District 141 Meets with United, Secures Wage Increases for Members Working Under Modified Contracts

700UW

Corn Field
Nov 11, 2003
37,637
19,488
NC
http://www.iam141.org/
 
 
Mike Klemm, PDGC, 17 December 2015: Download
District 141 Meets with United, Secures Wage Increase for Members Working Under Modified Contracts IAM District 141 and United Airlines met this week and began the process of determining which provisions of the current IAM-United collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) will be the subjects of collective bargaining in the upcoming expedited, limited issue contract negotiations. The parties also agreed upon a wage increase for IAM-represented employees working under modified contracts.
 
As you may know, IAM District 141 and United agreed in November to enter expedited, limited issue negotiations to modify the current IAM-United CBAs, which become amendable on January 1, 2017, to take advantage of favorable industry conditions. While these negotiations are not traditional Railway Labor Act (RLA), Section 6 collective bar-gaining, they may nonetheless present the unique opportunity to provide IAM members at United meaningful wage gains and enhance already improved job security in an expe-dited timeframe (IAM District 141 demanded and achieved, as a condition to enter expe-dited, limited issue negotiations, that United be prohibited from outsourcing work currently performed by IAM members at United Airlines until 1/1/2019 or one year follow-ing any subsequent agreement). Our intent is to make further scope and work protection improvements in any agreement that may be reached.
 
Your negotiating committee’s positions regarding which issues require improvement this week were guided by the survey results and local representative and member input. Participation in the contract survey was widespread among the different classifications and extremely encouraging. Participants by far rated the top issues as wage increases, strengthened job security (scope) and enhanced pension benefits.
 
Your negotiating committee requested United show a sign of good faith by including IAM-represented workers at locations working under modified CBAs to receive the same percentage wage increase as all other IAM-represented, similarly classified workers re-ceive on January 1, 2016. United agreed. This is a positive sign and a good start.
 
It is because of your hard work and past sacrifices that United Airlines is posting record profits and you deserve a bigger share of those profits and the security of knowing that your job will not be contracted out to the lowest bidder. You shouldn’t have to wait years for these improvements, as is often the case under RLA, Section 6 bargaining. As your union representatives, we have an obligation to ensure that you receive a fair deal for your labor. The upcoming expedited, limited issue negotiations provide us with that opportunity and to achieve further deserved equity.
 
IAM District 141 and United have agreed to meet the weeks of January 4th, January 18th, February 1st and February 15th. When both parties finalize the list issues that will be sub-ject to bargaining in these expedited, limited issue negotiations, they will immediately be communicated to the membership.
 
Sincerely and fraternally,
Mike Klemm, PDGC
 
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I'm glad to see this happen. Oscar wants labor peace and all contracts finished. That may happen soon (once the FA's get their act together - the company can only stand on the sidelines and watch). The company approached the IAM to reopen the contract. There are two nonstarters that has to happen before any negotiations start, and IMHO, I believe this is one of them: to restore our people that took the cuts to stay in their stations to full pay. And TWO: to keep and preserve the scope for the 29 stations and the Express Ops.  I know that these two conditions must be had. We lost way too much, and the operation shows. Dead last in every metric. We can't give up any more. Now the company is trying and is "listening", and the metrics are improving under Oscar's brief leadership.  So that's why they did the "No Outsourscing" till '17 or 18. UGS can't get up and running yet. I don't think that they have a dozen stations yet. 
 
topDawg said:
so the IAM sells them down the river then tries to do something for them. Maybe not send that turd of a contract out for a vote in the first place and this isn't an issue. 
I've explained the many reasons for this contract (TA2) being passed. It wasn't as clear cut as it was.  You don't have this issue now, and there isn't much that the company can buy off people with. What should happen is a much better out package should be offered so that natural attrition can take its place, and hiring should happen. People will leave if a decent package is there. (IMHO - 55k or better)
 
Those who survived these last couple of years will see that scope will be preserved and strengthened if any future deal is to be had. We've suffered enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Get ready for the shaft! Wage increases and scope changes that are worth 5X the amount of pay you will gain. This should be interesting!
 
T5towbar said:
I'm glad to see this happen. Oscar wants labor peace and all contracts finished. That may happen soon (once the FA's get their act together - the company can only stand on the sidelines and watch). The company approached the IAM to reopen the contract. There are two nonstarters that has to happen before any negotiations start, and IMHO, I believe this is one of them: to restore our people that took the cuts to stay in their stations to full pay. And TWO: to keep and preserve the scope for the 29 stations and the Express Ops.  I know that these two conditions must be had. We lost way too much, and the operation shows. Dead last in every metric. We can't give up any more. Now the company is trying and is "listening", and the metrics are improving under Oscar's brief leadership.  So that's why they did the "No Outsourscing" till '17 or 18. UGS can't get up and running yet. I don't think that they have a dozen stations yet.
T5 UAL is suffering because Low Cost Vendors have a substantially high turnover rate and can't keep people who over time will become engaged, caring workers. In some areas of the country new hire employment is gaining strength and wages are going up. These vendors keep there wages too low because of the pressure put on them by the carriers they serve. 

Forget just preserving your Stations staffing Scope. Lost Stations need to be reopened to a workforce that's proven they can get the job done. You and yours.
 
Mike Klemm, PDGC, 19 February 2016:
Download | Visit iam141.org
IAM, United Limited Issue Negotiations Progress in Houston.
IAM District Lodge 141 and United Airlines met this week and continued limited issue, expedited negotiations in Houston, Texas.
 

It was a very productive week as both parties were able to make significant progress regarding the work-rule issues that IAM members identified as needing improvement. Contrary to the past two weeks of bargaining, the Company demonstrated the ability to satisfactorily address those concerns.
 
Our next focus in these limited issue negotiations will center on job scope. IAM members deserve the security of knowing that they will not lose their job or have to uproot their families and move to a different city to maintain employment due to outsourcing. IAM members have sacrificed enough and have stated that expanding job scope is their highest priority. We intend to achieve that goal.
 
IAM District 141 and United will continue these limited issue negotiations in Phoenix, Arizona the week of March 6th.
In other news, Assistant General Chairman (AGC) Rich Pascarella was successful in returning a member to work after more than one year with full back pay. The IAM member was unjustly terminated, even though a Ground Safety Awareness Program (GSAP) was accepted by the GSAP Committee. I’d like to thank AGC Pascarella for a job well done and exemplifying the benefits of union representation.
 
Additionally, eleven other IAM members were returned to work due to the hard work of AGCs Pat Rezler, Troy Rivera, Bob Worthman, Mike Cyscon and Joe Bartz.
 
In other grievance-related news, AGC Erik Stenberg just completed the overtime bypass grievance docket with the Company. AGC Stenberg’s hard work led to thousands of dollars of payments going to IAM members who were wrongfully bypassed for overtime opportunities. Those payments will be coming to our members within the next couple of payment cycles.
 
Http://iam141.org

 
 
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
IAM District 141 and United Agree to Equal Pay for ALL Locations

09 March 2016: Download
 
IAM District Lodge 141 today is pleased to announce that the Union and United Airlines agreed, as part of the limited issue negotiations, to immediately restore the wage rates of IAM-represented workers whose wages were lowered during United’s “market competitive sourcing process.”
The negotiated wage hike will apply retroactively to February 21, 2016 and will apply to the following locations: BIL (Billings, Montana), IND (Indianapolis), KOA (Kona), LIH (Lihue), OGG (Maui),RNO (Reno, Nevada), SAT (San Antonio), SJC (San Jose, California) and TUL (Tulsa, Oklahoma), as well as for above-the-wing employees at ATL (Atlanta), MCI (Kansas City, Missouri), RDU (Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina), RSW (Fort Myers, Florida), SMF (Sacramento, California) and STL (St. Louis).
Whether one works in a hub or smaller line station, the same pay scale should apply. I am encouraged by United’s willingness to address the IAM’s concerns regarding this very important issue of fairness.
I would like to thank IAM members all over the United system, in big stations and small, for your support and solidarity. You spoke loud and clear on this issue and demanded it be rectified. This is an example of the fruits of a strong collective voice coupled with the Union and Company working collaboratively toward making necessary changes that positively impact the lives of IAM-represented workers at United Airlines.
We look forward to continuing limited issue negotiations with United and focusing next on improving job scope/security.
In solidarity,
Mike Klemm 
PDGC
 
Don't thank the District on this one.........
 
A big thanks to the agents and people from IND for speaking up on this.
When Oscar visited the station, the people spoke up on the disparity of their wages, and Oscar promised it would be fixed. He made good on that promise and all of the stations who took the cuts was restored.
 
Bottom line is that Oscar is trying his best to straighten the mess out that Jeff made. Now the District is supporting him with the upcoming proxy battle. Much as I respected Gordon, these hedge funders is not the way to go about running this airline. That's what's got us in trouble in the first place: catering to Wall Street while leaving the employees and passengers  behind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
I been hearing they are negotiating reopening 17 stations.
 
700UW said:
I been hearing they are negotiating reopening 17 stations.
I heard similar rumors.  I also heard 30.00 per hr as well.  And also a six year deal as well.
What's the catch........ and how much will Klemm give up to get new dues payers (ie: UGS)?  Those questions, and scope must be addressed to the members and how much we will have to give up. We have to maintain and strengthen the scope that we have. There can be no compromises on that. Now that everybody is getting the same (no more "B" scale), we can't give up on anything else.
 
Bottom line: I feel that our medical will go up. That will eat away any wage gains. That is one of the sticking points for MX as well. 
Let's see what is offered first.  Will there be bridge medical for those about to retire?  How much will be the out package?  But I hear that both sides want to get this agreement done before the end of Spring.
 
T5towbar said:
Don't thank the District on this one.........
 
A big thanks to the agents and people from IND for speaking up on this.
When Oscar visited the station, the people spoke up on the disparity of their wages, and Oscar promised it would be fixed. He made good on that promise and all of the stations who took the cuts was restored.
 
Bottom line is that Oscar is trying his best to straighten the mess out that Jeff made. Now the District is supporting him with the upcoming proxy battle. Much as I respected Gordon, these hedge funders is not the way to go about running this airline. That's what's got us in trouble in the first place: catering to Wall Street while leaving the employees and passengers  behind.
I've seen this back and forth going on about this on FB and it's kind of silly actually. It's as if you're saying that one lone agent in IND had to bring this up to him and make him aware of it first. Who was the first one to bring it up to him and if he was the one who magically raised his pen to sign off on it is irrelevant. What matters is that the Company are the one's with the keys to the checkbook and the District as your negotiating agent are the one's who have to accept this good item. 

Would there have been any reason not to accept it since your contract still has another year on it? Of course not. But again who cares as long as people are suffering a little less. 

This proxy battle would scare me if I were in your shoes. And I absolutely would support Munoz as well. I saw Bethune on CNBC that morning and he had kind words for both Munoz and (gulp) Smisek. If I was at UAL I absolutely wouldn't be able to support anyone who thinks kindly of Smisek and said "I think Jeff is a very honest man"

Hopefully your negotiators can get a deal done before these people possibly gain control of the airline? I certainly would be a little bit more motivated myself.
 
WeAAsles said:
I've seen this back and forth going on about this on FB and it's kind of silly actually. It's as if you're saying that one lone agent in IND had to bring this up to him and make him aware of it first. Who was the first one to bring it up to him and if he was the one who magically raised his pen to sign off on it is irrelevant. What matters is that the Company are the one's with the keys to the checkbook and the District as your negotiating agent are the one's who have to accept this good item. 

Would there have been any reason not to accept it since your contract still has another year on it? Of course not. But again who cares as long as people are suffering a little less. 

This proxy battle would scare me if I were in your shoes. And I absolutely would support Munoz as well. I saw Bethune on CNBC that morning and he had kind words for both Munoz and (gulp) Smisek. If I was at UAL I absolutely wouldn't be able to support anyone who thinks kindly of Smisek and said "I think Jeff is a very honest man"

Hopefully your negotiators can get a deal done before these people possibly gain control of the airline? I certainly would be a little bit more motivated myself.
No.
It wasn't lone lone agent.  It was the whole group (several stations, but IND was the catalyst) during one of Oscar's meetings with employees. During his station visits, he wanted no part of station / hub management during his visits. I witnessed this personally when he came to our hub. Local management got wind of the flight he was coming in on, and when they found out, they wanted to roll out the red carpet. He quietly shushed them away (a few of them were visibly pissed off, and then went to see and talk to the troops. They didn't know who was going to be his escort (since that person had to be locally badged. Hub management was furious.  He went to every breakroom and talked to the front line without management filter.  And a couple of heads rolled since.  I seen it personally. And then changes in policies were made. More management visits explaining the changes and how to earn the employees trust. After that, he got back on his flight and left without talking to the MD or the HM. I was in one of his talks and he knew that the workforce was demoralized, and wanted us to be frank and honest to him, without retaliation from hub / station management.  I will at least take him at his word for his comments to us.
 
I was hoping that this was one of the conditions of any reopening of any talks was to make the people who took the cuts whole. This, and the stop of the outsourcing had to be done before any talks to begin. Somehow, the feeling is that Oscar got the impetus to make that change. There has been a lot of positive changes (we've been on-time and met our baggage metrics for the last few months. There is a lot of optimism here. But now with news of this proxy battle, and the rejection of the IBT  TA, (and the subsequent protests) there are more questions than answers now.  I don't like hedge funders, and to put out a figure like Gordon out there makes things kind of suspect. They will go back to the slash and burn and cutting to make short term profits. 
 
Either way, both sides got this done for those people and I'm personally happy for all. Both sides are taking credit, and expedited talks are going on. My question is this:  how much is Klemm going to sell us out to get more new members on the IAM books (ie: UGS).  UGS is going to happen, contract or not. I hear that the District wants these potential members, but at what cost to the present workforce.  We shouldn't be giving ANYTHING up at all.  But as I see that Medical will be the sticking point in any contract, (it's one of MX's issues as well) and how much of that will eat into any potential wage gain?
 
It makes the leadership looks kind of suspect........
 
T5towbar said:
Either way, both sides got this done for those people and I'm personally happy for all. Both sides are taking credit, and expedited talks are going on. My question is this:  how much is Klemm going to sell us out to get more new members on the IAM books (ie: UGS).  UGS is going to happen, contract or not. I hear that the District wants these potential members, but at what cost to the present workforce.  We shouldn't be giving ANYTHING up at all.  But as I see that Medical will be the sticking point in any contract, (it's one of MX's issues as well) and how much of that will eat into any potential wage gain?
 
It makes the leadership looks kind of suspect........

T5 how many stations are you currently holding on to? If the rumor that 700 stated is true that they are trying to negotiate 17 more stations, do you think that would be above the one's you currently have? Or a securing of the one's that are on the chopping block?

I'm curious how many stations when this is done will you have available and secure in your contract?

I admit that I have a bit of a different philosophy then the norm when it comes to certain stations being staffed by us. If the company doesn't agree to staff certain cities with the higher cost group due to revenue constraints for that city by economics or competition, would it have been better to keep that city in play for you with a lower rate or just giving in and letting a group like UGS take it over? 

And I'd also agree that I would want to keep them under basically the Union surveillance. It's still far better than letting it go to a vendor who's going to undercut you to death with no collective bargaining agent to argue against that. I personally think the alternative to them not being under the IAM is far worse for you on the pressure side. And if the IAM collects dues based on the weighted average wage in a particular city I'd have to think the emphasis would always fall on wanting you in that city over the UGS people if possible?

On to the medical costs maybe rising? Sure that absolutely could happen. Don't know exactly what you pay currently. As a single guy over here at AA I pay currently $80.00 per month for the middle plan. Now the rumored raise could wind up being at least $5.00 per hour for you if you're topped out or $800.00 per month? There's no way IMO that even a guy taking the most expensive family plan is going to hit anywhere near that $800.00. So personally I think the raise is going to more than cover any medical creep you might be concerned about.

Hopefully the District can get this deal done soon. Yes I would be very concerned about this proxy fight if I were you or them too. You don't want anyone coming in that might disagree with the direction it seems you're currently on. Even the pundits on CNBC were saying this proxy fight is crazy. UAL management finally seems to be headed in the right direction and along come these hedge fund guys? Something smells fishy. 
 
United Continental Holdings Inc.’s chief executive officer returns to his job Monday after a heart transplant, just as two hedge funds threaten to topple his board. His first step: emulating an old friend who is now among the carrier’s chief critics.
Oscar Munoz is gathering United’s union leaders for a pep talk on Day 1, picking up where he left off before going on medical leave in October. His focus on employees echoes the approach of Gordon Bethune, who overcame years of acrimony between executives and the workforce when he revived Continental Airlines in the 1990s.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-14/ceo-will-mimic-united-s-best-known-critic-as-activist-feud-looms?cmpid=yhoo.headline

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/united-ceo-munoz-returns-115300844.html
 
WeAAsles said:
T5 how many stations are you currently holding on to? If the rumor that 700 stated is true that they are trying to negotiate 17 more stations, do you think that would be above the one's you currently have? Or a securing of the one's that are on the chopping block?

I'm curious how many stations when this is done will you have available and secure in your contract?

I admit that I have a bit of a different philosophy then the norm when it comes to certain stations being staffed by us. If the company doesn't agree to staff certain cities with the higher cost group due to revenue constraints for that city by economics or competition, would it have been better to keep that city in play for you with a lower rate or just giving in and letting a group like UGS take it over? 

And I'd also agree that I would want to keep them under basically the Union surveillance. It's still far better than letting it go to a vendor who's going to undercut you to death with no collective bargaining agent to argue against that. I personally think the alternative to them not being under the IAM is far worse for you on the pressure side. And if the IAM collects dues based on the weighted average wage in a particular city I'd have to think the emphasis would always fall on wanting you in that city over the UGS people if possible?

On to the medical costs maybe rising? Sure that absolutely could happen. Don't know exactly what you pay currently. As a single guy over here at AA I pay currently $80.00 per month for the middle plan. Now the rumored raise could wind up being at least $5.00 per hour for you if you're topped out or $800.00 per month? There's no way IMO that even a guy taking the most expensive family plan is going to hit anywhere near that $800.00. So personally I think the raise is going to more than cover any medical creep you might be concerned about.

Hopefully the District can get this deal done soon. Yes I would be very concerned about this proxy fight if I were you or them too. You don't want anyone coming in that might disagree with the direction it seems you're currently on. Even the pundits on CNBC were saying this proxy fight is crazy. UAL management finally seems to be headed in the right direction and along come these hedge fund guys? Something smells fishy. 
To answer the first question:
At present (not including the stations that took the cuts), they are 22 (we lost JFK) plus the 7 hubs. Those are presently under scope. Plus the Express Ops in IAH; ORD; and EWR.  They are trying to negotiate more stations to put under scope like IND; SAT; the Hawaiian stations; etc. But some rumors I heard they may want some with Customer Service only and not ramp. I hope that is both and not one over the other. IND and SAT and the Hawaiian stations get a lot of mainline, and we should be handling both. They are having a problem ramping up UGS because of the low pay, I guess, and other factors. But due to the fact of the low performance of the vendors, they are reevaluating and hopefully we can get those stations under permanent scope. I don't know how many after all is said and done. But the bottom line is that UGS will happen (to keep the product in line and not to be giving money to the competitors like Envoy and DGS). They want UGS to be the preferred handler in the Tier 3 and smaller UAX stations instead of a hodge podge of ground handling outfits.  One thing I myself would like to see is to get the Express operation into our hands from DEN and IAD. The disastrous experiment with the Simpletons in DEN and Swissport in IAD speaks volumes. We should get that work as well. But it was traditionally handled by SkyWest and Air Wisconsin, but Jeff wanted a lower cost operation and it showed. More rumors also floated that Cargo was in play as well. I doubt that will happen since they are saying that Cargo is making money now. But to answer another of your questions, we already tried that experiment where people went on a "B" scale to save their station. No more! This isn't Unionism. That one failed because the whole operation went to hell in the first place with all of the cutting.  But I would prefer UGS instead of Envoy; GAT; Worldwide; DGS; etc. if it will not infringe and encroach on our scope.  Trouble is, where are they gonna get the people to round out the new operation? The wages aren't attractive, and the flying is iffy to say the least with lower priority.  So more money will be spent on this to save money (not giving it away to DL and AA) in the longer run.  Hell, I don't even know how many stations they got yet.  Looks like we will have to wait till '17 to see how far UGS grows and our commitment of no outsourcing ends. Hopefully a contract will be in place before then, and we will see the real effect.
 
The reason why many of us are concerned about UGS is because of what the District will give up in order to get these potential members. Klemm and the company may try to short us and sell us out on scope to get these members. I for one believe that there should be no split operations in any hub. We should be doing all that work. Let UGS handle Tier 3 and the stations with no or very limited mainline (also Tier 3). There should be some sort of flight thresholds as well to limit the growth and spread of UGS into Tier 2.
 
As far as medical, we hope it doesn't creep into any raise. The dollar amounts are floating all over the place. 30.00; 31.00; 32.00. Who knows the final amount. But as recent history shows, medical will increases will come one way or the other. That is one of the sticking points with the IBT (and NJ Transit - which thank goodness it settled, hopefully). So far this year, the prescription drug plan is better, along with Dental. I went into a higher cost plan for myself this year. I can live with a bit of an increase (my plan at present is much more comprehensive with lower deductibles).  
 
My main concern is the scope. how much of it we will maintain and expand. No more station cutting. No more involuntary PT. We suffered too much since this all went down. This District has to do right by us. At least Oscar is listening and some efforts are in place to improve things. But we can't give up anything now. We are in a much better position now to negotiate. No retro battles (ie: the Retro Hotline).  No sCO vs sUA. The operation went to hell with all of the cuts so Wall Street can be pleased. The District should be able to use the leverage and the conditions of the airline to negotiate a much better deal for our side. IMHO, members who survived all of this should be better educated on scope more than ever now. The dollar signs are important, but that should not be the number one issue.
 
NO MORE........ 
 
Again, my issue is that why the investors want to have a proxy battle now? The company unperformed for years now. But somehow they made money with the stock buybacks and the cuts. IMHO, that is why they were silent all of these years. Now that Jeff is gone and Oscar is trying to make moves to restore some semblance and restore the employees trust, now these people want to step in. And to throw Gordon out as the front man (who is a revered figure to many of us on the sCO side), it is kind of suspect to say the least.
 
Something is fishy here............
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people