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

[T5towbar]

Yours is the first agreement that I know of in the industry that has detonation dates where only 7 stations will remain. What is even more troubling is that there are no protections preventing the airline from beefing up flight activity at non union stations. At US AIRWAYS, our scope sucks but we have protections against beefing up non union stations. We insourced ATL last year, and it appears IAH will be insourced this April since it has maintained 14 flights a day.

Since your TA offers no protections against that, management can and WILL BE encouraged to increase flight activity at any station of their choosing and have a union free environment.

And let's talk about the "Then there were 7" stations:
1. Every single merger within our membership, when completed, has done away with two hubs. PSA/USair: SAN, LAX; Piedmont/USair: Day/BWI. America West/US AIRW: LAS LAX. Even outside our membership in DL142: Delta/NW: Mem/CVG. So the question is, which two hubs will go when United finally realizes the synergies?
What we know is that of the 9 hub facilities, GUM and CLE will stay since they have union detonation dates in them and can be operated union free. So, out of the remaining 7, which two will be downsized? Your guess of which two will be just as valid as mine at this point.

OK, Let's talk about your 'no furlough' protections where you claim 96% are on lock down protections.

1. You claim lock down protections for ALL members on the payroll since 1999. Please share how those lock down protections are better than the "Lock down 1994" no furlough protections of the current PCE agreement that happened to go from 22,000 members down to 8,000 in a decade? Where the hell did 15,000 members go that had this guaranteed no furlough clause? Hell, we have the 1999 at US AIRWAYS but we lost 60 stations, and our numbers went from 8,500 down to 3,900 until the westie merger brought us back up to 5,900.

2. Let's talk about your guaranteed "no furlough due to outsourcing" language.
Don't you know what happened in EWR cargo? I thought you were the AGC there Mike? The IBT agreement had merger protections against contracting out, and you and your Boss Delaney claimed in your goofy update "You can't harmonize out of a agreement". So, management contracted out cargo but didn't lay anyone off so they can skirt by that clause. They just brought everyone over to the ramp. Maybe T5Towbar can explain better.

Several months later, management claimed it was overstaffed and laid off workers. I wrote a grievance with Mitch Buckley but management claimed the layoff had nothing to do with cargo. The union leaders had their fingers up their arse and were powerless to enforce.

TA2 is laid with more detonations than a Vietnam mine field. By application, out of 30,000 members, without any help from management I can't see any way there will be more than 15,000 out of 30,000 left after the detonation dates. To say otherwise would necessarily have to suggest that management truly loves their employees and defused the detonation dates.
However, if management shifts work from two hubs, historically speaking, how could you even be left with more than 10,000 members? And with unlimited part time, how many full time jobs will be left, a few thousand? Oh yeah, you promised that since part time is unlimited that all current full timers can not be reduced to part time for the sake of part time. Management sure is going to carve that one up in a few years as well.

Get ready for an explosion!
regards,

As far as the cargo situation at EWR, management claimed we were "overstaffed", so 803 people (from ramp and all of cargo) got letters saying that they were affected in being furloughed due to the bump. At least the old IBT contract provided bumping rights to the affected. So cargo (with a large percentage of them with very high seniority) was forced to come to the ramp. With that, it bumped a lot of lower seniority people (nearly all with 2008 seniority) was forced to move (which some did - SFO was the only city with FT) or take the furlough. So about 150 was bumped out. An about another 150 or so - I don't know the exact number - (with late 2007 - early 08 seniority) was forced to PT to keep their jobs. They did the same thing at IAH, but I think that they absorbed everyone due to the fact that they got rid of the vendor doing the Q400 flights, and insourced that function. If you read the furlough letter that they received (not the general letter - the letter that goes with your application for unemployment), it said about 350 or so people would be affected. That's why I'm not too keen on this 2006 date, because we hired a lot of people after 2005 (when we took our cuts). So we have a lot of people in that time frame 06-07 that would not be covered in this agreement. Why that date (4/1/06)? Everyone working under this should be covered! Hell, you know that the dues are definitely going up....... From what I understand in the last TA, no one should be reduced in status - if you are FT, you can't be reduced to PT.

 

[737823]

Tim, T5 or Socplat13:
As far as you know does the repackaged T/A have unlimited part time and split shift language like before?

Josh

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim, T5 or Socplat13:
As far as you know does the repackaged T/A have unlimited part time and split shift language like before?

Josh

i have to wait to see the ta. Socplat (bartz) and jet job (klemm) dont know either since neither has seen the ta yet. They did vote unanimously to recommend it based on only the highlight sheet they got at their eboard meeting. Very disappointing that the entire eboard voted based on a half page highlight sheet.

 

[mike33]

i have to wait to see the ta. Socplat (bartz) and jet job (klemm) dont know either since neither has seen the ta yet. They did vote unanimously to recommend it based on only the highlight sheet they got at their eboard meeting. Very disappointing that the entire eboard voted based on a half page highlight sheet.

The problem with this industry is we tend to set the bar for the rest every time there is a new agreement. Who is going to take the chance to leapfrog beyond that line of thinking and change things?

 

[Socplat13]

i have to wait to see the ta. Socplat (bartz) and jet job (klemm) dont know either since neither has seen the ta yet. They did vote unanimously to recommend it based on only the highlight sheet they got at their eboard meeting. Very disappointing that the entire eboard voted based on a half page highlight sheet.

Nelson,
It is truly sad that you spread lies and misinformation. All you are attempting to do is have this contract fail because you think it will further your political ambitions.

The fact is, just based on the highlights, this would be the best CBA for Fleet, Customer Service, Stores and Res in the industry.

Also, TA1 did not have "unlimited part-time." Every full-time worker was immunized from being reduced to part-time. That's called a limit and protection. Also, unlike any other employee handbook or CBA in the industry, part-time employees will receive the same medical and dental benefits as do full-time employees. The fact is, there will be increased full-time opportunities because part-time hiring will be cost prohibitive.

In many sub-CO stations you have Fleet and ASA employees that are full-time that have way less seniority than do their peers at sub-UA. How could that be with no language at all limiting in any way the utilization of part-time employment? It's because with more shift starting times they can staff the operation more efficiently with full-time employees--one benefit package as opposed to two.

But that doesn't fit into Nelson's fear-mongering message.

Best job protection and wage rates ever negotiated in the airline industry. Simple fact. 96% cannot be furloughed due to outsourcing. No expiration date for that protection. Unmatched protection for over 25,000 members.

Get the facts brother. Don't insult and endanger the work lives of UA workers with your nasty misrepresentations and outright lies.

 

[Socplat13]

i have to wait to see the ta. Socplat (bartz) and jet job (klemm) dont know either since neither has seen the ta yet. They did vote unanimously to recommend it based on only the highlight sheet they got at their eboard meeting. Very disappointing that the entire eboard voted based on a half page highlight sheet.

Oh, one more thing, moron. You say both Klemm and Bartz didn't see the contract only the negotiating team did. They're on the negotiating team you hateful little lying fool.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Nelson,
It is truly sad that you spread lies and misinformation. All you are attempting to do is have this contract fail because you think it will further your political ambitions.

The fact is, just based on the highlights, this would be the best CBA for Fleet, Customer Service, Stores and Res in the industry.

Also, TA1 did not have "unlimited part-time." Every full-time worker was immunized from being reduced to part-time. That's called a limit and protection. Also, unlike any other employee handbook or CBA in the industry, part-time employees will receive the same medical and dental benefits as do full-time employees. The fact is, there will be increased full-time opportunities because part-time hiring will be cost prohibitive.

In many sub-CO stations you have Fleet and ASA employees that are full-time that have way less seniority than do their peers at sub-UA. How could that be with no language at all limiting in any way the utilization of part-time employment? It's because with more shift starting times they can staff the operation more efficiently with full-time employees--one benefit package as opposed to two.

But that doesn't fit into Nelson's fear-mongering message.

Best job protection and wage rates ever negotiated in the airline industry. Simple fact. 96% cannot be furloughed due to outsourcing. No expiration date for that protection. Unmatched protection for over 25,000 members.

Get the facts brother. Don't insult and endanger the work lives of UA workers with your nasty misrepresentations and outright lies.

You don't make any sense. If I put political gain ahead of the members then no way in hell would I fight against this contract because it blows and the members blame you. If anything I'm trying to make you look good with another chance.
I would have stood by and watched the last contract get ratified if I was thinking political gain. Pushing a rejection would just make you guys look good if you got more for the members but as long as the members benefit I don't care if you look as good as Cindy Crawford. But hey, you guys are so bad you guys managed to F up another TA. How many chances you want me to give you? Lol

Regarding full time immunizations, please show me where a full timer can't be reduced down to part time as a result of a reduction in force? Your protections are a scandal because you dopes agree to do away with the cap on part time then sign LOA2 that only protects the full timers against part time 'for the sake of part time'. In other words, since you clowns gave in to unlimited part time, and removed caps, as you incorporated Delta airline guidelines, the small token you got back from the company was that the company wouldn't reduce a full timer to part time just for the hell of it. But even full timers can be reduced to part time. Hell they can be laid off as well. Please show me where Joe Blow works in OMA and they lose flights and the company can't reduce him to part time or lay him off altogether if he doesn't want to go to EWR? I want language! LMAO.

Your biggest problem is that you guys have no scope except for 7 stations. Those no layoff protections didn't save anyone at US AIRWAYS or PCE over the years, except for the 10% of members who want a life changing experience in a brand new station hundreds if not thousands of miles away. Funny thing is that management almost never puts on nice 'sun cities' on the list. At US AIRWAYS our members either had the choice of PHL or take furlough. Few went to PHL. My guess is that EWR or ORD will be on the short list for all the union members who will lose their jobs due to your support of bringing back a contract that has NO SCOPE for over 90% of stations.

Sheesh!

 

[Tim Nelson]

Oh, one more thing, moron. You say both Klemm and Bartz didn't see the contract only the negotiating team did. They're on the negotiating team you hateful little lying fool.

I'll give you points on that. My bad. I should have known they were on the negotiation team. The TA is good witness to that.

At any rate, good luck. It isn't me you have to worry about, it's the 80% that told you guys that the last contract blowed. Not sure if they are just going to vote it in due to a 'no confidence' with you guys, or continue sticking together against this inequitable agreement with their focus on the finish line of a equitable agreement.

If the contract comes in, I can't see any way possible where more than 10,000 union members survive after the detonation dates are triggered. I'd be surprised if it's 10,000. Probably something closer to 6,000 or 8,000 survive if they decide to finally do away with two hubs as history has taught us.

 

[T5towbar]

As far as I know, stopping the reduction from FT to PT is very important to most members. Especially junior members. We've had it happen before, and twice I can recall affecting people recently. In 2008, when the fuel spike hit, we stopped hiring, and the people who just made the cut were forced to PT. Most of them are gone now. And now during the cargo bump, the people who survived 2008 were affected and those who survived were forced to PT. Many of them would like to get back to FT.

What is the big issue with the various start times? We have many start times in a hub, and it works well for most people. Especially if people want to daytrade and pick up or drop off a shift. The only problem is see is there are some overlaps (maybe a half hour), but with the shortage of manpower, management allow shift adjustments so the trade would be covered, or an agent can start earlier.

As I said before, WHY NOT ALL COVERED IN THIS AGREEMENT??? Why the dates? If you are a member in good standing, you should be covered, and that's that!

 

[Socplat13]

As far as I know, stopping the reduction from FT to PT is very important to most members. Especially junior members. We've had it happen before, and twice I can recall affecting people recently. In 2008, when the fuel spike hit, we stopped hiring, and the people who just made the cut were forced to PT. Most of them are gone now. And now during the cargo bump, the people who survived 2008 were affected and those who survived were forced to PT. Many of them would like to get back to FT.

What is the big issue with the various start times? We have many start times in a hub, and it works well for most people. Especially if people want to daytrade and pick up or drop off a shift. The only problem is see is there are some overlaps (maybe a half hour), but with the shortage of manpower, management allow shift adjustments so the trade would be covered, or an agent can start earlier.

As I said before, WHY NOT ALL COVERED IN THIS AGREEMENT??? Why the dates? If you are a member in good standing, you should be covered, and that's that!

Those with less than 4/1/2006 are covered. They maintain seniority bumping rights and if there happens to be a reduction in force they exercise their property right of seniority. In 7 locations and Res Centers, in which 20,000 of our members work, and many of them are junior to 4/1/2006, have their work protected.

I fully agree about the start times, and so did the first rejected TA. Not only does it provide employees more choices of when to go to work and pick up shifts, it provides more full-time opportunities.

 

[Socplat13]

Nelson continues his fear-mongering and campaign of misinformation regarding the job security of the recently announced proposed CBA.

96% of the IAM-represented workforce at UA now cannot be involuntarily furloughed due to outsourcing. That's over 25,000 workers in Fleet, Customer Service, Res and Stores. Unmatched in the industry.

Also, protected is the vast majority of the express operation.

Nelson, a US Airways ramper, for political reasons, claims all UA workers will be forced into 6 stations over time. This is a false and foolish claim. 25,000 UA workers with 4/1/2006 seniority or 96% of the workforce CANNOT be involuntarily furloughed due to outsourcing. That means major limits on outsourcing, especially since 20,000 CANNOT have their work outsourced ever.

UA CANNOT fit 25,000 workers into 6 stations. Just cannot realistically occur.

Beware of Nelson. He's a slick talker but loses every election he enters. That's because he has no practical experience of any sort. He claims to be an expert in these matters but has absolutely no negotiating or educational background. Just another break room lawyer who just wants to divide.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Nelson continues his fear-mongering and campaign of misinformation regarding the job security of the recently announced proposed CBA.

96% of the IAM-represented workforce at UA now cannot be involuntarily furloughed due to outsourcing. That's over 25,000 workers in Fleet, Customer Service, Res and Stores. Unmatched in the industry.

Also, protected is the vast majority of the express operation.

Nelson, a US Airways ramper, for political reasons, claims all UA workers will be forced into 6 stations over time. This is a false and foolish claim. 25,000 UA workers with 4/1/2006 seniority or 96% of the workforce CANNOT be involuntarily furloughed due to outsourcing. That means major limits on outsourcing, especially since 20,000 CANNOT have their work outsourced ever.

UA CANNOT fit 25,000 workers into 6 stations. Just cannot realistically occur.

Beware of Nelson. He's a slick talker but loses every election he enters. That's because he has no practical experience of any sort. He claims to be an expert in these matters but has absolutely no negotiating or educational background. Just another break room lawyer who just wants to divide.

lol
Again, why don't you talk about the limitations on the 96% iron clad number? 90%+ stations [count them, 83 out of 90 stations] can most certainly get outsourced and boot all union members out. Kindly review your own TA [page 1-8....'except' failure by the employee to exercise his seniority to displace [insert move to EWR here]. Also, kindly show me the protections for the work in those 83 stations??? The only protections in those stations in YOUR TA are NOT protections of work but the limited protections that will force a union member to decide if he wants to move his family to EWR [or if lucky a sun station] or unfortunately take furlough. Management knows 90% will take furlough.

Please stop saying "CANNOT". That's not in the TA, page 1-8 says YES THEY CAN if they do not want to uproot their familes. That nasty little provision management inserted applies in 1-8 to the outsourcing date of 2006 and the otherwise date of 1999.

And you also know that 'start times' is contract language to protect full time family rearing jobs. Having unlimited start times compliments the unlimited part time.

And why do you claim iron clad protections for the express jobs when you guys got a detonation date in there? Please show us where there are any rights to express work at ANY airport after the time bomb date goes off? You seem to have a hard time mentioning the detonation dates, lol.

Myth! Maybe your fairy tale would be more available if you had contract language or started off the TA by saying "Long ago and far away...." LMAO

 

[Kev3188]

As I said before, WHY NOT ALL COVERED IN THIS AGREEMENT??? Why the dates? If you are a member in good standing, you should be covered, and that's that!

I wonder how many times you're gonna have to ask that before they stop dodging it, and answer...

 

[Socplat13]

Tim wants you to believe that UA workers have location protection and the announced agreement somehow goes backwards. That's untrue. UA workers do not have location protection, and neither do any airline workers. The 4/1/2006 date protects over 25,000 from lay-off due to outsourcing. Largest group of workers to ever have that protection, maybe in any industry.

Nelson wants to reinvent history, along with his disciples of misinformation, and have people believe that airline workers were always guaranteed a job in a certain city. Nothing could be further than the truth. All of a sudden, protecting 96% of IAM workers at UA from lay-off due to outsourcing is somehow a failure. The average American worker only dreams of this type of protection.

Again, Tim, which airline contract stipulates that a worker MUST be kept in a location? None.

Kev, you seem intelligent, ALL workers have protections in this CBA. It's called the property right of seniority which says you must have a job if someone is junior to you. Why aren't all covered? That's negotiations, the ability to do the best possible and have both sides leave not getting everything they want. It's called reality. Why isn't it sunny and 70 everyday? Why isn't the starting base wage $35.00 per hour?

 

[737823]

The AA TWU ramp CBA explicitly lists 17 protected stations assuming seven daily mainline flights until amendable date in 2016

Josh