libertybell
Senior
- Jan 5, 2003
- 320
- 9
Below is a capsule of what transpired this morning in a planned meeting with an IAM 141 fleet negotiations team member to update several union brothers/sisters in attendance. I took notes the best I could and I transcribed them below. The notes, in italicks below them, are intended for those brothers and sisters who wanted to know more detail of the IAM's position.
Meeting Notes That I penned to follow:
IAM negotiator:
Item 1: we would have met the company half way 50% [of the grievance] but the company only wanted to go to 10%.
This is direct evidence that the IAM did in fact have the greivance on the table. To have the grievance on the table is nonsensical with such huge beneficial implications for those covered by the east contract.
Item 2: company has inflated the grievance award numbers in its court filing. Said, the IAM has the actual numbers and its much lower but refused to tell what they were.
Typical IAM tactics. However, based on simple math, the company's representation of the grievance at over $625 million dollars is justified, consistent, and reasonable. Sounds like the IAM wants to belittle the incredibly large wage impact.
Item 3: several times that the IAM thinks the company lawsuit is "Frivilous". I counted him using the actual word "Frivilous" 3 times.
Agreed
Item 4: One brother said this 'is a slam dunk' but IAM negotiator said 22 west coast stations are important to keep and rattles something like "I'd give up some money to keep those stations". Hints that these 22 'westie' stations would be gone.
I was puzzled. The negotiator sounded really negative on the grievance and used cautionary language often. However, he was either delusional, ignorant, or defrauding to suggest 22 west coast stations would be gone if fleet won the award. Remember, the 'westies' are NOT under the east contract and are protected by their own language. Any arbitration award has nothing to do with the scope of the 'westies' contract. FWIW: although 22 stations seems like a large amount, the actual amount of members there is quite small, under 500 for sure.
Item 5: transitional talks could go on for 10 years
Agreed and true. Once an arbitraion award is awarded, it has nothing to do with transition talks. A transition agreement would still have to be negotiated and if the IAM doesn't think a fair one is being offered then it doesn't have to sign a transition agreement for years.
Item 6: Someone said, although I didn't get who, that the award would end up being $24hr after the snapback and guaranteed wage increases.
Regardless of the IAM math or the company math, the bottom line is the wage.
Item 7: Retro pay wasn't discussed in the meeting.
IAM apparently doesn't want to discuss this. This may be given away like in the airbus deal.
Meeting Notes That I penned to follow:
IAM negotiator:
Item 1: we would have met the company half way 50% [of the grievance] but the company only wanted to go to 10%.
This is direct evidence that the IAM did in fact have the greivance on the table. To have the grievance on the table is nonsensical with such huge beneficial implications for those covered by the east contract.
Item 2: company has inflated the grievance award numbers in its court filing. Said, the IAM has the actual numbers and its much lower but refused to tell what they were.
Typical IAM tactics. However, based on simple math, the company's representation of the grievance at over $625 million dollars is justified, consistent, and reasonable. Sounds like the IAM wants to belittle the incredibly large wage impact.
Item 3: several times that the IAM thinks the company lawsuit is "Frivilous". I counted him using the actual word "Frivilous" 3 times.
Agreed
Item 4: One brother said this 'is a slam dunk' but IAM negotiator said 22 west coast stations are important to keep and rattles something like "I'd give up some money to keep those stations". Hints that these 22 'westie' stations would be gone.
I was puzzled. The negotiator sounded really negative on the grievance and used cautionary language often. However, he was either delusional, ignorant, or defrauding to suggest 22 west coast stations would be gone if fleet won the award. Remember, the 'westies' are NOT under the east contract and are protected by their own language. Any arbitration award has nothing to do with the scope of the 'westies' contract. FWIW: although 22 stations seems like a large amount, the actual amount of members there is quite small, under 500 for sure.
Item 5: transitional talks could go on for 10 years
Agreed and true. Once an arbitraion award is awarded, it has nothing to do with transition talks. A transition agreement would still have to be negotiated and if the IAM doesn't think a fair one is being offered then it doesn't have to sign a transition agreement for years.
Item 6: Someone said, although I didn't get who, that the award would end up being $24hr after the snapback and guaranteed wage increases.
Regardless of the IAM math or the company math, the bottom line is the wage.
Item 7: Retro pay wasn't discussed in the meeting.
IAM apparently doesn't want to discuss this. This may be given away like in the airbus deal.