JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA Fleet

[NYer]

Really? The only times you comment on this Social Media site is to try and take a swipe at me?

Well here's a swipe back.

Had we gone with your emphasis and motivation to speed the process along more than likely we would have been finished at the tally of 7% above the top at that time Delta rate to $26.54 per hour.

UAL then absolutely would NOT have gone up to the $29.87 they're at now since it would have been uncompetitive against us and Delta's rates. And I doubt Delta would have propelled their ramp to the level they're at now as well.

And ALL of us would have been none the wiser because we all would have stood AA, Delta, SWA, and UAL at the roughly $26 per hour scale moving forward.

Thank God people in those negotiations don't listen to you at all.

 
So you're going to divert the conversation away from yourself and try to make the conversation about a flawed attack against me? You believe the others on this thread can't see a bait and switch.
 
Stick to the original concept of the post..."You base your prediction of an end of the year deal because other airlines have finalized deals with their work groups?"

 

[WeAAsles]

So you're going to divert the conversation away from yourself and try to make the conversation about a flawed attack against me? You believe the others on this thread can't see a bait and switch.
 
Stick to the original concept of the post..."You base your prediction of an end of the year deal because other airlines have finalized deals with their work groups?"

Just one of many had you been reading consistently this board you would have been aware of. I have no reason to rehash them all if you haven't been keeping up.

So on another note NYer. What did you think of the choice of ORD President Tim Murphy to the negotiating chair over MIA President Sidney Jiminez? Tim Murphy being an unelected first time President who has never been in negotiations and Sidney Jiminez being a twice elected President who was in negotiations both before and after Bankruptcy who is clearly the more qualified choice.

I would have to guess that for the MIA President this development has to be an extreme embarrassment and humiliating situation? He really should submit some type of formal protest and have an answer to why he was excluded?

What's your opinion?

 

[NYer]

Just one of many had you been reading consistently this board you would have been aware of. I have no reason to rehash them all if you haven't been keeping up.

So on another note NYer. What did you think of the choice of ORD President Tim Murphy to the negotiating chair over MIA President Sidney Jiminez? Tim Murphy being an unelected first time President who has never been in negotiations and Sidney Jiminez being a twice elected President who was in negotiations both before and after Bankruptcy who is clearly the more qualified choice.

I would have to guess that for the MIA President this development has to be an extreme embarrassment and humiliating situation? He really should submit some type of formal protest and have an answer to why he was excluded?

What's your opinion?

 
Again changing the subject.
 
"You base your prediction of an end of the year deal because other airlines have finalized deals with their work groups?"

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim you're going back 10 years. By the time we hit our (AA) concessions in 03 I believe we at least went on par with them and over the years they kept getting wage increases. Not to mention they had a great 401k match, a stock ownership program and Profit Sharing. Over the last 10 years our SWA counterparts made out like bandits in comparison to you and I.

Our 2001 agreement had us going to over $24 by 2005 if I remember correctly and it had held.

Southwest is interesting as it proves the old saying that ones true job security is based on the growth of a particular company. We have grown into the #1 airline and have continued to grow and add 15,000 more employees. Clearly there will be some cutting after JCBA's but Southwest's profits and growth hasn't been as strong and finds itself now in some labor situations. Thankfully, the ramp already has a solid agreement there, but it seems as if it's a struggle with some of the other groups.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Really? The only times you comment on this Social Media site is to try and take a swipe at me?

Well here's a swipe back.

Had we gone with your emphasis and motivation to speed the process along more than likely we would have been finished at the tally of 7% above the top at that time Delta rate to $26.54 per hour.

UAL then absolutely would NOT have gone up to the $29.87 they're at now since it would have been uncompetitive against us and Delta's rates. And I doubt Delta would have propelled their ramp to the level they're at now as well.

And ALL of us would have been none the wiser because we all would have stood AA, Delta, SWA, and UAL at the roughly $26 per hour scale moving forward.

Thank God people in those negotiations don't listen to you at all.

The thing that I see is that most of your arguments have always been hypothetical, and your predictions have been historically inaccurate. To be fair, I think most will agree with NYer that we lost valuable time. I think even the 2 unions will agree with that. Not sure how it was ever a good thing to lose 8 months when you are STILL in a bankrupt contract. The only thing received was money. But 'hypothetically' Parker would have still brought us up to UA +1 if you like to use your historical argument. But, if we hadn't wasted 8 months then he might have done so with a complete JCBA which is now lacking. The window has closed. You will find out and I'm not saying that to hope that I'm right.

 

[WeAAsles]

Again changing the subject.
 
"You base your prediction of an end of the year deal because other airlines have finalized deals with their work groups?"

Again one of many reasons. Do you have an issue with reading comprehension? When you focus and post all the other reasons I've written then maybe we can continue? Again not rehashing.

Now would you care to comment on the other item I asked you about?

"What, no comment"?

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

You don't know anything do you? First off, have you ever held any union office, ever? You have been wrong about 100% of the time on all of your goofy predictions, but more importantly you don't seem to learn or listen to those who have a good understanding of what is going on nor do you offer any solid alternatives when you disagree with anybody else [which is everybody]. Picking up where 700 left off may make you 701 but it doesn't make you any more knowledgeable. Your knowledge of labor is a complete disaster. That said, I do admit that we need your anti union opinion to bounce things off of.

Let me suggest that you come to this site to educate yourself and start paying attention to what Kev says or ograc says instead of assuming that they only see the glass half full. Sheesh! With the amount of time that you spend on here, I wonder if you have any friends or if this is your only social interaction for the day.

Man WeAAsles he really has your number.

 

[WeAAsles]

Man WeAAsles he really has your number.

If you say so. Obviously I have yours.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Really? The only times you comment on this Social Media site is to try and take a swipe at me?

Well here's a swipe back.

Had we gone with your emphasis and motivation to speed the process along more than likely we would have been finished at the tally of 7% above the top at that time Delta rate to $26.54 per hour.

UAL then absolutely would NOT have gone up to the $29.87 they're at now since it would have been uncompetitive against us and Delta's rates. And I doubt Delta would have propelled their ramp to the level they're at now as well.

And ALL of us would have been none the wiser because we all would have stood AA, Delta, SWA, and UAL at the roughly $26 per hour scale moving forward.

Thank God people in those negotiations don't listen to you at all.

So NYer takes a swipe at you, Tim Nelson assaults you, and I stalk you (despite the fact I have only posted in 5 threads in the last few months).
 
You sure do cry VICTIM a lot.
 
I would expect nothing less.
 

If you say so. Obviously I have yours.

Just keep telling yourself that.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

So you're going to divert the conversation away from yourself and try to make the conversation about a flawed attack against me? You believe the others on this thread can't see a bait and switch.

Of course NYer. Everyone is stupid except WeAAsles.
 
Didn't you know?
 
I mean he has told the whole forum all of his areas of expertise like.... a thousand times.

 

[NYer]

Again one of many reasons. Do you have an issue with reading comprehension? When you focus and post all the other reasons I've written then maybe we can continue? Again not rehashing.

Now would you care to comment on the other item I asked you about?

"What, no comment"?

 
 
Unionism isn't about hurt feelings or entitlements due to past service. The President of New York is longest servicing President not on the Negotiating Committee, maybe he should have been appointed to the table first. The President in Chicago is the 2nd longest serving President not on the Negotiating Committee, so he should have been chosen before the Miami President. Representatives are put in positions to serve, not to cry over spilled milk. If you're not chosen then you continue to represent, if you lose an election then you lick your wounds and continue forward.
 
As a matter of fact, I'd be in favor of having the current Negotiating Committee stay in place whether they win or lose their Local elections, if would help with the continuity and lead to a quicker resolution since everything may not have to be re-litigated as new members of the Committee are introduced.
 
But then again, you believe the deal with be done by the end of the year because other airlines completed their negotiations which I guess means it doesn't really matter who's on the NC.

 

[WeAAsles]

The thing that I see is that most of your arguments have always been hypothetical, and your predictions have been historically inaccurate. To be fair, I think most will agree with NYer that we lost valuable time. I think even the 2 unions will agree with that. Not sure how it was ever a good thing to lose 8 months when you are STILL in a bankrupt contract. The only thing received was money. But 'hypothetically' Parker would have still brought us up to UA +1 if you like to use your historical argument. But, if we hadn't wasted 8 months then he might have done so with a complete JCBA which is now lacking. The window has closed. You will find out and I'm not saying that to hope that I'm right.

Tim stay on point and stop trying to suck up to NYer. The readers know who has been fairly consistently accurate over those that haven't been already. Painting a picture over an original is low class and ruins a perfectly good work of art.

Wages are highly important in an individual's overall economic situation. Had we "locked" that in 8 months ago here's what ABSOLUTELY would have happened. We would have been at $26.54 per hour. Delta would not have propelled their ramp by another 14% and UAL would not have leapt over that. Plain and simply because it would have been uncompetitive over our wage rates.

Delta probably would have went 4% above us and still would have lost half the value on their PS. Munoz would have went a percentage or two above that, and Parker "may" have matched to try and keep labor peace (Maybe)

But had the Association locked in there is not even any guarantee that any of that would have occurred. Again the entire industry for Fleet wages would probably right now had capped out at $26 and change with a 2% per year raise over the life of the 5 year deal.

You're being incredibly naive if you think we would still be where we are right now. Extremely naive in fact.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

You're being incredibly naive if you think we would still be where we are right now. Extremely naive in fact.

See, another fine example of WeAAsles knows best.

 

[WeAAsles]

Unionism isn't about hurt feelings or entitlements due to past service. The President of New York is longest servicing President not on the Negotiating Committee, maybe he should have been appointed to the table first. The President in Chicago is the 2nd longest serving President not on the Negotiating Committee, so he should have been chosen before the Miami President. Representatives are put in positions to serve, not to cry over spilled milk. If you're not chosen then you continue to represent, if you lose an election then you lick your wounds and continue forward.
 
As a matter of fact, I'd be in favor of having the current Negotiating Committee stay in place whether they win or lose their Local elections, if would help with the continuity and lead to a quicker resolution since everything may not have to be re-litigated as new members of the Committee are introduced.
 
But then again, you believe the deal with be done by the end of the year because other airlines completed their negotiations which I guess means it doesn't really matter who's on the NC.

Maybe the NY President didn't want to be a part of the negotiations. And Mr Murphy still has never been in negotiations and was not elected to his Presidential position like the MIA President was.

Still seems to me as if there is more to this story than is being made public? Do you know the MIA President NYer? Maybe the decision has to do more with his personal character than anything else?

Still trying to pigeonhole me to one item I see. Sorry that I'm not letting you guide that narrative. Besides in both debates and boxing you should never confine yourself to the ropes unless you want to get knocked the F out.

 

[WeAAsles]

I just heard that the MIA President is trying to blame the former President as the reason he was not chosen. Now that has to be just about the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Stupid as a matter of fact if anyone buys it.