Why there will never be a T.A.

[WeAAsles]

My concern is your perceived position on the issues that concern me. I am thankful the 5 IAM NC members have, as I understand, veto power.
I look at them like the straps on a gurney. They are there to protect you from harming yourself, and others.

It actually works both ways Stretcher depending on how you view the circumstances.

Let’s say the IAM didn’t care about all those jobs being lost in Maintenance and Title 2? Well then you could say it’s the TWU Negotiators who have the veto power.

 

[1AA]

My concern is your perceived position on the issues that concern me. I am thankful the 5 IAM NC members have, as I understand, veto power.
I look at them like the straps on a gurney. They are there to protect you from harming yourself, and others.

They are also protecting their own interest of survival. Maintaining flow of dues. The association was formed to keep the membership divided and allow the leadership to have full control of its members. So far it's taken that path. We are all divided on issues, work ethics, contractual articles, pay, benefits, scope and then we have the division between line and overhaul. I'm sure on the fleet service side you have similar divisions between stations and work groups within both unions. That's the problem we are faced with. No unity. Way too many groups in the association that have different agendas.

 

[Racer X]

My concern is your perceived position on the issues that concern me. I am thankful the 5 IAM NC members have, as I understand, veto power.
I look at them like the straps on a gurney. They are there to protect you from harming yourself, and others.

Just for general info....the fleet NC is 6 members. No biggie...just clarification.

 

[WeAAsles]

I have a question for anybody that will answer honestly on the LAA side?

Why do you folks (most of you anyway) hate the LUS folks?

Don’t think anyone particularly hates the LUS folks. It’s just been a long road since 2003 and I think most want that nightmare to finally come to an end and maybe some feel LUS IAM is keeping us from that.

Why do you folks (most of you anyway) blame the LUS folks for your bankruptcy agreement?

Again PJ it’s not even the Bankruptcy agreement that caused us the greatest harm. Most of the items we’re looking to get back were lost in 2003, 15 years ago now. The items we lost in the BK don’t even seem to be on the table to gain back. Our DBP, Retiree Medical and Cabin Service.

Why would you folks (most of you anyway) rather bring us up to your insurance premiums rather than fighting to come down to ours and having more extra money in your check?

This one has obviously left me scratching my head. NYer who it seems everyone knows who he is now is the one giving the hard sell (In favor of the Company) that you need to relinquish your hold on your Medical costs.

He hasn’t only been pushing that narrative here but also on Facebook and he honestly has gained some followers in that agenda. Nowhere near what he wants or needs, but a few.

Otherwise some of it really is Stockholm Syndrome. AMR Managers did a real number on these people over their careers and I’m afraid they’ll never recover.

 

[WeAAsles]

They are also protecting their own interest of survival. Maintaining flow of dues. The association was formed to keep the membership divided and allow the leadership to have full control of its members. So far it's taken that path. We are all divided on issues, work ethics, contractual articles, pay, benefits, scope and then we have the division between line and overhaul. I'm sure on the fleet service side you have similar divisions between stations and work groups within both unions. That's the problem we are faced with. No unity. Way too many groups in the association that have different agendas.

Not to mention the agenda you’ve been trying to sell for the last 20 years or so too right?

 

[Bin Stretcher]

It actually works both ways Stretcher depending on how you view the circumstances.

Let’s say the IAM didn’t care about all those jobs being lost in Maintenance and Title 2? Well then you could say it’s the TWU Negotiators who have the veto power.

I realize you're using that as an example but it is my brief IAM never advocate for losing work. I would let my voice be heard on that as well.

 

[Bin Stretcher]

They are also protecting their own interest of survival. Maintaining flow of dues. The association was formed to keep the membership divided and allow the leadership to have full control of its members. So far it's taken that path. We are all divided on issues, work ethics, contractual articles, pay, benefits, scope and then we have the division between line and overhaul. I'm sure on the fleet service side you have similar divisions between stations and work groups within both unions. That's the problem we are faced with. No unity. Way too many groups in the association that have different agendas.

I disagree with you that the association's intent is to divide. That was going to happen regardless, even if we were school in a single union. Considering the 4 groups(IAM MT & fleet, TWU MT & fleet), the are a multitude of issues for each group. Each has unique issues. You would never find one solution to please everyone even with what be considered a great contractual outcome. Therefore, I personally don't take issue with the Association.

 

[WeAAsles]

I realize you're using that as an example but it is my brief IAM never advocate for losing work. I would let my voice be heard on that as well.

But some of these guys are not seeing the work on the other side as being necessarily “their” work.

Take for instance the Catering. I may never have done it and never will do it but even if it is in Stations I don’t plan to transfer too, that work is still currently MY work that the Company wants to take from me. And Deicing, Lavatory and Water servicing should be viewed the same way on your side. We should ALL want to keep those jobs. (And the low cost Medical as well)

It’s our own minds that we need to take out of the box we keep them in and think.

 

[Bin Stretcher]

Just for general info....the fleet NC is 6 members. No biggie...just clarification.

Thank you for the correction. Is the veto
part correct?

 

[WeAAsles]

Thank you for the correction. Is the veto
part correct?

I personally don’t like that “veto” term as it alludes to division. I’d like to think all will have their own minds free for when they vote to release something or not and at the end of that vote the majority will be respected without animosity.

 

[WeAAsles]

BTW the Executive Committee and the Company are meeting again this week I believe in DC. I think it’s mainly Maintenance related again but who knows?

 

[Bin Stretcher]

I personally don’t like that “veto” term as it alludes to division. I’d like to think all will have their own minds free for when they vote to release something or not and at the end of that vote the majority will be respected without animosity.

It is just a word, no more, no less. It has a meaning. Doesn't matter how you color it, it still provides the same function.
And, to be clear, I won't vote for any job losses, either side. In the end, it should be all our work whether you elect to perform those jobs or not.

 

[Racer X]

Thank you for the correction. Is the veto
part correct?

Both sides have that ability.
Perhaps a better way to put it is...a TA would have to be passed by a majority vote of the NC.
12 total...6 IAM....6 TWU...if ANY 6 ( IAM,TWU or any Combination) are fixed on a position, they would need to convince 1 more to vote their way for a passing majority.

 

[NYer]

NYer,

Correct me if I am wrong here, but aren't you on the NC now? Shouldn't you be concerned with how the TA'd language affects those systemwide, not just in MIA?

Don't think the language that concerns us is a detriment to anyone else or at least not to the extent it may affect MIA simply because of the sheer number of PTers in the station. That language is a mechanism used to limit the number of PTers that can currently swell to several hundred more than the current numbers.

Also, the language was TA'd while other TWU representatives we able to voice their points of view before it was TA'd, MIA didn't.

 

[WeAAsles]

It is just a word, no more, no less. It has a meaning. Doesn't matter how you color it, it still provides the same function.
And, to be clear, I won't vote for any job losses, either side. In the end, it should be all our work whether you elect to perform those jobs or not.

Under the old TWU way of Negotiations in our Constitution is something called the “Roll Call” vote. The roll call was essentially used as a bully pulpit to silence President’s who represented Stations with a smaller Membership than Hub President’s. I understand the principle behind it but sometimes it’s a crummy tool to use.

Veto just gives me that same feeling. Nothing personal.