2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,
 
"The IAM’s position is that US Airways must fulfill its bargaining responsibilities with the IAM before joint negotiations begin."
 
This is the rest of the answer to that question about the alliance. Granted, we know the Company is hoping we don't get released and that  the NMB continues to be inactive, however we have stated that we are here to fight. Why did you leave that part out? You should quote whole answers not partial ones.
 
P. Rez 

P Rez, just for clarification, will the IAM continue negotiating the current section 6 stand alone, after the NMB issues a single carrier, Yes or No?

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,
 
Are you able to make it PHX this coming Monday?

No, but I wish I could

 

[T5towbar]

Funny... you accuse me of seeing Nelson behind every tree, but YOU are convinced that I'm answering to some IAM officer...
 
Seems like you are the one with an obsession for the paranormal...

The situations is very similar.
The IAM hurriedly filed for single carrier and scrapping their talks with sUA for joint talks. The sUA members should have got improvements before going into joint talks. And giving up the metal hurt things as well, making things seamless which weakened the contract using the "Fly To Win" handbook (which we had at sCO) instead of starting from the BK sUA contract (which had better scope and limited the PT somewhat) and negotiating upward.

Bottom line is you have seen our mistake when going into joint talks without getting improvements and negotiating from a position of leverage. We had no leverage and wound up with a "industry leading contract" that is a joke.

We are paying for it......

Don't make the same mistake. Use whatever leverage and strengths your members have to get something better than we have now.

 

[Tim Nelson]

TIM   how can the TWU file for SCS when its suppose to be a joint thing with the IAM and the TWU?   secondly  its my understanding that the TWU may or will support the IAM should we get released and into  a strike at the end of a 30 day cooling off period.   I also like how our NC is standing their grounds for SECT 6 talks before  JCBA       

robbedagain,
I also like the current position that the group is in.  AH gave the TWU a 4.3% pay increase and in return the TWU agreed to be contractually bound to file single carrier within 6 months of the effective date. The Association is not authorized to deny that but the TWU is authorized to allow the Association to be its agent to file the application. According to the Association agreement, the TWU agreed to allow the Association to take its place in doing that.  But, that action has to happen within 6 months otherwise the union will be in breach of contract.  If there is a breach of contract, I suppose AH has two things he can do.  He can rescind the MOU and take back the 4.3% pay [unlikely] and cause the TWU members to rise up and ask what the hell is this association doing, or he can file an injunction in court and ask for severe penalties from the TWU. 

 

[700UW]

Not filing the SCS is not a major dispute, its a minor therefore the courts would rule it to the grievance procedure, not the court system.
 
The company can and has filed grievances against the IAM before, ie Airbus overhaul.

 

[P. REZ]

P Rez, just for clarification, will the IAM continue negotiating the current section 6 stand alone, after the NMB issues a single carrier, Yes or No?

Tim,
 
How am I supposed to answer that question? We have said all along that we will fight for a fair contract. If a scenario comes that requires a vote to stay in section 6 or something else, my vote will be to stay in section 6. This is of course assuming that going a different route wouldn't be more of an advantage. 
 
P. Rez

 

[WeAAsles]

I'm curious, thoughts? Do you think there is any possibility that this AH guy has not come to terms with you guys yet because this item still hangs out there? Even if it is extremely remote.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-mergers-no-one-waits-060521764.html

If this item was done I personally see no reason why you shouldn't be offered at least pay parity with us before we go into joint talks. I hope this is concluded prior to you guys meeting again with the NMB and if it's not it should be brought up that you are aware of it and are willing to meet again after the final ruling.

What is our (All FSC's both IAM and TWU) TOTAL compensation package worth if you received pay parity with us in relation to Delta and United in Fleet? I'm sure that's something else that the company negotiators must have brought up?

 

[WeAAsles]

I also did find the station staffing extension to be telling of the possibility that the company is either willing or expects they will soon have to come to some kind of terms?

 

[roabilly]

I'm curious, thoughts? Do you think there is any possibility that this AH guy has not come to terms with you guys yet because this item still hangs out there? Even if it is extremely remote.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-mergers-no-one-waits-060521764.html

If this item was done I personally see no reason why you shouldn't be offered at least pay parity with us before we go into joint talks. I hope this is concluded prior to you guys meeting again with the NMB and if it's not it should be brought up that you are aware of it and are willing to meet again after the final ruling.

What is our (All FSC's both IAM and TWU) TOTAL compensation package worth if you received pay parity with us in relation to Delta and United in Fleet? I'm sure that's something else that the company negotiators must have brought up?

Welcome to your new bosses! They don't give rat's ass about the employees anymore than old AA leaders did! I can think of another two words that "AH" stands for, and it ain't his name!
 
P.S. It may improve the situation if she's rules in favor of the Merger...

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,
 
How am I supposed to answer that question? We have said all along that we will fight for a fair contract. If a scenario comes that requires a vote to stay in section 6 or something else, my vote will be to stay in section 6. This is of course assuming that going a different route wouldn't be more of an advantage. 
 
P. Rez

Most members have not been around the NMB business enough to know the processes, so I just wanted to bring to light that there are some things, both legal and official stances by the association, that contradict what is being said on social media.  It seems as if the IAM leaders are telling us things 'off the record' that haven't been communicated to the TWU members.  The TWU has made it very clear, through the association, that these stand alone talks will last up until the NMB rules on a single carrier.  The TWU members also have been made aware that a single carrier certificate is expected within 6 months.  In fact, many TWU members are led to believe that this is all going to happen fairly soon.   So, when you tell Parker that you aren't leaving section 6 'stand alone talks' until there is a ratification, I'm just saying that that is your own personal opinion and not the official stance, as the Association made known to both the TWU and IAM members. 
 
As far as the single certificate application being filed.  I wish you and others were more forthcoming with that information.  I shouldn't have to be the one to bring out the information.  Folks like Robbedagain should be informed by you and not necessarily me.  If our members are being asked to strike then they should have full disclosure of the processes coming to a close in just a few months. 
 
The fact that a union has to file single carrier within 6 months is a fact, unless it wants to breach a contract.  I would love it if the TWU breached that contract but I disagree with 700.  700 says it will be labeled a minor dispute but I think AH will file an injunction and argue that it's a major dispute.  It's a matter of opinion, however, what isn't a matter of opinion is that the TWU finances are not that good and I am hard to convince that AH won't go for blood and just let the damages pile up for intentional breach of agreement.  Again, if the TWU does that then I support them and I think it's great.  Will it happen, I seriously doubt it unless the TWU wants to go bankrupt.
 
When in PHX,  you might want to have that MOU handy for a few questions which may come your way about the TWU contractual obligation it agreed to with AH in return for 4.3% pay raise. That's all.

 

[700UW]

delete

 

[P. REZ]

Most members have not been around the NMB business enough to know the processes, so I just wanted to bring to light that there are some things, both legal and official stances by the association, that contradict what is being said on social media.  It seems as if the IAM leaders are telling us things 'off the record' that haven't been communicated to the TWU members.  The TWU has made it very clear, through the association, that these stand alone talks will last up until the NMB rules on a single carrier.  The TWU members also have been made aware that a single carrier certificate is expected within 6 months.  In fact, many TWU members are led to believe that this is all going to happen fairly soon.   So, when you tell Parker that you aren't leaving section 6 'stand alone talks' until there is a ratification, I'm just saying that that is your own personal opinion and not the official stance, as the Association made known to both the TWU and IAM members. 
 
As far as the single certificate application being filed.  I wish you and others were more forthcoming with that information.  I shouldn't have to be the one to bring out the information.  Folks like Robbedagain should be informed by you and not necessarily me.  If our members are being asked to strike then they should have full disclosure of the processes coming to a close in just a few months. 
 
The fact that a union has to file single carrier within 6 months is a fact, unless it wants to breach a contract.  I would love it if the TWU breached that contract but I disagree with 700.  700 says it will be labeled a minor dispute but I think AH will file an injunction and argue that it's a major dispute.  It's a matter of opinion, however, what isn't a matter of opinion is that the TWU finances are not that good and I am hard to convince that AH won't go for blood and just let the damages pile up for intentional breach of agreement.  Again, if the TWU does that then I support them and I think it's great.  Will it happen, I seriously doubt it unless the TWU wants to go bankrupt.
 
When in PHX,  you might want to have that MOU handy for a few questions which may come your way about the TWU contractual obligation it agreed to with AH in return for 4.3% pay raise. That's all.

Tim,
 
It is no secret that DP and his clan pulled off a big eff u to the IAM when he went behind our backs and negotiated the MOU. The IAM has done what we have had to do to combat the Company's big slap in our face. If the NMB fails to act, the TWU does what it has to do or other scenarios play out then it will be what it is.
 
It is funny you bring all this up now because your stance has been everything was perfect leverage wise for us and nothing could go wrong unless we left section 6 negotiations. We have known and been discussing these issues for awhile now. We are committed to doing everything possible to benefit this membership.
 
P. Rez  

 

[700UW]

Tim do you not understand the difference between a major and minor dispute?
 
The non-filing of an SCS doesnt breach the status quo, its not a change in pay, benefits or work rules.
 
The Airbus Outsourcing was ruled minor at the appeals court level and that effected 300 workers not getting recalled to perform the work.
 
So explain how the non-filing of an SCS would be a major dispute?
 
And AH doesnt file an injunction, they would file a lawsuit, and an injunction prevents something from happening, it doesnt make it happen.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim do you not understand the difference between a major and minor dispute?
 
The non-filing of an SCS doesnt breach the status quo, its not a change in pay, benefits or work rules.
 
The Airbus Outsourcing was ruled minor at the appeals court level and that effected 300 workers not getting recalled to perform the work.
 
So explain how the non-filing of an SCS would be a major dispute?
 
And AH doesnt file an injunction, they would file a lawsuit, and an injunction prevents something from happening, it doesnt make it happen.

Im saying that the company argument would scream alot more than you may suggest. Im not disputing that you arent finally right.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,
 
It is no secret that DP and his clan pulled off a big eff u to the IAM when he went behind our backs and negotiated the MOU. The IAM has done what we have had to do to combat the Company's big slap in our face. If the NMB fails to act, the TWU does what it has to do or other scenarios play out then it will be what it is.
 
It is funny you bring all this up now because your stance has been everything was perfect leverage wise for us and nothing could go wrong unless we left section 6 negotiations. We have known and been discussing these issues for awhile now. We are committed to doing everything possible to benefit this membership.
 
P. Rez

we do have leverage and i think you guys are on the right path. Ive brought up the twu mou quite often. I just hope you guys are closers.