B737 driver
Veteran
- Jul 6, 2017
- 3,381
- 209
Do you have anything serious to say or can I ignore you as a troll?
WN Mechanics seek mediation
- Thread starter WNMECH
- Start date
Ignore me........please.
So that's how you do it MAX7. Didn't realize it was that easy. Makes a big difference.
As we await the RS's, it sure has gotten quiet since the numbers were all passed out. There is a small group of folks saying that their number do not line up with what their bonuses will be, I guess we will hear why at the RS's
As we await the RS's, it sure has gotten quiet since the numbers were all passed out. There is a small group of folks saying that their number do not line up with what their bonuses will be, I guess we will hear why at the RS's
If your referring to retro pay mine was a bit more than I expected. Turned out to be about 33.6% of last years gross. Again we don’t have the formula they used, only a hint in the methodology LOA. I’m keeping up with back pay since Apr 1st and it will be significant by a projected DOR.
Oh I agree. Mine too was more than anticipated, but I'm sure they are accounting for the compounding and other (interest) added items agreed to.
What I was talking about is the small group of people on AMFA FB that are saying it's not matching the numbers "they" came up with. This is also why I need to get the full explanation on how it was all calculated and then I will run the numbers myself. Then if the numbers match up I will vote accordingly.
B737 driver
Veteran
- Jul 6, 2017
- 3,381
- 209
Because there is no point to go on and on, mine was more than I thought, so I am fine with that. I told you I wasn't going to argue with you.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #3,082
You will vote accordingly if the numbers match up? What happened to “it’s not about the money, it’s about the language”? My bonus number is close enough to expected but I will not vote for this complete gutting of our contract language.
It is a turd and no roadshow polish will fix it.
Thanks for the truth.
B737 driver
Veteran
- Jul 6, 2017
- 3,381
- 209
The language is the same accept for LOA 1. And adding of maintenance controllers and tech instructors. Scope 2 is intact.
The company did their RS’s last year and their January 18’ update contained “we heard you“ conclusions. I would have to say I’ve heard more discussion on this one than anything else.
You had a concern that changes to Article 2 would lead to a lack of job and location protections. We heard you.
• We proposed to extend the 2.75 aircraft-to-mechanic ratio guarantee from LOA 1.
• We proposed furlough protections for existing Employees throughout the entirety of this agreement.
• We proposed Involuntary Transfer protections for PHX, HOU, MDW, DAL, ATL, and MCO to limit uncertainty about your ability to stay in your current location.
This was their offer in exchange for Article 2. At the time I thought it put to rest a lot of concerns many had about forced relocation and overall job security. But, with loss of the 2.75 ratio/station protection, and addition of language regarding shift start times, at least in Dallas a lot of mechanics are solid NO votes.
You had a concern that changes to Article 2 would lead to a lack of job and location protections. We heard you.
• We proposed to extend the 2.75 aircraft-to-mechanic ratio guarantee from LOA 1.
• We proposed furlough protections for existing Employees throughout the entirety of this agreement.
• We proposed Involuntary Transfer protections for PHX, HOU, MDW, DAL, ATL, and MCO to limit uncertainty about your ability to stay in your current location.
This was their offer in exchange for Article 2. At the time I thought it put to rest a lot of concerns many had about forced relocation and overall job security. But, with loss of the 2.75 ratio/station protection, and addition of language regarding shift start times, at least in Dallas a lot of mechanics are solid NO votes.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #3,086
Articles 21 and 22 have major changes. Everyone should read these sections side by side with our existing contract. Grievance and Arbitration are the enforcement of the contract and will be tilted (more than it is now) in favor of the company. These sections are just as critical (or more) as article 2 scope.
We already know how the company treats the existing contract language, this stacks the deck against us.
Last edited:
No. I was simply saying that my numbers were as expected or slightly higher. I still have not read any changes to any language so far. With that said, I have not picked it back up after the first day. My fault, been lazy lately.
WN I will look at 21 and 22 in detail and thx for the heads up.
The 2.75 does indeed worry me, I do know the co. side fought hard not to keep that or increase it at all, so makes me wonder why?
On a side note:
AS mechanics just rejected their JCBA is this correct?
I also heard a little rumor UPS just came to an agreement as well, is this true? I know some folks think that UPS has nothing to do with us, but in fact, they do IMO. Anyone have any info on the UPS contract? If not, I am sure it will be out soon.
Any info on why the AS mechs rejected theirs??
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Oct 20, 2007
- 23,539
- 5,263
swamt once again just came over to the AA threads to smear chit on our door.
I’m going to for now refrain from returning the very rude, tasteless, uncivil, and vulgar move on his part.
I haven’t disturbed you guys in a while but swamt is starting in once again. He obviously can’t control himself.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #3,089
The loss of the 2.75 is unacceptable. With no floor for our numbers we will not grow with the company like every other group.
Rumor is, it also will be a problem when Dallas and Atlanta are realigned after the new maintenance program is in effect. I can’t believe Atlanta mechanics would vote their jobs away, unless they want to move wherever their seniority will take them.
Just look back at reservations,cleaners etc. We will have a job but where? No 2.75 we will shrink. It affects all of us sooner or later.
Similar threads
- Locked
