Jump to content

Welcome to AirlineForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!


Photo

Cal backfilling


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1
jakexus

jakexus

    Newbie

  • Registered Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
with the same union at Cal/Ual why would IBT allow stations ie EWR to add Cal mechs the new hire in 2010 is over 100 new mechanics off the street, JFK is layed off back to '87, with mechs on system bid as well. i'm sure EWR isn't the only station Cal is doing this.. any feedback?
  • 0

#2
whoop whoop

whoop whoop

    Senior

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 252 posts

with the same union at Cal/Ual why would IBT allow stations ie EWR to add Cal mechs the new hire in 2010 is over 100 new mechanics off the street, JFK is laid off back to '87, with mechs on system bid as well. i'm sure EWR isn't the only station Cal is doing this.. any feedback?

Pretty simple really. The ibt sold out the laid off UAL mechanics and is helping the new UAL. It is cheaper to hire a new mechanic than recall one at top out wages and benefits. The ibt does not care about the mechanics and needs to be removed from the property, quick!!
  • 0
.

#3
gtd

gtd

    Advanced

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 167 posts

Pretty simple really. The ibt sold out the laid off UAL mechanics and is helping the new UAL. It is cheaper to hire a new mechanic than recall one at top out wages and benefits. The ibt does not care about the mechanics and needs to be removed from the property, quick!!


The clock is ticking. Sign an AMFA Card.
  • 0

#4
787nightmare

787nightmare

    Veteran

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 633 posts
Aw hell, the United mechs have been there too...so who do you turn to now?
I don't know what went wrong with AMFA at UAL, but surely it can't be worse than IBT!
  • 0

#5
lineguy43

lineguy43

    Senior

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 472 posts
UAL is like Linda Blair in the exorcist their heads are spinning they don't know which union to go to next....They have actually gone full circle and want the IAM back...lol Thats pretty pathetic.
  • 0

#6
Bob Owens

Bob Owens

    Veteran

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13223 posts

with the same union at Cal/Ual why would IBT allow stations ie EWR to add Cal mechs the new hire in 2010 is over 100 new mechanics off the street, JFK is layed off back to '87, with mechs on system bid as well. i'm sure EWR isn't the only station Cal is doing this.. any feedback?

AA did the same thing right after they bought TWA. In NY they laid off around 200 mechs from TWA then started hiring people off the street at AA, but not laid off TWA workers. Eventually those hired were laid off and the TWA guys recalled to AA. Why would they do that? My guess is to try and build a pool of mechanics for future use. The fact is that Mechanics are becoming scarce and mergers may be just as much about aquiring the skillsets as routes and equipment. They probably figure that most of the UAL guys will come back when they call and now they have a reserve of younger workers for when they need them.

It didnt pan out all that well for AA. At one time they had 300 guys on the recall list for NY1, which includes JFK, LGA and EWR. Well out of that 300 they got around 20. Similar results in Boston and LAX. They simply didnt come back, found better jobs during the interum.
  • 0

Businessmen Incorporate for protection, workers unionize.Equal Rights for Unions Now!The opinions expressed above are my opinions and not those of any organization or employer that I am associated with.


#7
ThirdSeatHero

ThirdSeatHero

    Veteran

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1452 posts

UAL is like Linda Blair in the exorcist their heads are spinning they don't know which union to go to next....They have actually gone full circle and want the IAM back...lol Thats pretty pathetic.


At first glance it might indeed seem rather odd, but dig alittle deeper and you'll understand abit better.

The Mechanics have been given guarentees -in writing- for a mechanics stand alone district lodge, and seperate mechanic local lodges. These will be governed by officers and reps elected from UALs current ranks, not some appointed shill. The organizing committee has already written and had approved our boilerplate bylaws securing our accountability & democracy.

The old IAM guard who were responsible for the disgraceful anti-union acts of the late 90s & early 2000s will have no part in this new District or Locals.
  • 0

#8
xUT

xUT

    Veteran

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3910 posts

UAL is like Linda Blair in the exorcist their heads are spinning they don't know which union to go to next....They have actually gone full circle and want the IAM back...lol Thats pretty pathetic.


You are SPOT ON!
We had the best in the industry with AMFA!
B) xUT
  • 0
Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.

#9
xUT

xUT

    Veteran

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3910 posts

At first glance it might indeed seem rather odd, but dig alittle deeper and you'll understand abit better.

The Mechanics have been given guarentees -in writing- for a mechanics stand alone district lodge, and seperate mechanic local lodges. These will be governed by officers and reps elected from UALs current ranks, not some appointed shill. The organizing committee has already written and had approved our boilerplate bylaws securing our accountability & democracy.

The old IAM guard who were responsible for the disgraceful anti-union acts of the late 90s & early 2000s will have no part in this new District or Locals.


Well, that is crap. If you believed their bull#### then tough nuts. I have zero sympathy for you numb-nuts.
B) xUT
  • 0
Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.

#10
ThirdSeatHero

ThirdSeatHero

    Veteran

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1452 posts

Well, that is crap. If you believed their bull#### then tough nuts. I have zero sympathy for you numb-nuts.
B) xUT


When this drive started it was understood there would be this sort of skepticism. The IAM has offered their assurances in writing with signatures, something the ibt never did. This drive is not about criticizing AMFA its about decertifying the ibt.

AMFA also has a card drive in progress, if the majority wish to return, then that is how it will be. For my part, I would not complain in the slightest, even though at present I'm supporting the IAM.

What should be remembered is that AMFA doesn't hold the patent on accountability & democracy.

TSH-
  • 0

#11
xUT

xUT

    Veteran

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3910 posts

The old IAM guard who were responsible for the disgraceful anti-union acts of the late 90s & early 2000s will have no part in this new District or Locals.


Of course not.

The old IAM Guard (Rich Petrovsky, Paul Molenberg and their team) are now IBT thugs which you ID-10T's voted in!

Much like the old NWA IAM Guard (Chairman and ex President of the IAM Local) which were the 'FIRST' to cross NWA picket line and be SCABS.

When this drive started it was understood there would be this sort of skepticism. The IAM has offered their assurances in writing with signatures, something the ibt never did. This drive is not about criticizing AMFA its about decertifying the ibt.

AMFA also has a card drive in progress, if the majority wish to return, then that is how it will be. For my part, I would not complain in the slightest, even though at present I'm supporting the IAM.


If the IAM and/or AMFA spends more than 25 cents on a UAL card drive, then they just pissed away 25 cents. You guys have no loyalty or unionism concept. How many hours did you walk the picket line TSH?
How many hours did/do you spend at union meetings.
How active were/are you (other than internet brouhaha) in support of 'any' union?

What should be remembered is that AMFA doesn't hold the patent on accountability & democracy.

TSH-


Well the IAM isn't by a long shot. But I will say the IAM is better than the IBT. But at this point, you guys screwed yourselves and will have to live with the IBT. Please don't come here crying how the IBT took your 401K match and gave you the IBT defined benefit retirement.

Or do, I need the entertainment... :lol: :lol: :lol:
B) xUT
  • 0
Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.

#12
xUT

xUT

    Veteran

  • Registered Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3910 posts
I know you folks need help so here is more data:

IN RE: JOSEPH PRISCO, Protestor,
Protest Decision 2010 ESD 6
Issued: July 8, 2010
OES Case No. P-007-062510-FW


Business agent Petrovsky violated the provisions that prohibit campaigning on union time by distributing accreditation petitions at craft and steward meetings, by directing chief stewards to follow-up with stewards about petitions, and by sending the June 23 email. All those chief stewards who complied with Petrovsky’s directives with respect to the petitions also campaigned on union time.

Petrovsky violated the provisions that prohibit use of union facilities for campaigning by speaking in support of the petitions at the May 20 craft meeting held at Local Union 856’s hall and at the June 8 steward meeting held in the union conference room at the union office on UAL property. He committed further violations by using the union office to deliver his directive to chief stewards to follow-up on petition circulation.

Petrovsky violated the provisions that prohibit use of union equipment for campaigning by using the union email network to transmit the June 23 email and by directing the chief stewards to follow up with stewards concerning the petitions, reasonably anticipating that they would do so using union phone lines or union cell phones. The chief stewards who followed Petrovsky’s directive by using union equipment also violated the Rules.

Business agent Molenberg, the Local Union 856 business agent with UAL responsibility, violated the Rules by permitting campaign activity to occur during a union meeting that he co-hosted and taking no action to stop it or to remedy the violation.

Business agent Averette violated the Rules by placing accreditation petitions on the sign-in table for the May 20 craft meeting; in doing so, he made use of the union hall and union equipment to campaign. Averette substantially cured this violation with respect to the accreditation petitions by recognizing the violation after the fact, not turning the signed petitions into the Hoffa-Keegel 2011 campaign, and by surrendering them instead to our investigator. However, the placement of the petitions on the sign-in table constituted campaigning of a type that is not permitted in a local union hall.

When Local Union 986 principal officer Griswold commenced the chain of events that resulted in the Rules violations set forth above by sending the petitions via his assistant to Petrovsky, he undertook an obligation under the Rules to insure that the business agent his local union employed did not use union time, facilities, equipment or personnel to support a candidate. Griswold failed to meet this obligation. A post-it note on a stack of accreditation petitions mailed to a subordinate telling the subordinate to call is not sufficient to convey to that person the proper and improper means of circulating the petitions. Instead, Griswold had an affirmative obligation to communicate the Rules’ requirements to all those whom he asked to circulate the petitions. That he, as Local Union 986’s principal officer, was ignorant of what Petrovsky did until after the protest was filed is no defense to the Rules violations. Similarly, the elected leadership of Local Union 856 may not rely on their asserted lack of knowledge that their business agents and chief stewards conducted campaign activity on union time and using union facilities and equipment as a defense to a protest that the local union violated the Rules.


BAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • 0
Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users