US IAM Fleet Service topic 8-13-

[Jester]

That's a fairly weak assumption to base an argument from.

I think it's more likely that they'd have focused their efforts elsewhere had fleet voted down a second TA and come back with nothing at all. What would it have been to them to maintain the cost savings of the old arrangement? Further, with the impending fuel crisis (at the time) and disappearing profits, why would you assume they'd have sweetened the deal in any way with a third attempt? Sure, the company said it was committed to seeing a combined workforce, and was probably telling the truth, but I'd hardly say they were desperate to do so.

Well, yeah, I mean, it isn't it obvious... we could have just kept saying, "No" until the company offered us $70/hour, right? So after about 100 years of waiting, that would be a fair wage given the annual rate of inflation.

So Amuses Jester.

 

[700UW]

When I as on the IAM M&R NC during BK II the DL President William O'Driscoll was the man for the union that kept TWA a float as long as he could and he even had a deal lined up when TW went into BK to stave it off once again but was too late.

He told us as a committee that we should have recommended a no vote as US would have come back with a better offer as they didnt want labor unrest, as a committee we had a clear division so we gave no opinion on the final offer.

To this day I believe he was right, and this was a man who had over 50 years of experience.

 

[john john]

I'm always amazed how ignorant people

PHX & LAS are hubs/focus cites
So it is your belief that the small and medium cites carry the votes. The hubs and focus cites voted to outsource 26 cites and have no recall rights during bankrupts II. You need a history lesson. All of this was done to keep catering in PHL. Cites were taken of the outsource list just to get the contract pass

 

[john john]

You are incorrect, the hubs and focus stations don't carry the votes.
PHX voted proudly as follows
PHX 648 9

?

 

[ChockJockey]

He told us as a committee that we should have recommended a no vote as US would have come back with a better offer as they didnt want labor unrest, as a committee we had a clear division so we gave no opinion on the final offer.

To this day I believe he was right, and this was a man who had over 50 years of experience.

With all due respect to Mr. O'Driscoll and his 50 years, I just don't see this management team caring enough about fleet's situation or so afraid of labor unrest that they'd have come running back to the table with something better. Of course now there's no way of knowing for sure what would have happened, but seeing as how management is basically sitting comfortably with a bag of popcorn while the pilots continue to fight it out all the while saving dollars from labor unrest, well...

Of course, when you're the higher paid faction of the work group you can afford to vote no until you think management is going to come back with a shiny perfect contract, regardless of a fuel crisis, record losses, and a global financial meltdown. And your union brothers and sisters out West doing the same job making express wages? How much longer were you comfortable with stringing them along? Another year? Another three? Solidarity! Brotherhood! Equal pay for equal work! I guess the West's union dues at the time weren't enough to get those premium features?

Anyways, all I wanted was pay parity, and I got it.

 

[700UW]

Let me explain what happened with us.

The night before the Judge announced the CBA was going to be abrogated, he informed the company and the IAM lawyers. The company was told by the Judge to offer all the affected workers a final offer to ensure labor peace as he did not want the company torn apart from the inside out.

All of Labor Relations including Glass met with us on the NC, including some of the IAM attorneys and GVP Roach.

What the company initially offered the M&R was even worse what was finally offered and approved, we basically told them if that is what your offering then we will tear it down, we negotiated till 3am in the morning and came back at 8am to further move the company off their POS offer, which they moved somewhat, not a lot but some.

At the airport that afternoon I ran into Lakefield and him and I had a one on one and told him like it was, as they were not offering any early outs in MTC like they did with the other groups, I was quite candid with him and did not hold back and I had GC Tony G as my witness with me.

Several days later Lakefield and Hemenway called me at work and informed me that they were offer the same as they did to the other groups.

Since I am four years removed from US I feel ok telling this now as I have never told anyone what transpired.

Like I said, there is always another bite to the apple, and I understand that if you would have rejected they would have come back better.

As in 92 and 99 M&R rejected two tentative agreements in Section 6 Negotiations, 92 led to a strike and a better deal and in 99 we were in the 30 day cooling off period and got a better deal.

Yes I was referring to pre-merger which Hemenway was part of and we negotiated from 89 till 92 then went on strike and negotiated from 95-99, 4 1/2 years when we ratified the second TA in 99.

 

[pjirish317]

Does anybody know if anything has been decided one way or the other with the Insurance Arbitration? Seems like it has been a long time since it has been presented. Just wondering.

 

[proud2bphilly]

Does anybody know if anything has been decided one way or the other with the Insurance Arbitration? Seems like it has been a long time since it has been presented. Just wondering.

we lost announced last week

 

[proud2bphilly]

Does anybody know if anything has been decided one way or the other with the Insurance Arbitration? Seems like it has been a long time since it has been presented. Just wondering.

increases will begin jan 2010

 

[freedom]

how about the sick policy arbitration ? ( on hands and knees praying that the arbiter rules in our favor for a less restrictive and puntive sick policy )

i want to reiterate that i think the sick policy is VERY unfair to those of us who were former america west airlines workers .. it's like " oh i see you called in sick a few times before the new contract , here you go BAM level III" :down:

 

[Tally yo]

Regarding the insurance arbitration, all greivance chairman should have received a letter from the District regarding the outcome and should have posted, if you didnt please update your address. I dont vbeleive the final decision has been written however the arbitrato gave his preliminary report and from what i was told, since the union Failed to negotiate it in during our transition agreement we have no obligation to hold the company at 2008 rates. So thank your transition/negotiating team CANALE.

 

[Tally yo]

All I got to say is next contract we (officers/membership) need to make sure everything is gone over with a fine tooth comb. This BS of us not having a sick policy so we just get slapped with one is BS. This Insurance stuff we got rolled on is BS. This outsourcing language is crap. People you better wake up and smell the coffee its not all about wages. I think the wooden stick has gone up our A** too many times because someone failed to negotiate it and no one bothered to ask. Weve only left the door open for this company to shove it up our A** one more time. So many people have been furloughed hopefully we wont have the new hires lining up to take a raise to turn around and have the company outsource them. Im pissed at this POS contract we have that keeps getting shoved up our A** because we didnt negotiate it in the contract.

 

[robbedagain]

how about the sick policy arbitration ? ( on hands and knees praying that the arbiter rules in our favor for a less restrictive and puntive sick policy )

i want to reiterate that i think the sick policy is VERY unfair to those of us who were former america west airlines workers .. it's like " oh i see you called in sick a few times before the new contract , here you go BAM level III" :down:

We on the East never had such a horrible sick policy til the 2nd bankruptcy i believe. but to throw this type in after the ratification of the May 08 contract is purely the company's fault an dit hould be grieved and won bu the IAM

 

[Ramp Rogue]

When you have shift bids in your station, how much time has to separate two parttime shifts? If a parttime shift ends at say 0600, at what time could the next parttimer start a shift? We are having a problem whereas the company is running parttime shifts with only a half an hour or an hour between start times. Before hp came along, there had to be at least a two hour gap between parttime shifts. Does anyone know if this is still true? Any help is much appreciated.

Rogue

 

[Tally yo]

When you have shift bids in your station, how much time has to separate two parttime shifts? If a parttime shift ends at say 0600, at what time could the next parttimer start a shift? We are having a problem whereas the company is running parttime shifts with only a half an hour or an hour between start times. Before hp came along, there had to be at least a two hour gap between parttime shifts. Does anyone know if this is still true? Any help is much appreciated.

Rogue

I beleive now as long as the teo dont equal FT shifts. So if they are running two part-time shifts with only half an hour between thats a violation. And remember we are alloted 10hr shifts so if there is 1.5 hours between shifts that should be a full-time as well but you need to talk to your greivance comittee or you AGC for further clarification in your station.