OCT/NOV 2012 IAM Fleet Service Discussions

[ograc]

I was not aware that the union and the company jointly applied for Mediation with the National Mediation Board for Fleet Service and that the NMB has assign a case number and negotiations were under the auspices of the NMB

Nor was I. Perhaps PJ could enlighten us all and validate his post.
ograc

 

[roabilly]

I think there are things everyone needs to keep in mind is this forum…

1) We are in section six negations under the RLA...

2) The NC is progressing no faster, or slower than what is to be expected…

3) The articles “opened” and discussed are NOT agreements... they are proposals…

4) Compensation (Pay/Benefits) will soon be opened, and discussed… I’m assuming proposals will be exchanged at that time, or soon after in following rounds of talks.

This does NOT mean we are close to an agreement! The most difficult articles are yet to be negotiated. Compensation is a huge part of the total agreement, and could affect previously opened articles. The only time the Committee will tell you there is an agreement on anything… is when they actually reach a Tentative Agreement.

Now… even after the Tentative Agreement is reached, it is still NOT an agreement until it is ratified by the Membership!

I don’t know how many times I have said, and will have to say this again in the future… YOU… I … and EVERY MEMBER will have to decide if WE want to accept what is negotiated. The Membership has the final say-so... it’s just that simple!

Cargo and PJ... I think it’s time to bury the past… the Canale era came at a difficult time for Fleet Service, and we suffered immensely from concessions wrangled through BK proceedings. Those times are GONE… let’s move forward! Attempting to carry the baggage of the past into the future will only serve to slow us down!

 

[pjirish317]

Nor was I. Perhaps PJ could enlighten us all and validate his post.
ograc

This is right from the July 17th update on the IAM141 website:

July 17, 2012
Brothers and Sisters,
We met our Mediator at the beginning of the week to discuss what to expect from him through this process. He could not stay for our Negotiations but plans on being at future sessions starting in August. We stated to him that our biggest issue to date was seniority protections in case of a merger.

Do you read at all?

 

[pjirish317]

Absolutely know the difference. The update states passing proposals. In other words... dancing with no "real" progress. So what is the NC's proposal regarding Article 3 language? Does anyone know? Based on the current situation with AA none of it really matters. The company will continue to meet it's minimal legal obligation to negotiate in good faith until there is a resolve to their real agenda. A merger or acquisition with or of AA respectively. In the meantime the updates are pretty vanilla.
P.S.
You do know the difference between "negotiating in good faith" and "just going through the motions" right?

You really expect the NC to tell us their proposal? Really? Are they to update us every time it changes? I have an idea, why dosen't the NC negotiate on here, that way we can all see everything that is being proposed. I explained why the tell us they "discussed" and "proposed", and yet you still do not get it. Good grief man, are you that obtuse? Clearly you do not understand negotiations. Have you spoke with anyone on the NC? Come on man, I thought you were smarter than this.

ROA,

I have moved on, but ograc, seems to like to try to discredit the NC, IMO, and I wanted to clarify a few things.

 

[ograc]

You really expect the NC to tell us their proposal? Really? Are they to update us every time it changes? I have an idea, why dosen't the NC negotiate on here, that way we can all see everything that is being proposed. I explained why the tell us they "discussed" and "proposed", and yet you still do not get it. Good grief man, are you that obtuse? Clearly you do not understand negotiations. Have you spoke with anyone on the NC? Come on man, I thought you were smarter than this.

ROA,

I have moved on, but ograc, seems to like to try to discredit the NC, IMO, and I wanted to clarify a few things.

pj,
It was never my intent to discredit the NC. I'm sorry you see it that way. I am certain they are doing the best they can. unfortunately, it takes negotiations in good faith from both parties. IMO... US is just stalling... as they have with every other work group... in negotiations. The company's posture in negotiations is what I discredit. The current pace of negotiations is typical for this company. They have historically moved at a snail's pace. Very quick though when closing stations, eliminating jobs or putting together proposals to other labor unions that aren't even on their property.
ograc

 

[john john]

You really expect the NC to tell us their proposal?

Why not tell the company’s proposal?

 

[700UW]

Because they usually change each session until an article is T/Aed.

 

[roabilly]

You really expect the NC to tell us their proposal? Really? Are they to update us every time it changes? I have an idea, why dosen't the NC negotiate on here, that way we can all see everything that is being proposed. I explained why the tell us they "discussed" and "proposed", and yet you still do not get it. Good grief man, are you that obtuse? Clearly you do not understand negotiations. Have you spoke with anyone on the NC? Come on man, I thought you were smarter than this.

ROA,

I have moved on, but ograc, seems to like to try to discredit the NC, IMO, and I wanted to clarify a few things.

I hear yah, PJ…

I think our anger should be directed at Mr. Nelson. After all, it was him that cleverly played on our frustrations during the BK proceedings by successfully directing our ire back at the IAM and the leadership right here on this board. I think we have all learned the hard way… not everything that Nelson claims to know is put forth in a nonpartisan manner, and it usually driven by an agenda other than benefiting Fleet Service!

I made it a point to learn as much as possible about the negotiating process under the RLA in the last four years, and it’s clear the Company can, and does play the law like a banjo! Unfortunately… it is what it is… we have to follow the process from start to finish adhering to the regulations or face fines that could bankrupt the Union.

We now have a new team that we ALL chose to represent us… it's time to support them fully.

 

[roabilly]

This is right from the July 17th update on the IAM141 website:

July 17, 2012
Brothers and Sisters,
We met our Mediator at the beginning of the week to discuss what to expect from him through this process. He could not stay for our Negotiations but plans on being at future sessions starting in August. We stated to him that our biggest issue to date was seniority protections in case of a merger.

Do you read at all?

My understanding is that the mediator was brought in to address the Seniority Protection articles. Apparently, the company feels the existing language is sufficient in terms of protection should a merger or acquisition by another carrier occur. The IAM does not share this view… and would like enhancements to the language.

The mediator is there to break the stalemate!

 

[roabilly]

Why not tell the company’s proposal?

It is not LEGAL to release proposals on anything by either side!

 

[john john]

It is not LEGAL to release proposals on anything by either side!

Proposals are “Business confidential” that would aid or assist a competitor of US Airways

 

[ograc]

I hear yah, PJ…

I think our anger should be directed at Mr. Nelson. After all, it was him that cleverly played on our frustrations during the BK proceedings by successfully directing our ire back at the IAM and the leadership right here on this board. I think we have all learned the hard way… not everything that Nelson claims to know is put forth in a nonpartisan manner, and it usually driven by an agenda other than benefiting Fleet Service!

I made it a point to learn as much as possible about the negotiating process under the RLA in the last four years, and it’s clear the Company can, and does play the law like a banjo! Unfortunately… it is what it is… we have to follow the process from start to finish adhering to the regulations or face fines that could bankrupt the Union.

We now have a new team that we ALL chose to represent us… it's time to support them fully.

roabilly,
Our anger should indeed be directed at Nelson. His divisive agenda has always been self centered and not necessarily in the best interests of the entire IAM represented Fleet Service. Hopefully, we have learned from history. I have stated before the election and after that I intend to respect the membership's wishes by supporting the leadership team they chose to elect.I remain true and dedicated to that statement. This newly elected team, inclusive of the NC has my full support. It's a thankless job Brother. In the spirit of the holiday I would like to thank them for their dedication, service and sacrifice. I, for one, do not take it for granted.
ograc

 

[ograc]

RICH DELANEY, JUNE 1, 2012 — Download Negotiations between District 141 and US Airways resumed this week in Chicago. The focus of the week, as it has been for the past several months, was job security and enhanced seniority protection.

This is right from the 141 web page.

Job security and enhanced seniority protection as it pertains to a merger or acquisition (Article 2, par. A&B). In May 2012, with the company's intentions with AA well known, this language was the sole focus in negotiations as it should be. Reference the June 01, 2012 Negotiations Update. The language under Article 3 - Recognition and Scope is not what is being addressed in the update. This language defines outsourcing existing Fleet Service work. I was inquiring about Article 3. Whole different issue.
ograc

 

[ograc]

Job security and enhanced seniority protection as it pertains to a merger or acquisition (Article 2, par. A& B). In May 2012, with the company's intentions with AA well known, this language was the sole focus in negotiations as it should be. Reference the June 01, 2012 Negotiations Update. The language under Article 3 - Recognition and Scope is not what is being addressed in the update. This language defines outsourcing existing Fleet Service work. I was inquiring about Article 3. Whole different issue.
ograc

Sorry for the Type O!

 

[700UW]

Usually in most negotiations scope and major economic issues are the last to be addressed as they are usually the hardest issues to agree upon.