Why Is The Iam Violating Our Contract By Refusing

[cavalier]

Some people on here will call or think you are a holy roller pit, they do me when I express such sentiments. I agree totally with you. Here is why your post will not move them to think of the true weight your comment implies: Money is the God they worship therefore they are justified do to any and everything regardless if it is moral or not to accomplish the never ending task of filling their pockets on the employees backs and will even consider it a victory. Believing in your brothers keeper makes them think one is ill, and sick in the mind, when in reality they will one day pay the ultimate price for their lies, deceit and destruction of families in the name of money. The rewards of this world are very empty and they and not us are the real fools.

 

[pitguy]

Amen Cav....

 

[cavalier]

Wow Bob....what got into you? Whatever it is I hope it stays there.

 

[pitguy]

Bob.........You have me rolling on the floor with laughter..........Haha........

 

[PITbull]

Bob,

Whaaaaattt? Stop posting? Give up the cockroaches? Are you insane, man? Don't you ever speak that filth around here again...Moderator, oh moderator....delete Bob's statment.

You know, even if they would have apologized, they would only turn around and break your balls all over again. LOL.....

 

[MarkMyWords]

Dell, once again thank you for the information. Is there a training issue with the S check, or since we are doing the C check the S check is just a little more involved and would require AB oversight, much like the first F100 heavy checks? You say we have the tooling because of the C check, would there be enough tooling to share between the C and S checks?

I do agree with what you said about third party mtc and the rush to train. I agree with Bob when he asks that IF it is found by the judge that the work could be contracted out, what safety nets and oversights will be in place to ensure the safety of our customers and employees.


Thanks for the info, I do appreciate the insight.

 

[T-bone]

Even on this board, it seems nobody here is willing to address this force majeure clause 'In cases of acts of God, terrorism, STRIKES'. I need to know if the IAM can guarantee me that if I play follow the leader out the door that they will take care of me and guarantee that if the company pulls another force majeure (isn't that a guarantee?) that I will be able to come back. All the union wants to talk about is that I can legally strike and the ramp can legally sympathize but we already know that don't we? I just want to know what happens next after the company pulls a force majeure (remember 911?)

Mister managment, let me get this strait. If the Union moves to strike, you would go for force majeure. Man this is either stuningly brilliant or totally insane. If the Union pushes for self help, the suits would park the fleet and Bronner lose all his money! I think not. That's a fairly stupid and empty threat.

Anyhow don't you managment guys (hawk & strike facts) have anything to do at work such as manage an airline. I think it's about time you stopped wasting time here and started preparing our hangars for the airbus fleet, and start trying to figure out how to win customer and employee confidence back.

 

[jetmechline]

What "strike facts" fails to see is this.

Well put and thank you for an intelligent post even though I don't agree with your conclusion that the IAM is worthy or even a reason to stand behind. Every time I stood with the IAM they knifed me in the back. I see myself in the same shoes as a Continental or Delta person so I see the company doing what it is going to do regardless of what the IAM does.

The time to fight was long before this dispute but we have been beaten and whooped and half of us are just here for the short term now because we have had enough and we are actively looking for employment elsewhere. Who cares.

Delldude claims I am not an iam member now, fair enough. But I am. But WHO CARES ANYWAYS????????? I am not impressed with any IAM rhetoric so far and I have seen nothing that the IAM PUT OUT THAT ANSWERS THE FORCE MAJEURE CLAUSE because they don't want to take you to that clause.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&


Strike Facts, you stated above â€￾ I have seen nothing that the IAM PUT OUT THAT ANSWERS THE FORCE MAJEURE CLAUSEâ€￾.

I have looked for this clause in the current contract, but I’m unable to find any information that would allow the company to use force majeure in the event of a strike. That’s not to say that the company has not signed a secret LOA with AGC Bill LIARBERGER, but I would appreciate any help you could give me on where this information that you are concerned about, is located in our contract language.

BTW, like most of the others, I was suspicious of you when you first began to post on this site. But after reviewing all your post, I have come to the conclusion that you are probably a fellow mechanic or related employee. You come across as someone who has personally suffered the consequences that naturally followed the lies, deceit, and secret deals made between the company and their toy union, the IAM. [AKA “THE LIARS CLUBâ€￾].

Don’t be too disappointed if you do not get the answers you are seeking form the union, as you are probably already aware, they are experts in evading the truth. They have learned that it is much easier to send their lapdogs out to distort, manipulate and misinterpret the facts to support their position. It has worked so well for them in the past.

Having said that, I must also say that if, and that is a big if, this strike does happen, then all of the membership must walk out together. If the company can successfully divide the membership at this critical time, we will certainly be ending our own careers. We will have no one but ourselves to blame.

 

[T-bone]

jetmechline says,

BTW, like most of the others, I was suspicious of you when you first began to post on this site. But after reviewing all your post, I have come to the conclusion that you are probably a fellow mechanic or related employee. You come across as someone who has personally suffered the consequences that naturally followed the lies, deceit, and secret deals made between the company and their toy union, the IAM. [AKA “THE LIARS CLUBâ€￾].


The above is written about (strikefacts) aka mr. managment. What I think Jetmechline means is you are a related employee, as in managment mole.
As for the paranoid statement about secret deals and lies. If you have some juicy
tidbits why not pass them on, We're all pretty keen to know what the $^#% your on about.
The only lies I have heard have come from the managment team that has abused the Pilots, Flight Attendants, Gate Agents, Baggage handlers, Ticket Agents, Utility, Customer Service persons, lower Managment and Machinist. Sorry if I missed anyone.
By the way jetmechline, when you call someone or group liars and you have no facts or proof, it is tantamount to calling your self a liar. It does make you look bad. So if you have any James Bond type revalation you can make about some top secret deals please bring them forth.

 

[T-bone]

[


Strike Facts, you stated above â€￾ I have seen nothing that the IAM PUT OUT THAT ANSWERS THE FORCE MAJEURE CLAUSEâ€￾.

I have looked for this clause in the current contract, but I’m unable to find any information that would allow the company to use force majeure in the event of a strike. That’s not to say that the company has not signed a secret LOA with AGC Bill LIARBERGER, but I would appreciate any help you could give me on where this information that you are concerned about, is located in our contract language.

[/QUOTE]

the reason you have not seen this clause inour contract is because in isn't. And it also makes no sense. What your saying is that if someone goes on strike then you would lay them off? Please explain the logic!

 

[delldude]

JET MECH LINE : please sir spare me this hoopla regarding " secret deals". WTF you smoking ,dude..?the only secret deals i'm aware of were between ov delle famine and NWA regarding the farmouts.
frank and bill have assured me (at the iam villa bronner bought us)that the only secret deals that were signed on to were regarding the education committees unsung efforts to provide the membership with the most accurate and timely information as possible.hopefully we/them can and will dispell any and all misinformation and bogus rumors .
thank you for your opinion.
may we support each other in solidarity for our common cause my friend....
NO AIRBUS FARMOUT!
IN THE UTMOST SOLIDARITY,
YOUR FRATERNAL BROTHER,
DELLDUDE

 

[jetmechline]

jetmechline says,

BTW, like most of the others, I was suspicious of you when you first began to post on this site. But after reviewing all your post, I have come to the conclusion that you are probably a fellow mechanic or related employee. You come across as someone who has personally suffered the consequences that naturally followed the lies, deceit, and secret deals made between the company and their toy union, the IAM. [AKA “THE LIARS CLUBâ€].


The above is written about (strikefacts) aka mr. managment. What I think Jetmechline means is you are a related employee, as in managment mole.
As for the paranoid statement about secret deals and lies. If you have some juicy
tidbits why not pass them on, We're all pretty keen to know what the $^#% your on about.
The only lies I have heard have come from the managment team that has abused the Pilots, Flight Attendants, Gate Agents, Baggage handlers, Ticket Agents, Utility, Customer Service persons, lower Managment and Machinist. Sorry if I missed anyone.
By the way jetmechline, when you call someone or group liars and you have no facts or proof, it is tantamount to calling your self a liar. It does make you look bad. So if you have any James Bond type revalation you can make about some top secret deals please bring them forth.

T-bone writes:

As for the paranoid statement about secret deals and lies. If you have some juicy
tidbits why not pass them on, We're all pretty keen to know what the $^#% your on about……… So if you have any James Bond type revalation you can make about some top secret deals please bring them forth.
**********************************************************************
***************************************************
T-bone, I hope the web site below, which lists the scans of 48 pages of charges brought against the IAM by their own members of the Trump/US Airways shuttle on July 30, 1999 and were found guilty of on August 5th, 2003, will quench your appetite for juicy tidbits.

Please take note that a jury found the IAM guilty of these charges! The following scans are copies of a lawsuit filed against the IAM and US Airways by Mechanics formerly employed by Trump Shuttle and Eastern Airlines before the acquisition of the Shuttle by US Airways. These mechanics are now US Airways employees.

This information was originally posted on another mechanics web site. I’m posting it here for anyone that may find it of interest.

The IAM was recently found guilty of these charges and now have appealed. See copy of appeal on IAM 141m site under US Airways. http://www.iam141m.org/Ramey%202.pdf

The following scans are copies of a lawsuit filed against the IAM and US Airways by Mechanics formerly employed by Trump Shuttle and Eastern Airlines before the acquisition of the Shuttle by USAir.


http://www.deleted/trump-lawsuit.html
Pay particular attention pages 22 thru 26, 27,28,37, 38, 42, 43 and 45.

Page 22 - IAM Discriminates Against ex-EAL Mechanics, USAir Agrees to Recognize EAL Seniority, Needs IAM Approval.

Page 23 - IAM Convinces USAir to Deny Former EAL/Trump Shuttle Mechanics Seniority

Page 24 - IAM Deliberately Lied to Mechanics Page

Page 25 - IAM Again Deliberately Lied to Mechanics,

Page 26 - IAM Refuses to Allow Mechanics Participation at Meeting Regarding Seniority

Page 27 - IAM Again Refuses to Allow Mechanics to be Present at Meeting

Page 28 - IAM Refuses to Allow Neutral to Make Decision, Continues to Deceive Mechanics

Page 29 - IAM/USAir Agree to New Contract in 1994, Seniority Clauses

Page 30 - USAir Acquires Full Ownership of Shuttle Page

Page 31 - Trump Shuttle Becomes Wholly USAir Owned Subsidiary, USAir to Retire B727s

Page 32 - IAM Seniority Committee

Page 33 - IAM Finally Informs Mechanics of Seniority Denial, Refuses to Allow Member Participation in Discussions

Page 34 - IAM Falsely Accuses Mechanics in Order to Ostracize Them from Mainline Workforce, Thiede Rejects Appeal

Page 35 - May 1999 Letter of Agreement

Page 36 - IAM/USAir "Redeployment" Scheme

Page 37 - USAir/IAM Collusion, AFA Provided Full Seniority for EAL Flight Attendants

Page 38 Shuttle Ticket Agents Received Full EAL Seniority

Page 39 - Quote From IAM Legal Memorandum

Page 40 - IAM Historical View Regarding Seniority, Harm to ex-EAL Mechanics

Page 41 - More Harm to ex-EAL Mechanics, IAM Duty of Fair Representation

Page 42 - Thiede and Snyder Implicated

Page 43 - USAir Also Liable

Page 44 - Plaintiffs Entitled to Damages to be Determined at Trial

Page 45 - Plaintiffs Entitled to Enforcement of Promises

Page 45 - Plaintiffs Entitled to Enforcement of Promises

LINE 147. Defendant Shuttle, Inc., and thereafter defendant US Airways, became the successors, both in law and in fact, to Trump with respect to the duties owed to Plaintiffs as a result of said promises and representations.

148. Injustice can be avoided only if said promises and representations are enforced.

149. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to enforcement of the various promises and representations made by Trump, including but not limited to the promise that they would continue their full Eastern classification seniority. Plaintiffs are entitled to enforcement said promises and representations against defendant US Airways.
Wherefore, Plaintiffs demand judgment in their favor, and against defendants, and each of them, upon each of the First, Second, Third and Fourth Causes of Action herein:

1.Declaring defendants District 141, Thiede, Snyder and IAMAW to have breached and violated their duty of fair representation to Plaintiffs.

2. Declaring defendants District 141, Thiede, Snyder and IAMAW to have engaged in “FRAUD†and misrepresentation with respect to Plaintiffs.

3. Declaring defendants group, US Airways and Shuttle, inc., to have breached one or more individual contracts with Plaintiffs, and each of them.

August 15, 2003
TO: THE MEMBERSHIP OF DISTRICT LODGE 141-M EMPLOYED BY US AIRWAYS
Dear Sisters and Brothers:

As most of you are aware, the IAM has been, for many years, involved in a court case involving the classification seniority of individuals who were former employees of the Eastern Airlines’ Shuttle.

On August 5th the Court ruled against the IAM and therefore against all current US Airways’ mechanics.

In response to the Court ordered judgement, the IAM has appealed this unfair decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

To view the Appeal and the Court order Click Here. We will keep you advised as to the status of the appeal.

Sincerely and fraternally yours,

Scotty Ford
President and General Chairman

 

[delldude]

JETMECHLINE:
so its under appeal...this means its not cast in stone.so your hoopla is meaningless.
BTW,JETMECLINE...didn't those mechanics quit from eastern and come to another company?
and furthermore....we were going to merge with UAL,and they then wanted to put us at the the bottom of the list,if AMFA won the election then....did you know that?

 

[jetmechline]

JETMECHLINE:
so its under appeal...this means its not cast in stone.so your hoopla is meaningless.

Delldude, Judge Edward R. Korman doesn't agree with you! And that, my friend, is what matters the most !!!!!!

United States District Court
Eastern District of New York
Case # CV 99 4341

Judge: Edward R. Korman ordered August 5, 2003.

Within 10 days of date of this order, the IAM shall inter into negotiations with US Airways for the purpose of establishing new classification seniority dates for the Plaintiffs identical to each such Plaintiffs original date of entry into the mechanic classification at Eastern Air Lines, as adjusted and reflected in trial exhibit 134, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein.

The IAM shall exert every reasonable effort to ensure that such adjusted seniority shall be set fort on every applicable seniority list created and maintained by US Airways pursuant to the IAM/US Airways bargaining agreement, and such seniority dates shall be available for utilization by plaintiffs for all purposes under such agreement, and subject to the terms thereof.

With regard to those plaintiffs who are on a furlough status from US Airways as of date of this order, the IAM shall exert every reasonable effort in negotiations with US Airways to obtain the right of such plaintiffs, at the earliest possible date, to resume their employment at the station from which they were furloughed, with work assignments and shifts to be determined pursuant to the applicable provisions of the IAM-US Airways collective bargaining agreement. The IAM shall take the position in such negotiations that these employees will be eligible to use their collective classification seniority date in any and all station rebids following their return to work at the station from which they were furloughed.

In complying with this order, the IAM shall make every reasonable effort to minimize the expense to non-party US Airways in implementing the proposals made by defendant IAM pursuant to this Order. The provisions of this order do not require US Airways to negotiate with or reach any agreement with the IAM on the maters set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this order, the IAM shall advise the court forthwith, which may order such further relief as may be necessary, If, within sixty days of the date of this order, US Airways has not fully agreed with the IAM’s proposals as set forth above for any reason, the IAM shall promptly report to the court which may order such further relief as may be necessary.

In the event US Airways agrees to the terms, which the IAM is required by paragraphs 1 and 2 of this order to propose, the IAM shall promptly notify the court. Implementation of such an agreement shall be held in abeyance pending the resolution of any appeal by the IAM of this order, provided that the IAM has filed a notice of appeal within five days of the date of entry of this order and has promptly moved the court for expedited briefing and consideration.

IT IS SO ORDERED, THIS 5TH day of AUGUST 2003.

Hon. Edward R. Korman
Chief United States District judge

 

[delldude]

Implementation of such an agreement shall be held in abeyance pending the resolution of any appeal by the IAM of this order, provided that the IAM has filed a notice of appeal within five days of the date of entry of this order and has promptly moved the court for expedited briefing and consideration.

like i said dude...............DMD
(I SUGGEST YOU READ THE FINE PRINT NEXT TIME)