2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[ograc]

Maybe someone on the US NC should nudge AH and wake him up. Remind him that he is no longer negotiating contracts with the protection of bankruptcy. In fact, he is negotiating contracts for a combined airline that has made billions already and expected to increase profits in the years to come. With that being said... the old company response of everything given in negotiations must be "cost neutral" has become irrelevant in the members' eyes. This response may have worked under BK protection negotiations; but given the current status of contract negotiations (section 6 and a company projected to make billions) it has no merit. Was DP's raise in compensation cost neutral? Our NC is proposing reasonable and fair contract improvements for the former US Fleet in order to obtain an agreement that has a reasonable chance of being ratified. Additionally, it is fair and reasonable to expect a section 6 ratified contract for the former US Fleet before entering into transition talks. Would someone on the US NC wake AH up and make him aware he no longer has the blanket of protection provided by the bankruptcy courts regarding the current contract negotiations? The "cost neutral" leverage no longer applies.
Lock and Load!

 

[Tim Nelson]

Maybe someone on the US NC should nudge AH and wake him up. Remind him that he is no longer negotiating contracts with the protection of bankruptcy. In fact, he is negotiating contracts for a combined airline that has made billions already and expected to increase profits in the years to come. With that being said... the old company response of everything given in negotiations must be "cost neutral" has become irrelevant in the members' eyes. This response may have worked under BK protection negotiations; but given the current status of contract negotiations (section 6 and a company projected to make billions) it has no merit. Was DP's raise in compensation cost neutral? Our NC is proposing reasonable and fair contract improvements for the former US Fleet in order to obtain an agreement that has a reasonable chance of being ratified. Additionally, it is fair and reasonable to expect a section 6 ratified contract for the former US Fleet before entering into transition talks. Would someone on the US NC wake AH up and make him aware he no longer has the blanket of protection provided by the bankruptcy courts regarding the current contract negotiations? The "cost neutral" leverage no longer applies.
Lock and Load!

I think the membership has been very explicit to the NC and in return the NC has woke AH up, at this point. In fact, my hunch is that there will be some movement in March.  I think another day was added to the negotiations scheduled by the NMB.  I'm not saying there will necessarily be enough movement but I don't think AH is sleeping this one out.  He does have a lot of catching up to do though. I wouldn't be surprised if the NC comes back and reports no movement but the finish line, as modest as it is, can't be drawn any lower by the NC. Their 6 items have to stick, especially enhancing scope.

 

[robbedagain]

id be shocked if that dirty ole donkey ah gets his arse out of that stall and gives us a contract that's fair    but  tim I hope youre right that there be movement  but only positive for all iam folks

 

[ograc]

at some point the unions gotta get scope instead of extra holidays and drop dead clauses that hostage the whole.

Protect the work first! Then you can go after improvements in other areas such as; holidays, sick time, Part Time ratios, overtime rates of pay etc. Without the represented jobs and work you sacrifice long term leverage in negotiations. The union needs to look beyond what it may take to pass a current TA and set long term goals. The membership needs to do the same. A challenging task indeed. IMO though ... until this is accomplished; we will continue to witness the steady decline in quality union represented work.   

 

[ograc]

Utilizing BK proceedings as leverage, with the threat of abrogation...

roa,
please see previous post. The company no longer has the security blanket of BK procedures in the current Section 6 contract negotiations for Fleet at the former US. AH can stick the position of everything given must be cost neutral. Additionally, they no longer have the threat of abrogating the contract. The threat under section 6 belongs to the union. If the parties cannot agree the NMB can and will eventually release a union to take legal economic action. STRIKE! A withdrawal of services. Hopefully, the company wakes up! IMO.. i think they will. They have to know a strike (the nuclear option) is not in their best interests. IMO... I think they are running out the clock before calling a time out!    

 

[roabilly]

Maybe someone on the US NC should nudge AH and wake him up. Remind him that he is no longer negotiating contracts with the protection of bankruptcy. In fact, he is negotiating contracts for a combined airline that has made billions already and expected to increase profits in the years to come. With that being said... the old company response of everything given in negotiations must be "cost neutral" has become irrelevant in the members' eyes. This response may have worked under BK protection negotiations; but given the current status of contract negotiations (section 6 and a company projected to make billions) it has no merit. Was DP's raise in compensation cost neutral? Our NC is proposing reasonable and fair contract improvements for the former US Fleet in order to obtain an agreement that has a reasonable chance of being ratified. Additionally, it is fair and reasonable to expect a section 6 ratified contract for the former US Fleet before entering into transition talks. Would someone on the US NC wake AH up and make him aware he no longer has the blanket of protection provided by the bankruptcy courts regarding the current contract negotiations? The "cost neutral" leverage no longer applies.
Lock and Load!

Cargo...
 
Maybe, the answer is for Fleet to simply go into “motivation neutral” each time the phrase ‘cost neutral” comes up in the current section 6 negotiations!
 
Turn the dial to...
 
LOCK –N– LOAD MODE!!

 

[roabilly]

roa,
please see previous post. The company no longer has the security blanket of BK procedures in the current Section 6 contract negotiations for Fleet at the former US. AH can stick the position of everything given must be cost neutral. Additionally, they no longer have the threat of abrogating the contract. The threat under section 6 belongs to the union. If the parties cannot agree the NMB can and will eventually release a union to take legal economic action. STRIKE! A withdrawal of services. Hopefully, the company wakes up! IMO.. i think they will. They have to know a strike (the nuclear option) is not in their best interests. IMO... I think they are running out the clock before calling a time out!    

I hear ya Cargo...
 
I was referring to the AA offer in a conversation about AA/TWU with one of their members...
 
Believe me... I'm aware this is SECTION 6 for US FLEET... outside of Bankruptcy, in the most profitable environment in decades!
 
BRING ON THE A-10'S!

 

[Tim Nelson]

Protect the work first! Then you can go after improvements in other areas such as; holidays, sick time, Part Time ratios, overtime rates of pay etc. Without the represented jobs and work you sacrifice long term leverage in negotiations. The union needs to look beyond what it may take to pass a current TA and set long term goals. The membership needs to do the same. A challenging task indeed. IMO though ... until this is accomplished; we will continue to witness the steady decline in quality union represented work.   

The importance of this can not be overstated.  What good is improvement to more time off but there is no scope for all the current stations?  We can't leave scope on the table hanging with a drop dead 2015 letter and leave section 6 with AH holding on to that.  Like giving him a steak dinner.  And all stations not protected will never make it past the drop dead date once out of section 6.   

 

[necigrad]

What is the likelihood of the TWU/IAM alliance not getting a transition agreement (JCBA) that supersedes this language PRIOR to the Dec 31 2017 date?

I'd say 70%.  I have zero logic to support that specific number, but look at history and current negotiations.  US Section 6 negotiations are at a standstill.  No progress, no impasse.  When US and HP merged, it to 2 to 2 1/2 years to get a JCBA.  Give the company a reason to drag things out to 2018 and they'll find a way to do it!

 

[ograc]

The importance of this can not be overstated.  What good is improvement to more time off but there is no scope for all the current stations?  We can't leave scope on the table hanging with a drop dead 2015 letter and leave section 6 with AH holding on to that.  Like giving him a steak dinner.  And all stations not protected will never make it past the drop dead date once out of section 6.   

Agreed! Protect all existing work first! If Fleet at the combined airline is to gain measurable improvements to working conditions in the future we must protect the existing work first!  The continual concession of work and represented jobs (wheather it be outsourcing or concessions regarding part time ratios) will continue to erode future contract negotiation leverage. the membership needs, for the first time, to look past the immediate hourly wage increase with potential retro pay and focus on the future.     

 

[Tim Nelson]

What is the likelihood of the TWU/IAM alliance not getting a transition agreement (JCBA) that supersedes this language PRIOR to the Dec 31 2017 date?

Unless AH has an awakening I'd say slim to none. Most joint contract talks take at least 3 years but many last 5+ years.  I don't think there were any joint agreements with America West and our stews or pilots for 7 years.  At United, the stews and mx are far far away from a joint contract in 4 years already.  Expecting a joint contract within 2 years after a section 6 contract [if we positively assume we even get a quick ratification in current talks] is nonsensical.  
We have to grab as much as we can now with a focus on scope getting a priority as opposed to other things, especially knowing the drop dead date of Dec 31, 2017, and April 3, 2015. If we all stick together as we have, we can do this but it may take time. Panic mode isn't an option.
 
At any rate, AH gains leverage by stalling joint talks past those drop dead dates. Given the new problems with the pilots and their 'seniority agreement' falling apart now,  this merger is turning into a mess. We shouldn't be surprised that management sided with the American union over USAPA over interpretations about the seniority MOU.  Looks like arbitration for that group now. Where have we seen that before with our pilots?

 

[roabilly]

Unless AH has an awakening I'd say slim to none. Most joint contract talks take at least 3 years but many last 5+ years.  I don't think there were any joint agreements with America West and our stews or pilots for 7 years.  At United, the stews and mx are far far away from a joint contract in 4 years already.  Expecting a joint contract within 2 years after a section 6 contract [if we positively assume we even get a quick ratification in current talks] is nonsensical.  
We have to grab as much as we can now with a focus on scope getting a priority as opposed to other things, especially knowing the drop dead date of Dec 31, 2017, and April 3, 2015. If we all stick together as we have, we can do this but it may take time. Panic mode isn't an option.
 
At any rate, AH gains leverage by stalling joint talks past those drop dead dates. Given the new problems with the pilots and their 'seniority agreement' falling apart now,  this merger is turning into a mess. We shouldn't be surprised that management sided with the American union over USAPA over interpretations about the seniority MOU.  Looks like arbitration for that group now. Where have we seen that before with our pilots?

Agreed!
 
Many of the Pilots will be eligible for social security before they see an agreement... assuming they don't kill each other first!

 

[Solidarity]

 
I agree. MM was not here to the extent of what I personally saw.
 
As a side note, can someone tell me why I can not use MM, MF, PR, NH, or any other elected officers name in full? They are public figures, are they not?
Can we use their proper names as long as we are not addressing them directly on this forum so as to reveal their forum identity?
Not sure of the proper etiquette.

If anyone goes to iam141.org they can reference the district officers from USAirways and cross-reference the names of the AGCs with their initials.  I think it is good to keep it status quo .........but that is just my opinion

 

[psa8979]

Whats happening with are Brothers/Sisters above the wing PS and CWA ? When is their election by NMB ? I have heard conflicting information from Agents here at SFO ? Any facts, speculation, or opinions AF contributors or Active Union Members ?IMO CWA will be a factor with the out come of what happens with FS  IAMATWU  at LCC/AAL. Contracts NOW ! Contracts for ALL !

 

[Tim Nelson]

Whats happening with are Brothers/Sisters above the wing PS and CWA ? When is their election by NMB ? I have heard conflicting information from Agents here at SFO ? Any facts, speculation, or opinions AF contributors or Active Union Members ?IMO CWA will be a factor with the out come of what happens with FS  IAMATWU  at LCC/AAL. Contracts NOW ! Contracts for ALL !

The CWA has a lot less leverage than Fleet.  Fleet's leverage was incredibly enhanced with the Association.  AH knows who he will be negotiating against with fleet.  OTOH, AH knows that the CWA will have an election when the CWA files a single carrier.  I can't possibly imagine the CWA filing that anytime soon.  The last TA signed by the CWA was terrible but it was pulled after the DOJ suit. Certainly the CWA would have been a goner with that TA so not sure what it was thinking.   The big issue will prolly be flight travel, as odd as that seems. The CWA position is doh although sAA likes FCFS.  The CWA filed a grievance on this and I'm sure AH will note that to the sAA workers. 
 
Best guess is a union election upstairs in early 2015 if not very  late 2014.