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

[Kev3188]

Kev and WT will be able to weigh in more on DL ready reserve but my understanding is this. The program has been in place for many years at DL and is used as a way to adjust staffing across flight schedule both on a time of day and seasonal basis at hubs and outstations alike. The concern Kev and other employees have expressed is the rapid growth of the program, it was once a small part of DL's staff but is now upto 50% of staffing in certain stations. That is what Kev has stated here before, not sure if that is 50% of headcount, 50% of hours, or what measure. The program is now used to backfill PT and FT roles and is also the primary way ACS and Ramp acquires talent at DL. They work roughly 200-1200 hours per year and are paid ~$11/hr and receive flight privileges and that's it. Some stations there are opportunities for RR to upgrade to full-time/part-time. Again this is my understanding, hopefully Kev can weigh in more on the specifics.

Yep, it's been there for awhile. The difference between then & today is the exponential growth the program has seen (their term, BTW), and instead of a stepping stone is now a default. As far as 'filling in the gaps" in flight schedules or vacation relief goes, that's not necessarily happening everywhere. Rather in many stations- hubs and line alike-they're utilizing them in the same manner as a regular employee.

Maybe w/o the counterbalance of a union it's just too easy not to...

P.S. It's 300-1300 hr./yr.

 

[Tim Nelson]

So as it is now, US has much stronger scope than UA. Pretty sure US is mainline fleet service at BDL, MHT, MIA, PVD and certainly BOS. Will be interesting to see how this plays out in the merger, hopefully they will hold the line on scope. That brings me to my next question: the association agreement lists stations and which union members will pay dues to. BDL, MHT, PVD, etc aren't listed. What does that mean? They don't intend to fight for scope in those stations going forward? AA serves BDL, ramp was contracted however passenger service is still mainline. But of course AA isn't in MHT or PVD. What do you make of this?

http://www.usaamerger.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Mechanic-and-Related-Association-Agreement1.pdf

Josh

Not listed because PVD and BDL are in the BOS local which is listed as IAM.

 

[Tim Nelson]

So as it is now, US has much stronger scope than UA. Pretty sure US is mainline fleet service at BDL, MHT, MIA, PVD and certainly BOS. Will be interesting to see how this plays out in the merger, hopefully they will hold the line on scope. That brings me to my next question: the association agreement lists stations and which union members will pay dues to. BDL, MHT, PVD, etc aren't listed. What does that mean? They don't intend to fight for scope in those stations going forward? AA serves BDL, ramp was contracted however passenger service is still mainline. But of course AA isn't in MHT or PVD. What do you make of this?

http://www.usaamerger.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Mechanic-and-Related-Association-Agreement1.pdf

Josh

Yes, USair fleet has much stronger scope than United even though the scope is in serious need of a tuneup.  My suspicions, especially watching Delaney's new video along with his previous actions, are that he will want to bring back a ta that extends protections with detonation dates, as opposed to extending scope and/or grandfathering all current stations as a bare minimum.  And, given what they asked for in wages/benefits [according to AH], I wouldn't think Delaney will have much movement other than a token wage increase with detonation dates and maybe a $500 signing bonus when retro and signing bonus should be expected.  What is sacred......is scope though.  Absolutely NO REASON for Cinderella dates.  We have leverage and we don't have to even bother with joint talks if management doesn't want to share by recognizing their record profits and newest disclosure that it will make billions more in synergies.  But I can't help but think how awful things turned south with the United members who were almost in the identical situation when their company announced record profits, one billion in this last quarter alone. Yet, scope was lost.  WTH?  So disturbing that it actually bothers myself and other labor guys to even entertain the thought.  Something is wrong.

 

[Kev3188]

+1


I hope everyone on the US property regards time-bombed scope as an absolute deal breaker this time around...

 

[737823]

Yes, USair fleet has much stronger scope than United even though the scope is in serious need of a tuneup.  My suspicions, especially watching Delaney's new video along with his previous actions, are that he will want to bring back a ta that extends protections with detonation dates, as opposed to extending scope and/or grandfathering all current stations as a bare minimum.  And, given what they asked for in wages/benefits [according to AH], I wouldn't think Delaney will have much movement other than a token wage increase with detonation dates and maybe a $500 signing bonus when retro and signing bonus should be expected.  What is sacred......is scope though.  Absolutely NO REASON for Cinderella dates.  We have leverage and we don't have to even bother with joint talks if management doesn't want to share by recognizing their record profits and newest disclosure that it will make billions more in synergies.  But I can't help but think how awful things turned south with the United members who were almost in the identical situation when their company announced record profits, one billion in this last quarter alone. Yet, scope was lost.  WTH?  So disturbing that it actually bothers myself and other labor guys to even entertain the thought.  Something is wrong.

Thanks. So it seems 141/142 are going in another direction here, they are insisting on new CBAs for ramp and fleet at US before joint CBA and integration talks. Hopefully they will hold everyone to it and keep SCOPE. From your involvement at UA why didn't they do the same? From a negotiating stand point it would be perfect. UA wants to tap the supposed "synergies" of their merger and a large part of that is running a smooth integrated operation. Why didn't they settle the negotiations from 2009 for sUA before going into joint CBA? Seriously is it because they wanted the dues from unorganized sCO agents and dues to administer IBT ramp CBA? Correct me if I'm wrong, but nothing was stopping the district from holding the representational election once single carrier status was established but they could have held out for stand alone UA ramp and PCE agreements, no?

Josh

 

[737823]

Yep, it's been there for awhile. The difference between then & today is the exponential growth the program has seen (their term, BTW), and instead of a stepping stone is now a default. As far as 'filling in the gaps" in flight schedules or vacation relief goes, that's not necessarily happening everywhere. Rather in many stations- hubs and line alike-they're utilizing them in the same manner as a regular employee.

Maybe w/o the counterbalance of a union it's just too easy not to...

P.S. It's 300-1300 hr./yr.

Thanks. Again your feelings of this aside, my point was DL has publicly stated RR is a means to better align staffing with flight activity. I know your perception is different, but that was the context I meant to give T5.

http://www.startribune.com/business/140349533.html

and DL's response:

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/141673763.html

Josh

 

[Tim Nelson]

Thanks. So it seems 141/142 are going in another direction here, they are insisting on new CBAs for ramp and fleet at US before joint CBA and integration talks. Hopefully they will hold everyone to it and keep SCOPE. From your involvement at UA why didn't they do the same? From a negotiating stand point it would be perfect. UA wants to tap the supposed "synergies" of their merger and a large part of that is running a smooth integrated operation. Why didn't they settle the negotiations from 2009 for sUA before going into joint CBA? Seriously is it because they wanted the dues from unorganized sCO agents and dues to administer IBT ramp CBA? Correct me if I'm wrong, but nothing was stopping the district from holding the representational election once single carrier status was established but they could have held out for stand alone UA ramp and PCE agreements, no?

Josh

Yes, they could have held out. Instead they agreed to try expedited talks, but when those failed, they had to file for new talks. No academic standing went into these decisions. When I was doing the organizing, I had to threaten the IAM [actual threat withheld] to establish a position to preserve the membership and toss out the IAM"s organizing manual which was insulting, and bring in modern day techniques which reflected the modern culture and modern tools. In short, they wanted to use cavemen clubs. Otherwise we would have lost all elections and kept the losing streak in tact. Thankfully, a few in the INTL saw the reasoning and allowed me to bring the new techniques in but it was too late for the continental stews and Delta members. The Delta ramp was a really hard one to stomach when it was nonsensically lost. It did finally convince the IAM INTL to allow me to bring in the new techniques.
 
As far as the negotiations of contracts, I can tell you that practically the whole district has no academic standing and has no idea how to research or present a case for discussion. I presume the company struck a deal with IAM141 to cooperate with the dues of the former teamsters if the IAM agreed to joint talks.  And I presume that the $$$ of the continental ticket agents had a lot to do with selling out a strong ramp contract.  That is, imo, the most likely reason why the IAM did that dirty deed but I also know that it could have been because they are just flat out stupid and believe management when it says it has no current plans to contract out.  In either case, why it was done is not important, what is important, tragically, is that it was done.

 

[Kev3188]

Thanks. Again your feelings of this aside, my point was DL has publicly stated RR is a means to better align staffing with flight activity. I know your perception is different, but that was the context I meant to give T5.

http://www.startribune.com/business/140349533.html

and DL's response:

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/141673763.html

Josh

I've read both previously. The DL "response" by Lentsch is the same canned talking points we get to hear day in/day out.

BTW, I believe it's been discussed here before, but the company tried to hold up those quoted in the original as examples as a means to quiet everyone else. Very North Korean-esque of them, IMO. Thankfully, it didn't work, though.

In my experience, Minnesotans are a reticent bunch...until you try to shut them up...

 

[737823]

Yes we've discussed them before, again I posted the links mainly for T5 to learn more about RR at DL. That's all.

Josh

 

[Kev3188]

Right on. Couldn't remember if it was on here or another site...

 

[saywhat]

Yes, USair fleet has much stronger scope than United even though the scope is in serious need of a tuneup.  My suspicions, especially watching Delaney's new video along with his previous actions, are that he will want to bring back a ta that extends protections with detonation dates, as opposed to extending scope and/or grandfathering all current stations as a bare minimum.  And, given what they asked for in wages/benefits [according to AH], I wouldn't think Delaney will have much movement other than a token wage increase with detonation dates and maybe a $500 signing bonus when retro and signing bonus should be expected.  What is sacred......is scope though.  Absolutely NO REASON for Cinderella dates.  We have leverage and we don't have to even bother with joint talks if management doesn't want to share by recognizing their record profits and newest disclosure that it will make billions more in synergies.  But I can't help but think how awful things turned south with the United members who were almost in the identical situation when their company announced record profits, one billion in this last quarter alone. Yet, scope was lost.  WTH?  So disturbing that it actually bothers myself and other labor guys to even entertain the thought.  Something is wrong.

Point of clarification, UA has lost around $700 million in the last 12 months dating back to 2012 but projected to make something like $700 million for 2013.

 

[WorldTraveler]

The pilots really hurt us. We don't have a small M/L aircraft like the 190 or the 717 that AA/US and DL has. The 50 seaters really kills leverage. We don't have a lot of the larger RJ's in our system, but the 175's will be coming online, and I don't know how that's going to play out in the line stations. And how many we will lose in this deal.

excellent insights all around....

as for this comment, CO's pilots boxed the company into a corner that worked for CO. CO was strong enough in the NYC local market and fuel prices were low enough that the RJ cap that limited RJs to less than 50 seats worked for CO. Fuel prices grew dramatically which has rendered 50 seat RJs less profitable at the same time that CO's overall costs were going up which meant CO couldn't add incremental capacity near as profitably as they once did and CO's costs to operate at hubs like EWR weren't near as attractive as they once were.

Add in that in competition in NYC was heating up dramatically, esp. as a result of the slot deal in which DL added flights to many markets from LGA, the preferred local market airport for short-haul business travel and is using 76 seat RJs while CO is using 50 seaters.

As much as a lot of people want to slam UA, they inherited a bad hand from CO that included restrictive labor agreements. They are trying to replace 50 seat RJs but both the UA and CO pilots aren't going to agree to the massive number of 50 seat replacements with 76 seaters than UA needs - and thus UA will be forced to compete with less desirable and less profitable aircraft in many parts of its network.

Labor can't win when a company has to use non-winning network or fleet strategies.

It also explains why UA is trying so hard to make its mainline fleet as efficient as possible to try to counterbalance its limitations with the regional fleet.

 

[scores]

"As much as a lot of people want to slam UA, they inherited a bad hand from CO that included restrictive labor agreements."
 
*Cough* *Cough* Bullshit.
 
Theres a reason why CO went from worst to first and UA was sucking pig slough from the bottom of the barrel and it wasnt because of restrictive labor agreements. As you can see from the graphs CO was WAY better than UA.
 
Pre-merger
 
http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/news/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2010092
 
http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/news/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2011075
 
Post-merger
 
http://www.jdpower.com/content/press-release/aOGunkG/2012-north-america-airline-satisfaction-study.htm
 
http://www.jdpower.com/content/press-release/5sYQtpZ/2013-north-america-airline-satisfaction-study.htm
 
Ask yourself this question: Why is the company I work for rated second to last among its competitors?

 

[scores]

Oh ... and just remember. The ONLY reason this bloodsucking union is even representing PCE is because the NMB changed the rules on how votes are counted. So now I have to pay union dues to keep a job Ive had for 23 years.
 
Yeah, I'm pissed. Along with alot of my other s-co co-workers.

 

[737823]

Oh ... and just remember. The ONLY reason this bloodsucking union is even representing PCE is because the NMB changed the rules on how votes are counted. So now I have to pay union dues to keep a job Ive had for 23 years.
 
Yeah, I'm pissed. Along with alot of my other s-co co-workers.

Excellent post.

Agree completely, that is what the sCO agents have told me. MIA is getting outsourced, sCO has always been mainline but sUA has been an express station several years now. The IAM won't lift a finger for their dues payers, nor do they have to. Zero accountability from the appointed cronies. But fortunately other unorganized workers are taking notice of how the IAM fumbled at UA and will hopefully stay away in the future. On one I hand I feel UA would probably have more stations staffed if they were unorganized like DL for no reason other than the company's desire to keep the union out. All the IAM cronies are laughing their way to the bank now on the backs of the dues payers they impose their presence on.

I know the FAs are happy the IAM is gone, especially at EWR given the corruption at LL 2339N.

Josh