Us Airways May Cut 914 Utility Jobs
- Thread starter USA320Pilot
- Start date
700UW said:
With all that the employees and company have in stake, I wouldn't call it playing.
I will leave that part of the work to the experienced. Sitting across know-it-alls like you is not my cup of tea. And I asure you neither of them are on here giviing anybody the "I didn't see you on the floor today" or " I am in the loop". I really feel sorry for the whole process if indeed you are involved. 🙁
BillLumbergh
Veteran
Why not get back to topic?
700,
Mesa's mechanics are not Teamsters. You may be confusing thsoe mechanics with the fine folks who worked at the now defunct CCAIR. They were, in fact Teamsters.
Yes, I am aware there is E-Concourse turnover. I spent 3 1/2 years there when it was the D-Concourse. I am also aware that they are run by Piedmont in CLT. It went from CCAIR to Mesa to Piedmont.
My point is, the operation runs just fine there and at many other stations without the tremendous amount of deadweight both the unions and the company have managedto hang from every tree limb. If they were both serious about reducing costs and becoming competitive, they would addressed the workrules in the first round of concessions, not put the 30 minute unpaid lunch and other window dressing in place to make it look like it had been addressed.
There is absolutely no reason to have jobs so divided across the board. No reason to file a grievance against an Express employee for placing a bag on a belt loader because no mainline employee was near the aircraft at the time. Also, most of the fleet service jobs seem to be careers for too many. If people want to do that, fine, but it is a job, not a career. A career implies you have desire to move ahead. Is there training involved in being able to handle jobs safely and efficiently out there? Of course, but there is training to work the drive-thru at McDonalds properly as well. How many people are out there for decades and feel no desire to move up in the ranks, yet feel they should be entitled to above median income salaries with generous benefit packages? That kind of stuff flies in Europe, but not here. Must have something to do with constant double digit unemployment, and the stagnant economies of many of our friends across the pond.
The bottom line is to move ahead in society, one must be educated, remain educated, work hard, and have a desire to grow. Nothing is a guarantee, even if it is in a contract.
Mesa's mechanics are not Teamsters. You may be confusing thsoe mechanics with the fine folks who worked at the now defunct CCAIR. They were, in fact Teamsters.
Yes, I am aware there is E-Concourse turnover. I spent 3 1/2 years there when it was the D-Concourse. I am also aware that they are run by Piedmont in CLT. It went from CCAIR to Mesa to Piedmont.
My point is, the operation runs just fine there and at many other stations without the tremendous amount of deadweight both the unions and the company have managedto hang from every tree limb. If they were both serious about reducing costs and becoming competitive, they would addressed the workrules in the first round of concessions, not put the 30 minute unpaid lunch and other window dressing in place to make it look like it had been addressed.
There is absolutely no reason to have jobs so divided across the board. No reason to file a grievance against an Express employee for placing a bag on a belt loader because no mainline employee was near the aircraft at the time. Also, most of the fleet service jobs seem to be careers for too many. If people want to do that, fine, but it is a job, not a career. A career implies you have desire to move ahead. Is there training involved in being able to handle jobs safely and efficiently out there? Of course, but there is training to work the drive-thru at McDonalds properly as well. How many people are out there for decades and feel no desire to move up in the ranks, yet feel they should be entitled to above median income salaries with generous benefit packages? That kind of stuff flies in Europe, but not here. Must have something to do with constant double digit unemployment, and the stagnant economies of many of our friends across the pond.
The bottom line is to move ahead in society, one must be educated, remain educated, work hard, and have a desire to grow. Nothing is a guarantee, even if it is in a contract.
usairways_vote_NO
Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2002
- Messages
- 1,882
- Reaction score
- 57
USA320Pilot said:
That's funny USA320 is quoting this comment and its in direct conflict with his ongoing mantra that the unions caused additional "hurt". He doesn't flinch or miss a beat anytime he contradicts himself does he?
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- Joined
- May 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,175
- Reaction score
- 1,539
Last summer during the LOA 91 negotiations GE was directly involved and actually forced ALPA to provide RJ scope relief. The financier spoke directly with ALPA numerous times about diversifying their US Airways risk, and not only did it occur with RJs, but mainline aircraft too.
Separately, last August during a MEC meeting at the Key Bridge Marriott, Bruce Lakefield told the MEC in "open session" that if labor did not fully participate in the TP, GECAS wanted to take back about 30 aircraft. Every union was briefed on this risk, thus, due to labor resistance to change, GE repossessed 25 of its aircraft from US Airways with an orderly reduction.
Due to issues such as the CWA/AFA strike press releases and IAM "concession stand is closed" comments, passengers booking away from the company has increased. Thus to offset the revenue loss their must be more cost cuts.
According to today's WSJ, US Airways' latest GE deal is a "catalyst" toward completing its restructuring. But it also requires the airline to come up with another $100 million in liquidity by January.
Guess where this will likely come from -- try the AFA and IAM units.
GE is requiring more cuts due to labor leader resistance and there will be deeper labor cuts than were necessary, due to "hardline" attitudes. The cuts will come from those unions without new agreements.
It's too bad this is happening, but it's a union’s choice.
A colleague of mine recently made an interesting comment. He said, "and the CWA, AFA and IAM? Held out to the bitter end, totally unified, and got a bill for $150 million more than their original ask! Why do you think the CWA signed, with the AFA close behind, even after their ask went up? Because they didn't want their entire contract abrogated by a judge who has already called US Airways a 'ticking fiscal time bomb.' There is nothing easier than using the threat of liquidation combined with a 1113c filing during one's second bankruptcy in 2 years to 'take candy from a baby.' Waiting for the bankruptcy judge to decide on a company's 1113c motion has never been tried before in the airline industry! Why? Because, to date, no one has been stupid enough to allow the company to impose their 'last and final offer' through the courts."
Is imposition enough "pain"?
Best regards,
USA320Pilot
Separately, last August during a MEC meeting at the Key Bridge Marriott, Bruce Lakefield told the MEC in "open session" that if labor did not fully participate in the TP, GECAS wanted to take back about 30 aircraft. Every union was briefed on this risk, thus, due to labor resistance to change, GE repossessed 25 of its aircraft from US Airways with an orderly reduction.
Due to issues such as the CWA/AFA strike press releases and IAM "concession stand is closed" comments, passengers booking away from the company has increased. Thus to offset the revenue loss their must be more cost cuts.
According to today's WSJ, US Airways' latest GE deal is a "catalyst" toward completing its restructuring. But it also requires the airline to come up with another $100 million in liquidity by January.
Guess where this will likely come from -- try the AFA and IAM units.
GE is requiring more cuts due to labor leader resistance and there will be deeper labor cuts than were necessary, due to "hardline" attitudes. The cuts will come from those unions without new agreements.
It's too bad this is happening, but it's a union’s choice.
A colleague of mine recently made an interesting comment. He said, "and the CWA, AFA and IAM? Held out to the bitter end, totally unified, and got a bill for $150 million more than their original ask! Why do you think the CWA signed, with the AFA close behind, even after their ask went up? Because they didn't want their entire contract abrogated by a judge who has already called US Airways a 'ticking fiscal time bomb.' There is nothing easier than using the threat of liquidation combined with a 1113c filing during one's second bankruptcy in 2 years to 'take candy from a baby.' Waiting for the bankruptcy judge to decide on a company's 1113c motion has never been tried before in the airline industry! Why? Because, to date, no one has been stupid enough to allow the company to impose their 'last and final offer' through the courts."
Is imposition enough "pain"?
Best regards,
USA320Pilot
......Nice little [self serving] story 320,, except the ending could turn out quite different than your usual one way, dead end predictions....If these liquidation/strikes threats continue, EVERY employee [including you]could be out of a job here at Usairways........Of course, I'm not telling you anything that you don't already know....You wanna talk "stupid ", How about abrogration = strikes = liquidation= no jobs...Bronner and glASS better get the dictionary out and look up the words good, faith, and bargaining..Looks to me that the Flight Attendants will not be needing the use of a wussy wagon....80%
ClueByFour
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 3,566
- Reaction score
- 37
USA320Pilot said:
Perhaps if you were in the millitary you happened across the term "Mutually Assured Destruction?"
Imposition=strike (nothing has changed in 1113 with regard to the RLA since the Eastern and Continental strikes of the early 1990s which were held to be legal). Strike=no airline.
Who is stupid? The CWA got themselves a much better deal by threatening to go nuclear--the IAM has nothing to lose given the number of members the company has been threatening since the "transformation" plan 1.0 came together (as a note, the versioning is now up to 3.1).
Regarding the fleet size, GE is going to turn around and finance new RJs. Of course, had ALPA not given away the scope farm, it would put GE in a pickle that they don't have to face now.
insp89 said:
From Nov 21, http://www.usaviation.com/forums/index.php...90&#entry202790
Be it by a temporary shutdown or some other means, one would have to be in total denial to believe that management does not have contingent plans in place to deal with the failure of people to show up for work without justification.
jm
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Alaska Airlines F/A's vote in favor of a new contract- Latest: Jalsporteam