DP is a D............ickWhat pisses me off is that once again the Company decides something and doesn't talk to the Union. When is this Company going to respect us and our contract? I am really tired of the disrespect. DP, your New Year's resolution should include respecting your US employees for once.
P. Rez
A member from the CWA said that the CWA has already filed a grievance on the matter. I'm not sure if it's true or not but maybe FO can contact the CWA to see. If the company wants to change the boarding policy, and it does by its own admission, then it should have scheduled a meeting to discuss the matter with the union. Acting unilaterally, without scheduling a meeting with the union over a condition in the contract, is dangerous. Of course, the implication of all of this is that it fully expects to have settled a section 6 contract with DL141 and DL142.charlie Brown said:Do I expect a section 6 agreement by summer? Yes. A transition agreement by summer? No. But I could be wrong. I grievance will be filed if they violate our current contract. My point is by the time it is implemented, who knows of it will be a violation then. Travel benefit as you know is given to all the work groups, not just fleet. It's a privilege that the company will argue they don't even have to give you. I know our travel policy is pretty liberal compared to some other airlines.
The CWA has filed a grievance on this. CWA Contract is a legal binding contract and the Company CANNOT just violate it.Tim Nelson said:A member from the CWA said that the CWA has already filed a grievance on the matter. I'm not sure if it's true or not but maybe FO can contact the CWA to see. If the company wants to change the boarding policy, and it does by its own admission, then it should have scheduled a meeting to discuss the matter with the union. Acting unilaterally, without scheduling a meeting with the union over a condition in the contract, is dangerous. Of course, the implication of all of this is that it fully expects to have settled a section 6 contract with DL141 and DL142.
A) Employees and their immediate family will be granted the same transportation privileges on the Company's system as may be established by Company regulations for all personnel.
(D) Free and reduced rate on-line transportation will be provided in accordance with Company Policy.
Employees covered by this Agreement and their immediate families will be granted the same transportation privileges on
the Company's system as may be established by Company regulations for all personnel.
Our district has decided to stay silent on this matter as far as I can tell. Instead of being proactive like the CWA, I think it will 'sit back and wait' . Hopefully, the eboard wont' blindly support Delaney if Delaney chooses to sign a side letter agreeing to it. I agree with you though John John, the company has violated it already in spirit by announcing it. That seems to violate article 1 of most contracts where both parties are expected to support the current contract fully. +1 for CWA in filing the grievance. I hope the IAM follows.john john said:The CWA has filed a grievance on this. CWA Contract is a legal binding contract and the Company CANNOT just violate it.
Is the IAM filing a grievance on the DOH/FCFS issue? Does their leadership want what Parker wants FCFS
imo, much hope exist psa8979psa8979 said:Brother TN it's the Golden Rule . Those at D-141 who own the gold rule. Follow the money at D-141 and who the top of the Pyramid pledge their allegiance too . We have , are, and will continue to be a second or third thought . Our fate at LCC/AAL F/S will have the same outcome if nothing changes who is making the decisions for US . The LCC/AAL AGS and NC hands are tied by their Boss's. We will have to wait and see what the International does ? The majority of the Membership isn't even paying attention and are becoming more jaded/apathetic after more than 3 yrs. of excuses.
Tim,Tim Nelson said:Our district has decided to stay silent on this matter as far as I can tell. Instead of being proactive like the CWA, I think it will 'sit back and wait' . Hopefully, the eboard wont' blindly support Delaney if Delaney chooses to sign a side letter agreeing to it. I agree with you though John John, the company has violated it already in spirit by announcing it. That seems to violate article 1 of most contracts where both parties are expected to support the current contract fully. +1 for CWA in filing the grievance. I hope the IAM follows.
Not even close to true.bunt3dunk said:Is it true that the company offered wages equal to AA ? I heard that they would do this is they were allowed to contract the ramp out in JAX ,PIT and RDU, anyone else hear this ?
someone needs to stir the pot for sure. I didnt file the grievance because this is a system grievance that should be filed by the district and expedited, imo. It will b nice if brother delaney addressed this on an update.P. REZ said:Tim,
PHX has filed a grievance but my question to you is why do you come on here and stir the pot? What was holding you up from filing a grievance?
P. Rez