Why Tim Nelson is Dangerous to IAM-represented employees at United Airlines

[Tim Nelson]

That and the 2006 date? makes no sense to me. EVERYBODY should be protected in ANY collective bargaining agreement. That sets a negative precedent. sCO hired a lot of people (and I'm quite sure that sUA hired) after the 2006 date as well.

The reason is that the backed up seniority dates give the company additional space to eliminate those thousands of employees [mostly from sCO] to make space for TA1 and for those who are going to get their jobs contracted out, and are willing to travel. Having thousands of jobs to play with will leave open more than enough job openings for the few who want to uproot their family with the 1999 protections.

Further, if the early out produces a net benefit for the company of an additional 3,000 open spots, then under TA1, those spots wouldn't have gotten back field by new hires unless the company hired some folks temporarily before the TA1 doomsday onslaught initiates in a couple years. When doing calculations, scoplat assumes that the company will not take advantage of the language, but I think that is a fatal flaw. One thing we have learned is that the company most certainly will take advantage of the language and that the union leadership will sign a LOA to do so. TA1 was just an exhaustive LOA whereby Air Willy can come in and dues will be 'seamless'. Big Labor has joined forces with corporate and is part of the system but their constitutions still allow the working people to stop it....if they continue to stick together. Delaney hates the membership bigtime. That's why he signed the LOA exterminating cargo.

 

[jet job]

Nelson once again you are circumnavigating. You claim to be the expert I asked you earlier to write your iron clad language.

 

[jet job]

If the teamsters had written a better contract the cargo loa wouldn't have been necessary.

 

[jet job]

multi layered like cake and Bull S. You took the bull S and just piled it higher and deeper. If you had not gutted scope but built upon it then you wouldn't need all the layers of more BS. Cripes, there is so much gray in that contract that you can paint a USS Battleship with it.

Management can pluck and choose where and when since it will have the exclusive right to contract out at 90% of all current stations.

Hey, let's just use the 2006 date since that's better than 1999. ok? I'm management, and I say your work is getting contracted out, and the only available options I have for you are JFK, BOS, EWR. Sorry, no sun city. Now, you must decide if you want to go. If you go, then you will be one of those who sacrificed your current life while most of the others didn't. You better choose a favorite new baseball team because you will be a long way from home if you planned on supporting your previous local team.

And as far as all the babble about express. TA1 did nothing to get the work of one single express flight after a couple years. Obviously, that wasn't good enough for 80% of our members but I will admit that 20% didn't mind short time protections. Dunno, maybe they were going to retire in two years or had something going on, but most folks don't believe the future is today....the future is tomorrow and needs to be planned for. Today is the day to negotiate a leading industry agreement. The reality of the situation is that there can not possibly be a better negotiation environment than the present one.

A better environment? How can you say that. 65percent of the flights are express and pilots just signed away the bigger RJ s . Hubs have a 9percent unemployment rate. Nelson please tell me again about the negotiation environment.

 

[jet job]

I've offered several solutions, just not in your first 25 questions.

The first solution is to listen to the members and trust them. Then you might stop fearing management as much as you do.

The second solution is to get your head out of your arse with a campaign of fear mongering to collect more dues, and instead take complete advantage of the reality of the situation. The reality of the situation is that this is the best negotiation environment known to man. Looking at TA1, we must conclude that no negotiations have taken place over the past 4.5 years.

As far as strategy and timelines, I suggest triggering the next process and call for a release like you did at US AIRWAYS after only 1.5 years. Going 4.5 years without calling for a release reeks of being a pushover.

I'd focus on those 3 suggestions which you can't handle since you are so far up management's arse.

Nelson no need to become vulgar I've just asked a few questions that have come up in conversation in my breakroom What would calling for a release do? I'll tell you because you seem to have a fascination with UAL . We would be put into a holding pattern for who knows how long without raises, to what purpose to show management ? How does that solve anything? The UAX work that is not currently protected would disappear because you believe the environment is right.

 

[Kev3188]

Tim,
Do you have any info on how many stations (non-union) jetblue currently has staffed? Kev has posted DL has ~25 ramps throughout their system and cargo curious how jetblue compares to this agreement.

Josh

I've said we have ~43, not 25.

 

[700UW]

Gee Kev,

He is misquoting you again!

43 out of how many stations does DL fly domestically?

 

[737823]

I've said we have ~43, not 25.

Even better then. That's substantially more than the UA IAM T/A, US fleet service agreement, and AA TWU fleet agreement. My apologies.

Josh

 

[Kev3188]

Gee Kev,

He is misquoting you again!

43 out of how many stations does DL fly domestically?

Way more than 43...

110ish?

 

[737823]

How many do UA/UAX fly to that don't have M/L ramp? AA/AE? US/US Express? As 700 says no airline has mainline ramp at every city. The NY Times article I posted states in 1998 UA had 113 m/l stations and 17 reservations centers. Not only that but the IAM also had significantly more dues paying members and was on much stronger foundation too. Times have changed...

Josh

 

[jet job]

Nelson no need to become vulgar I've just asked a few questions that have come up in conversation in my breakroom What would calling for a release do? I'll tell you because you seem to have a fascination with UAL . We would be put into a holding pattern for who knows how long without raises, to what purpose to show management ? How does that solve anything? The UAX work that is not currently protected would disappear because you believe the environment is right.

Nelson are you there?

 

[T5towbar]

The reason is that the backed up seniority dates give the company additional space to eliminate those thousands of employees [mostly from sCO] to make space for TA1 and for those who are going to get their jobs contracted out, and are willing to travel. Having thousands of jobs to play with will leave open more than enough job openings for the few who want to uproot their family with the 1999 protections.

Further, if the early out produces a net benefit for the company of an additional 3,000 open spots, then under TA1, those spots wouldn't have gotten back field by new hires unless the company hired some folks temporarily before the TA1 doomsday onslaught initiates in a couple years. When doing calculations, scoplat assumes that the company will not take advantage of the language, but I think that is a fatal flaw. One thing we have learned is that the company most certainly will take advantage of the language and that the union leadership will sign a LOA to do so. TA1 was just an exhaustive LOA whereby Air Willy can come in and dues will be 'seamless'. Big Labor has joined forces with corporate and is part of the system but their constitutions still allow the working people to stop it....if they continue to stick together. Delaney hates the membership bigtime. That's why he signed the LOA exterminating cargo.

That's what I thought as much. There has to be room for the transferees who want to come over to a hub, and just having that 10% to sacrifice sounds about right. There is no reason why EVERYBODY under contract shouldn't be protected. The expendable 10%. What a shame. Why else for the "protection dates". Good scope protects EVERYBODY covered in ANY collective bargaining agreement. Another reason (amongst many) why it was shot down.

 

[jet job]

That's what I thought as much. There has to be room for the transferees who want to come over to a hub, and just having that 10% to sacrifice sounds about right. There is no reason why EVERYBODY under contract shouldn't be protected. The expendable 10%. What a shame. Why else for the "protection dates". Good scope protects EVERYBODY covered in ANY collective bargaining agreement. Another reason (amongst many) why it was shot down.

Nice try .......... On scare tactics but the fact is that hub work is protected

 

[T5towbar]

Well, f that's so, well why everyone isn't covered then? Havng dates like that just adds to the confusion. Like I said before, in a COLLECTIVE bargaining agreement, all who work under it should be covered. All it does is add speculation, and ask for reasons why. It's just common sense to ask........

 

[WorldTraveler]

Way more than 43...

110ish?

if my calculations are correct, DL serves 131 cities with mainline aircraft within the US, UA serves 75, and AA serves 81. US also serves 75 and WN/FL serve 88.

WN offers approx. 3.1M domestic mainline seats/week in the US, DL offers 2.3M, and AA and UA each offer approx. 1.5M and US is at 1.1M.

If you include regional carriers, DL offers 3.4M seats/week, WN still offers 3.1M, UA offers 2.6M, and AA 2.0. If you include FL with WN, they end up with 3.4M seats/week. If you add AA and US, they have 3.8M domestic mainline seats per week based on current separate schedules.

DL is substantially more mainline, UA far less so. There is a strong correlation between the size of the mainline operation at network carriers and their likelihood of having mainline ramp agents.

Note that these numbers are based on current schedules and will change as the 717s begin transferring from FL to DL.