what are we asking for?

[WeAAsles]

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by 1AA. View it anyway?

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by 1AA. View it anyway?

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by 1AA. View it anyway?


Trust me it's the only way.

 

[AANOTOK]

Fleet gives that impression because they seem to be happy with the TWU in all the concessions and elimination of cabin services. Maybe because they act like sheep when the TWU dictates to them what they will accept in negotiations.

So let me see if I have this straight. A work group (Fleet) likes a particular TA, votes on it and it passes. They have decided they are satisfied with it, it will pay the bills, they will accept the good with the bad, and decide by a ballot that is put in front of them.
Kinda how the process works. They vote yes or no. Now, another work group (mechanics) do not like a particular union and have the opportunity to vote no on their contract. That contract passes (Tulsa is the culprit) and you are stuck with something you don't like. So, if I'm hearing you right, since your contract passed and a contract was voted in by a completely different work group (one you obviously don't get to vote on) and both work groups are represented by the same union, then fleet are sheep for voting yes. If they don't vote no like YOU want them to vote then they are sheep. Got it.

 

[1AA]

Great job at deflecting my intent of the sheep comment and fleet service.

 

[Buck]

The IAM in total has more members than the TWU, yes the TWU has more members at the New AA, but not overall.

And China has more people than the United States 

 

[AANOTOK]

Great job at deflecting my intent of the sheep comment and fleet service.

I actually thought I nailed it...but I digress. Go back to AMFA chatter.

 

[bob@las-AA]

The IAM in total has more members than the TWU, yes the TWU has more members at the New AA, but not overall.

You might want to sharpen your pencil.
 
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/default.html

 

[700UW]

You might want to sharpen your pencil.
 
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/default.html

You might want to learn how to read an LM-2.
 
And you might also want to sharpen your comprehension skills.
 
Read what I wrote one more time:
 

The IAM in total has more members than the TWU, yes the TWU has more members at the New AA, but not overall.
 

The IAM has 569,373 members as of the latest LM-2.
 
http://kcerds.dol-esa.gov/query/orgReport.do
 
The TWU has 116,199 members.
 
http://kcerds.dol-esa.gov/query/orgReport.do
 
In my world 569,373 is greater than 116,199.
 
 

 

[MetalMover]

You might want to learn how to read an LM-2.
 
And you might also want to sharpen your comprehension skills.
 
Read what I wrote one more time:
 
The IAM has 569,373 members as of the latest LM-2.
 
http://kcerds.dol-esa.gov/query/orgReport.do
 
The TWU has 116,199 members.
 
http://kcerds.dol-esa.gov/query/orgReport.do
 
In my world 569,373 is greater than 116,199.
 
 

Too bad the IAM is outnumbered at AA.

 

[WeAAsles]

Ok I have to ask? Why are we talking about who has more members either inside or outside of AA? What does it matter? We are all going to eventually get a "Transitional Agreement" to vote on whether or not it becomes a "Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement"

In the end it's not going to matter in the slightest who is represented by what label, whether that label starts with an I or a T. Every individual at the combined AA will read the TA and decide if it should pass or fail based on what they think. Does it pass muster in their minds? Is it great, acceptable or horrible?

And if it passes that's that. Collective Majority Rules.

 

[MetalMover]

Ok I have to ask? Why are we talking about who has more members either inside or outside of AA? What does it matter? We are all going to eventually get a "Transitional Agreement" to vote on whether or not it becomes a "Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement"

In the end it's not going to matter in the slightest who is represented by what label, whether that label starts with an I or a T. Every individual at the combined AA will read the TA and decide if it should pass or fail based on what they think. Does it pass muster in their minds? Is it great, acceptable or horrible?

And if it passes that's that. Collective Majority Rules.

It does matter. The TWU contract at LAA is different than the IAM LUS contract for all title groups. There are things that the TWU will like better enough to keep and the same goes for the IAM. There are vast differences in certain articles. For instance, at LAA, tech crew chiefs are union. At LUS they are management.  Instructors are included with the TCC group. At LUS they are separate. 
What about seniority dates? The TWU/IAM already agreed to mesh the seniorities. But what survives the JCBA where LEAD seniority is different? LAA does not have have crew chief seniority....So what survives?
There are more differences than any of us realize. Now I would hope the better of each contract's language would survive, but it will be up to the members to determine what is BETTER and what survives in the form of a contract vote. 
If LAA TWU members are vehemently opposed to any or several issues that comes before them for a vote, then LAA employees will be the majority and vote no.
 
 
Another "for instance." The TWU just posted the CS policy which is in the IAM/US contract. Anyone care to venture a guess as to why the TWU would post it? I believe the CS policy at LAA is headed for a change and will mirror that of US. Since the TWU doesn't have the cs policy in our contract, this will be our new policy. It is more restrictive in some aspects and LAA employees will not like some of those restrictions as, for instance, does not allow numerous back to back doubles as TWUers are allowed to do. Also once a CS is agreed to between two employees, it cannot be revoked to have ANOTHER employee work. That's going to go over real well. But since it is NOT contractual.....Get ready.
 
So now what happens come JCBA time when it IS contractual? What happens when TWUers want the NO RESTRICTION policy back in place? The majority will rule but what if the company is not willing to budge..
 
Just one of many scenarios where each legacy group dukes it out keep what each has..
 
So the LAA vs LUS number do matter.

 

[Bob Owens]

 

You might want to learn how to read an LM-2.
 
And you might also want to sharpen your comprehension skills.
 
Read what I wrote one more time:
 
The IAM has 569,373 members as of the latest LM-2.
 
http://kcerds.dol-esa.gov/query/orgReport.do
 
The TWU has 116,199 members.
 
http://kcerds.dol-esa.gov/query/orgReport.do
 
In my world 569,373 is greater than 116,199.
 
 

And in 2000 the IAM had 730,673 members, over the last 15 years the IAM membership has dropped by nearly 200,000 members . Over the last 15 years they lost nearly 25% of the membership.  
 
Its a dying Union, thats why we want no part of their IAMNPF. Fewer people are going in to the IAM every year, and the IAM is the source of members for the IAMNPF, when that happens the plans eventually default. Sure its bigger than the TWU, but its still dying, and if they cant get members, they will at least try and get others to try and keep their pension afloat. I'll take my cash directly from the company Thank You, don't need a dying Union to act as a middleman with my Pension. 
 
Didn't the IAM at one time have over 1 million members? 

 

[Bob Owens]

You might want to learn how to read an LM-2.
 
And you might also want to sharpen your comprehension skills.
 
Read what I wrote one more time:
 
 

Bob@las seems to have a problem with reading comprehension. 

 

[AANOTOK]

Metal, where can I read the IAM/US contractual cs policy posted by the TWU. I would like to take a glance at it. I have been told on several occasions by our TWU reps that the cs policy is changing, and not for the better.
In my opinion, I don't think it will be contractual, I think AA management wants more control over it.

 

[Bob Owens]

The shrinking Union is another reason why we want no part of the IAMNPF. The promises that these pension plans make are based upon an ever expanding base of contributors to the plan, and when thats the case they work great, but we are not likely to see that going forward. The combined LAA and LUS maint group will be smaller than it is today, and it will continue to shrink. So while promises may be nice in my opinion we should focus our efforts on getting a contribution along the lines of what the other licensed Airmen on the property get, the pilots. 

 

[WeAAsles]

It does matter. The TWU contract at LAA is different than the IAM LUS contract for all title groups. There are things that the TWU will like better enough to keep and the same goes for the IAM. There are vast differences in certain articles. For instance, at LAA, tech crew chiefs are union. At LUS they are management.  Instructors are included with the TCC group. At LUS they are separate. 
What about seniority dates? The TWU/IAM already agreed to mesh the seniorities. But what survives the JCBA where LEAD seniority is different? LAA does not have have crew chief seniority....So what survives?
There are more differences than any of us realize. Now I would hope the better of each contract's language would survive, but it will be up to the members to determine what survives in the form of a contract vote. 
If LAA TWU members are vehemently opposed to any or several issues that comes before them for a vote, then LAA employees will be the majority and decide  yes or no.

Good point but I'd like to think that the negotiators on both sides would prefer to be able to capture the stronger language of the two or even write better language (NEW) ? Of course the Company obviously has a say on that. (There is language outside of the AA/US contracts that I hope people are aware of and propose)
 
 


 

Another "for instance." The TWU just posted the CS policy which is in the IAM/US contract. Anyone care to venture a guess as to why the TWU would post it? I believe the CS policy at LAA is headed for a change and will mirror that of US. Since the TWU doesn't have the cs policy in our contract, this will be our new policy. It is more restrictive in some aspects and LAA employees will not like some of those restrictions as, for instance, does not allow numerous back to back doubles as TWUers are allowed to do. Also once a CS is agreed to between two employees, it cannot be revoked to have ANOTHER employee work. That's going to go over real well. But since it is NOT contractual.....Get ready.
 

 

Ok where was that posted and why did they post it? I'd personally rather have that written into our contract but yes the current IAM language is more restrictive to what we have as a policy. The only problem is policies change as we all are well aware of. In many Stations they use "CS Restrictions" as a form of punishment. So they punish the member economically because he didn't read a stupid lesson on time.  
 
 

So the LAA vs LUS number do matter.

 
True again but only if the bad changes are so unacceptable that they override all of the possible positives. 

Might not matter anyway if some morons go for the stupid signing bonus that is always there to lure in the fish? (Hate those things personally, taints the purity of the vote)