UAL/CO Merger LABOR Discussion

[Richard]

Since the original thread was drifting a bit off topic, here is a new thread for you to discuss ONLY the labor issues and integration challenges of the upcoming merger between UA and CO. Please limit your discussion here to those topics ONLY.

We're going to start a new merger topic for non-labor related discussion of the merger.

Thank you.

 

[whoop whoop]

I'm sure an intelligent person like yourself can sum up in a paragraph or 2 why CAL's scope is better. You do realize you have either skirted or tried to skirt around every question asked of you. It seems like that is the ibt way. Does the ibt have "dance around questions 101" class you guys go to?
And again IND, OAK, receive and dispatch and the heavy checks were all let go under the IAM pre-2005.
You can't be trusted with what you say on these public forums, you obviously have an agenda. And thanks, I will have a great day.
This is to ADIRUWHO, since the last topic closed.

 

[superfrog]

I was laid off from United on 10/05/08 I worked as a mechanic in San Francisco does anyone know if they are still farming out work ? And how is this seniority integration process going to effect my chances of being recalled ?

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

What would you suggest the best way to deal with the seniority issue should be? Maybee the best thing would be to let the mechanics from both sides sit down with each and hash it out. It seems like the ibt has dug itself in a hole promising 2 different things to the 2 groups. Why don't they let the groups decide for themselves and save themselves the headache of lying to both groups?

I would support exactly that, with the caveat that the committees be ELECTED from the membership, NOT appointed.

You go to the IBT UAL negotiations website and the majority hold 2 positions or more.

I will support elected negotiators, not "yes" men.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

I don't think ThirdSeatHero is saying it will go one way or another, since as he said it doesn't really affect him much. I think he's just trying to say that ibt sold them on one concept but now are trying a "bait and switch."

As a pilot I don't claim to know the politics or details behind your contracts and unions. Based on my experience, my opinion is that there will be some kind of compromise that will be considered acceptable to more than 50% of the membership so that ibt does not run the risk of getting voted off the property in favor of another union. It does sound to me like ibt put themselves in a precarious position by promising 2 different things to 2 groups, and now having to rectify that.

ThridSeatHero,
As with most contracts, the devil is in the details. If they promised you straight DOH but there is some small loophole in the writing, I'm sure they will exploit that loophole in order to save face. If that ends up being the case, then your gripe is certainly with ibt and not your CO counterparts. And the only way to rectify that is with a vote. If they truly lied to you, and a majority of others are unhappy with the result as well, then by all means vote their butts out and replace the ibt.

PS. It doesn't sound to me like you have a problem with the CO folks, only ibt. I just want to make sure THEY understand that. The last thing we need is employees fight among ourselves. It's easy to happen when a subject as sensitive as seniority is involved. Just look at the US Air pilots. Right now it's up to United's new management and our respective unions to do the right thing. If they don't then they are the ones we should ALL go after.

Nearly spot on throughout 767jetz.

You are quite correct that my problem is with the ibt.

The CAL personel in SFO, that we've interfaced with since this little sleigh ride began, are top notch. The mechanic representaional issue aside, the potential for the combined airline is IMHO unmatched.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

To answer your question simply SCOPE. There are other reasons as well as all contracts are rather complex, and I do not believe this is the proper venue to go through it line by line. However I'm sure that our friend Third Seat Hero can attest to the importance of this, as the reduction in scope negotiated under AMFA directly and indirectly led to the amount of bloodshed for UAL MX. I will make no mention more of AMFA's negotiating abilities as the NWA debacle says it all. You need to keep in mind also that UAL MX is still working under an AMfA contract and are in negotiations now with the IBT. I'm very sure that these issues are being addressed, and the negotiating committee has copies of ours to see where improvements can or should be made. Our contract is by no means perfect, and we are currently in mediation, when it ends your guess is as good as mine. Prior to the integration Union leadership from both sides will get together and hopefully come to an agreement joining best of both contracts. Not everyone will be happy with every single line item but that's how it goes. Hopefully I have answered your question.

As for the other yes, but by no means am I an officer or negotiating committee member

I will surely attest to the importance of scope language in any contract, that said, when it comes to what occured under AMFA at UAL, I'd advise you to educate yourself and not merely accept ibt propaganda.

The IAM agreed to heavy maintenance outsourcing prior to AMFA gaining certification on UAL. The heavy checks were gone. What was left was a section of scope that stated all UAL heavy checks would be done within the US. This language stood alone and was not contingent on whether union mechanics were performing the work. The domestic MROs were either too expensive for UAL or simply not up to the task.

When UAL came to its employees for a second round of concessions during bankruptcy, AMFA was faced with modifying that language and saving its remaining members from even more draconian benefit cuts OR Leaving the language unchanged and costing its members millions more in wage and benefits losses.

In the end the language was modified to allow B747 & B777 checks to be done outside the US.

 

[rjf1251]

I was laid off from United on 10/05/08 I worked as a mechanic in San Francisco does anyone know if they are still farming out work ? And how is this seniority integration process going to effect my chances of being recalled ?

***************************************************************************************************************************************
Un fortunately we are STILL farming out work, We still farm out Line station work at a number of locations and we STILL farm out HMV's and Most C-ck's. I'm REALLY not sure that the practice will stop when the Merger is complete CAL has their OWN airplanes to worry about and whether they have enough mechanics for theirs. At some point It's almosr CERTAIN they'll recall you. the question is to WHERE?? I would HOPE It's some where you want to lve but knowing UAL?? Nobody can tell.

 

[superfrog]

***************************************************************************************************************************************
Un fortunately we are STILL farming out work, We still farm out Line station work at a number of locations and we STILL farm out HMV's and Most C-ck's. I'm REALLY not sure that the practice will stop when the Merger is complete CAL has their OWN airplanes to worry about and whether they have enough mechanics for theirs. At some point It's almosr CERTAIN they'll recall you. the question is to WHERE?? I would HOPE It's some where you want to lve but knowing UAL?? Nobody can tell.

Thank you for the Info rjf1251 at this point I would be happy with any location UAL had to offer me.

 

[adiruwho]

Whoop whoop- In case you haven't figured it out I will not on a public bulletin board give out line by line comparisons of either contract. These are issues that are best discussed at the hall or over beers some time. I have mentioned to you where you can get the information you have requested, the rest is up to you. In fact I bet the question regarding scope comparisons would be a good one the next time you attend a general membership meeting. I'm sure your current negotiating committee is working to improving your current CBA. As for an agenda, the only agenda I may have is to see long term improvements in job security , benefits, and wages etc, for the entire work group. That includes you, even if you think I can't be trusted.

Super Frog- If I were to venture a guess it would be that you would be recalled to your past domicile, being SFO. I believe there will be in increase of work in Heavy Maintenance, particularly wide bodies. Then again I can't be trusted.

Third Seat Hero- If you say its all IBT propaganda it must be so. Sure the IAM did you no favors, bankruptcy didn't help, but things didn't much improve with AMFA. In all fairness I will say AMFA was a neat idea, craft union and all. Unfortunately they lacked clout in D.C., at least when Hoffa calls members of Congress, they answer the telephone. What happened during the IAM/AMFA years is unfortunate, remember we took our licks too. The important thing is where we go from here, and how do we improve our situation, and what are we going to do about it? Sure there is going to be contention between sides during the integration, but that is why we have committees to hash through these things. As to who is a member of these committees, I remind you that though they may come from the local or are stewards or whatever, they were initially elected to that position by the members. A similar situation occurs, in the House of Representatives, the elected official acts on behalf of their constituency to enact legislation. If there are people who are in a position to be placed into the situation of contract integration that you feel are unable or inadequate to perform those functions, file a motion at the next General Membership meeting for elections. Heck why don't you volunteer yourself and become part of the solution.

As a side note, and I'm not sure if this pertains to superfrog or rjf1251 more- On the CAL side we have managed to bring in house the 737NG and recently the 757 Heavy Maintenance. After the closure of the Wide body check lines in the early 90s, retirement of the 727s,MD80s, and 737 classics this was not a small feat, and in fact added jobs. Regarding Wide Bodies, management has repeatedly stated that if they could justify running the checks nose to tail, the check lines would be added. The question now is where is the VP of Maintenance going to come from. I am optimistic that with the combined Wide Body fleet, these checks will be brought in house, in SFO, where there are tooling and facilities. ( Did Tilton hock all the tooling? I hope not.) Things are looking up for you guys in UALMX, This merger can be a good thing for everyone, but some say I can't be trusted.

Have a great day

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

Third Seat Hero- If you say its all IBT propaganda it must be so. Sure the IAM did you no favors, bankruptcy didn't help, but things didn't much improve with AMFA. In all fairness I will say AMFA was a neat idea, craft union and all. Unfortunately they lacked clout in D.C., at least when Hoffa calls members of Congress, they answer the telephone. What happened during the IAM/AMFA years is unfortunate, remember we took our licks too. The important thing is where we go from here, and how do we improve our situation, and what are we going to do about it? Sure there is going to be contention between sides during the integration, but that is why we have committees to hash through these things. As to who is a member of these committees, I remind you that though they may come from the local or are stewards or whatever, they were initially elected to that position by the members. A similar situation occurs, in the House of Representatives, the elected official acts on behalf of their constituency to enact legislation. If there are people who are in a position to be placed into the situation of contract integration that you feel are unable or inadequate to perform those functions, file a motion at the next General Membership meeting for elections. Heck why don't you volunteer yourself and become part of the solution.

Indeed, I say its IBT propaganda because that's exactly what it is.

However, should you wish to continue on insisting it was AMFA that lost UAL's in house heavy maintenance, simply provide proof of your assertions. I and others, can and will of course then provide the truth and the proof of what happened.

As to the UAL-CAL merger, I have no illusions, it will be difficult for all involved. However, while you seem willing to accept those individuals working the merger from the CAL side, I and others here at UAL are not.

Our UAL negotiators WERE NOT elected to those positions, ALL of them were appointed. Additionally, it is ridiculous in the extreme to try to equate voting for a steward as tantamount to an endorsement for their appointment to any other future position.

As to your suggestion of taking action at a membership meeting, the teamsters have eliminated the possibility of that.

The 3000+ UAL-SFO membership is split between two locals (986-856).

This of course had never been done before prior to the UAL campaign, the IBT claims its for better representation, an assertion that brings a good laugh among the UAL membership, but what it does do is limit this stations ability to influence the type of policies and decisions discussed here. As to my personal involvement, I've been a shop steward since the IBT set foot on the property.

As a side note, you may be completely satisfied with the representation provided by the IBT at CAL, but that doesn't change the fact that at UAL we have been repeatedly lied to, and the representation we receive is sub par at best.

Oh, and if you truly are concerned about the fact that you....can't be trusted...then spare us the condescension and give up the wounded noble union man act.....you don't do it very well.

You have a great day too.

 

[rjf1251]

Whoop whoop- In case you haven't figured it out I will not on a public bulletin board give out line by line comparisons of either contract. These are issues that are best discussed at the hall or over beers some time. I have mentioned to you where you can get the information you have requested, the rest is up to you. In fact I bet the question regarding scope comparisons would be a good one the next time you attend a general membership meeting. I'm sure your current negotiating committee is working to improving your current CBA. As for an agenda, the only agenda I may have is to see long term improvements in job security , benefits, and wages etc, for the entire work group. That includes you, even if you think I can't be trusted.

Super Frog- If I were to venture a guess it would be that you would be recalled to your past domicile, being SFO. I believe there will be in increase of work in Heavy Maintenance, particularly wide bodies. Then again I can't be trusted.

Third Seat Hero- If you say its all IBT propaganda it must be so. Sure the IAM did you no favors, bankruptcy didn't help, but things didn't much improve with AMFA. In all fairness I will say AMFA was a neat idea, craft union and all. Unfortunately they lacked clout in D.C., at least when Hoffa calls members of Congress, they answer the telephone. What happened during the IAM/AMFA years is unfortunate, remember we took our licks too. The important thing is where we go from here, and how do we improve our situation, and what are we going to do about it? Sure there is going to be contention between sides during the integration, but that is why we have committees to hash through these things. As to who is a member of these committees, I remind you that though they may come from the local or are stewards or whatever, they were initially elected to that position by the members. A similar situation occurs, in the House of Representatives, the elected official acts on behalf of their constituency to enact legislation. If there are people who are in a position to be placed into the situation of contract integration that you feel are unable or inadequate to perform those functions, file a motion at the next General Membership meeting for elections. Heck why don't you volunteer yourself and become part of the solution.

As a side note, and I'm not sure if this pertains to superfrog or rjf1251 more- On the CAL side we have managed to bring in house the 737NG and recently the 757 Heavy Maintenance. After the closure of the Wide body check lines in the early 90s, retirement of the 727s,MD80s, and 737 classics this was not a small feat, and in fact added jobs. Regarding Wide Bodies, management has repeatedly stated that if they could justify running the checks nose to tail, the check lines would be added. The question now is where is the VP of Maintenance going to come from. I am optimistic that with the combined Wide Body fleet, these checks will be brought in house, in SFO, where there are tooling and facilities. ( Did Tilton hock all the tooling? I hope not.) Things are looking up for you guys in UALMX, This merger can be a good thing for everyone, but some say I can't be trusted.

Have a great day

***************************************************************************************************************************************

Well I can say this,

If they BRING the checks to SFO?? We can do them and Well. We Still do 'C' Checks landing gear changes a LOT of Specioal Route work, Interior changes And we still Can do everything up TO an overhaul buy since there are only Docks in
DOCK 1 for the 747-777 and Dock 3 for the 767, Dock 2, 2n,2w,Dock 1E,the North and South B29 Hangars and Docks,4,5,6,7 could all be used fir C ck lines. And with 10,000 mechanics on Furlogh?? Man?!? the possibilities are ENDLESS!! Much of the tooling was sent to Timco when we did Overhauls there, It has been Rumored that Much of it was returned. A LOT of it wasn't. We still Have orcan get our hands on anythong we need. as much of the tooling was multiple fleet stuff and the 737's haven't been gone long enough to forget about them. We might not know the avionics differences in yours but ours were EFIS cockits and We'rewell versed in all glass cockpits dealing with the Airbus. We CAN do the work suffuce to say.

 

[adiruwho]

Indeed, I say its IBT propaganda because that's exactly what it is.

However, should you wish to continue on insisting it was AMFA that lost UAL's in house heavy maintenance, simply provide proof of your assertions. I and others, can and will of course then provide the truth and the proof of what happened.

As to the UAL-CAL merger, I have no illusions, it will be difficult for all involved. However, while you seem willing to accept those individuals working the merger from the CAL side, I and others here at UAL are not.

Our UAL negotiators WERE NOT elected to those positions, ALL of them were appointed. Additionally, it is ridiculous in the extreme to try to equate voting for a steward as tantamount to an endorsement for their appointment to any other future position.

As to your suggestion of taking action at a membership meeting, the teamsters have eliminated the possibility of that.

The 3000+ UAL-SFO membership is split between two locals (986-856).

This of course had never been done before prior to the UAL campaign, the IBT claims its for better representation, an assertion that brings a good laugh among the UAL membership, but what it does do is limit this stations ability to influence the type of policies and decisions discussed here. As to my personal involvement, I've been a shop steward since the IBT set foot on the property.

As a side note, you may be completely satisfied with the representation provided by the IBT at CAL, but that doesn't change the fact that at UAL we have been repeatedly lied to, and the representation we receive is sub par at best.

Oh, and if you truly are concerned about the fact that you....can't be trusted...then spare us the condescension and give up the wounded noble union man act.....you don't do it very well.

You have a great day too.

I don't believe I ever said that Amfa was the cause of ALL the problems that have happened there over the years. As to the structure of the IBT in your station with regards to the various locals figured you were all 856, its been a while since I was in 986. Really I'm not too concerned, and will not continue with this argument and instead focus on the future. Whats happened before is irrelevant to where we need to go.

 

[adiruwho]

***************************************************************************************************************************************

Well I can say this,

If they BRING the checks to SFO?? We can do them and Well. We Still do 'C' Checks landing gear changes a LOT of Specioal Route work, Interior changes And we still Can do everything up TO an overhaul buy since there are only Docks in
DOCK 1 for the 747-777 and Dock 3 for the 767, Dock 2, 2n,2w,Dock 1E,the North and South B29 Hangars and Docks,4,5,6,7 could all be used fir C ck lines. And with 10,000 mechanics on Furlogh?? Man?!? the possibilities are ENDLESS!! Much of the tooling was sent to Timco when we did Overhauls there, It has been Rumored that Much of it was returned. A LOT of it wasn't. We still Have orcan get our hands on anythong we need. as much of the tooling was multiple fleet stuff and the 737's haven't been gone long enough to forget about them. We might not know the avionics differences in yours but ours were EFIS cockits and We'rewell versed in all glass cockpits dealing with the Airbus. We CAN do the work suffuce to say.

I never had any doubt as to the capabilities of the overhaul base there. I would imagine that the 737 checks will remain where they are,The 777 and 767's are what I think you will see out there.I have no idea what they will do with the 787s. Keep in mind we also have the 767-400s which are a bit different than what you are used to seeing, neat airplane though. One of the things that disappeared in the early 90s was our gear shop, since then they have been farmed out. I have heard that these will be coming your way eventually as well. Of course this is when the merger is completed.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

***************************************************************************************************************************************

Well I can say this,

If they BRING the checks to SFO?? We can do them and Well. We Still do 'C' Checks landing gear changes a LOT of Specioal Route work, Interior changes And we still Can do everything up TO an overhaul buy since there are only Docks in
DOCK 1 for the 747-777 and Dock 3 for the 767, Dock 2, 2n,2w,Dock 1E,the North and South B29 Hangars and Docks,4,5,6,7 could all be used fir C ck lines. And with 10,000 mechanics on Furlogh?? Man?!? the possibilities are ENDLESS!! Much of the tooling was sent to Timco when we did Overhauls there, It has been Rumored that Much of it was returned. A LOT of it wasn't. We still Have orcan get our hands on anythong we need. as much of the tooling was multiple fleet stuff and the 737's haven't been gone long enough to forget about them. We might not know the avionics differences in yours but ours were EFIS cockits and We'rewell versed in all glass cockpits dealing with the Airbus. We CAN do the work suffuce to say.

Additionally, Dock:3 was recently re-configured to accept the B757 + winglets. Not sure what would be required to accomodate the B757-300s CAL flys, but fairly certain SFOs plant maintenance guys could outfit it in short order.

BTW where does this 10,000 on furlough number keep coming from? We don't have half that many still on the street.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

I don't believe I ever said that Amfa was the cause of ALL the problems that have happened there over the years.

And I don't believe I ever said you made such a statement.

I did however correct you on an erroneous statement you made in a previous post where you asserted AMFA was the cause of UALs in house heavy checks being sent to China. I'd be happy to quote it for you if you've forgotten.

As to the structure of the IBT in your station with regards to the various locals figured you were all 856, its been a while since I was in 986. Really I'm not too concerned, and will not continue with this argument and instead focus on the future. Whats happened before is irrelevant to where we need to go.

I'm not suprised that you're... not too concerned...you make a statement on erroneous information and when confronted with the facts of the situation you become dismissive. Thats also typical of our reps here in SFO.

As to your final opinion, I'll wholeheartedly disagree. Whats happened before is critically relevant when you're counting on those same individuals to get you where you're going.