an officer or a shop steward, than how exactly are you tied into the ibt, again besides being a member? You never answered the question.

I would suggest that you take the time and ask your local business agent for a copy and read it for yourself, there is too much to go into here.
I agree with you that there were issues with the IAM otherwise you would never have brought in AMFA. To venture a guess as I wasn't there I would say they started some time around the ESOP deal over there. The truth from what I can tell is that in MAY of 2005 an AMFA contract was ratified, by SEP 05 checks were being outsourced to China. That didn't happen due to strengthening of scope. When things started getting worse and potential sale of the SFO mx base came up so did the IBT. Like I said before hopefully better things will come, for both the UAL and CAL people. Believe me if there is any group of employees that can relate it is us, we may not have had Wolf, but we had Lorenzo instead. So its time to start working together rather than fighting each other.
I suppose technically I am still a shop steward. Though after nearly 10 years of doing so due to personal reasons I recently submitted a resignation, and am currently waiting for the election to be completed to step down. Should things change I may consider doing it again. It has taken a lot of my personal time and effort but has been educational. I also encourage all members to be active with their union, and be involved rather than being PO"d.
Have a great day

 

[whoop whoop]

I would suggest that you take the time and ask your local business agent for a copy and read it for yourself, there is too much to go into here.
I agree with you that there were issues with the IAM otherwise you would never have brought in AMFA. To venture a guess as I wasn't there I would say they started some time around the ESOP deal over there. The truth from what I can tell is that in MAY of 2005 an AMFA contract was ratified, by SEP 05 checks were being outsourced to China. That didn't happen due to strengthening of scope. When things started getting worse and potential sale of the SFO mx base came up so did the IBT. Like I said before hopefully better things will come, for both the UAL and CAL people. Believe me if there is any group of employees that can relate it is us, we may not have had Wolf, but we had Lorenzo instead. So its time to start working together rather than fighting each other.
I suppose technically I am still a shop steward. Though after nearly 10 years of doing so due to personal reasons I recently submitted a resignation, and am currently waiting for the election to be completed to step down. Should things change I may consider doing it again. It has taken a lot of my personal time and effort but has been educational. I also encourage all members to be active with their union, and be involved rather than being PO"d.
Have a great day

I'm sure an intelligent person like yourself can sum up in a paragraph or 2 why CAL's scope is better. You do realize you have either skirted or tried to skirt around every question asked of you. It seems like that is the ibt way. Does the ibt have "dance around questions 101" class you guys go to?
And again IND, OAK, receive and dispatch and the heavy checks were all let go under the IAM pre-2005.
You can't be trusted with what you say on these public forums, you obviously have an agenda. And thanks, I will have a great day.

 

[Richard]

As some of you have disregarded my prior comments, please continue LABOR related discussions of the merger in the new thread, and discuss NON labor related merger issues in the separate thread being started as I close this one.

Thank you.