2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[ograc]

Being told "We are ready to strike" carries no weight and no leverage at all.  Zero.  In fact, I think this is the 4th time tiberi said it.   The union has to do better than that because AH is yawning.
 
The union leadership has been given no authority whatsoever regarding that by the way.  Such authority only comes with a strike vote and/or a rejection of a TA.    AH isn't going to raise any ante with a group who says 'strike' but has no authority to carry that out.   I can apprehend your "Enough said" comment but it leaves me uncomfortable since I really don't think nothing at all has been communicated to the membership other than "Prepare to strike".  What does that mean when we haven't been given any disclosure whatsoever?   Is it profane to show the company proposal? WTH?  Use the company proposal against management.   If we wait on self help and tie everything to self help, the very real risk is that we may be waiting an incredibly long time that we may not have.  We can't simply depend upon the NMB and expect it to rule in the next few weeks or months.  Most will say that the NMB isn't even close to ruling.  The NMB hasn't even ruled there is an impasse.  If a release happens in the next few weeks then I can agree with you but I think that is unlikely and that we must proceed.
 
What appears to be the case is that the leadership simply doesn't trust the membership with a strike ballot.  I think that is unfortunate and that is exactly what AH must think.  That unknown must be resolved and plenty quick. Covering our bases is key. A strong strike vote will increase leverage and solidarity. Whatever the case, there isn't any option but to trust the membership.

While I agree a strong strike vote would certainly increase leverage I think AH would still yawn. The company, I believe, knows they have time on their side. The NMB's refusal to release buys them unlimited time. Even if, or when, the NMB were to release they have another 30 days. If a PEB is appointed, which most likely would happen, it buys them an additional 30 days. The company is in no hurry to provide any relief or improvements to the working conditions, wages and benefits of the US Fleet or MTC. & Related for that matter. The past two and a half years of fruitless negotiations are evidence of this. Why would the company be in any hurry? The longer they keep us down the more money in their pockets. I agree a strong strike vote always sends a powerful message but I don't see how a strong strike vote accelerates the process of getting AH and the company to negotiate in good faith. IMO... The only thing that will raise their urgency is a countdown.

 

[rockit2]

Sorry to ask this, I've been on a tractor the last three days getting the fields ready to plant, what was offered and did we get released by the NMB? I just didn't feel like going thru all the post. Thanks

 

[robbedagain]

talks did not go well rockit   the IAM has been pressing the NMB to release both groups.. so far the NMB has FAILED to do their jobs
 
the Donkeys REFUSE to negogiate with the union for  fair and equitable contracts 
 
LOCK N LOAD

 

[NYer]

And that is a reporter and financial analyst's opinion, not the union, not the NMB and no one that was in negotiations.

 
And a strike or even the threat of a strike is supposed to cause financial pressure on the airline. That is what supposed to turn the leverage towards getting a deal. If no one expects something to happen, such as a reporter which is needed to report to the pending doom...of a financial analyst that is supposed to scare people away from investing in the airline...then what do you have....nothing.
 
If you're going to use your past experience as a way to gain more credibility then you shouldn't throw that away by making comments that clearly go against what a strike and the threat of a strike is supposed to cause....which is passengers booking elsewhere to cause financial harm....for Wall Street to run away from the stock in order to cause a sell off....those issues hurt the bottom line which may cause financial and stockholder pressure to settle the issue.
 
If none of that happens, then there is no leverage to force a deal to better suit your wants.

 

[NYer]

The reality is that the average member needs to see the ridiculous proposal and be given a chance to exercise his displeasure and to vote yes to strike. Anything less isnt as forceful. Use the strike vote now as a solidarity vote. Until then, my opinion and your opinion is all the iam has since they have not been
given the authority by the membership yet

As far as media and public display, id say that a strong strike vote sends the strongest message but not having a strike vote looks like a lack of trust.

Why the secrets? Why not show AH offer?
Why the paternalism? Something is wrong.

 
 

How are you going to take a strike vote when we haven't even been released?

 
A strike vote is a gesture to try and create enough uncertainty to have passengers book on other airlines and create a financial burden. It today's process, a strike vote is more of a symbolic process meant to galvanize the members and create some press.
 
However, in today's environment of immediate information. That doesn't seem to work as intended. It is also very important to realize that the media explains the Railway Labor Act process quite well, which brings down the intended stress level.

 

[700UW]

Actually it does put financial pressure on the company to strike a deal.
 
Go ask the AFA, and the CWA, it helped them get a CBA while were were in Chapter 11 part 2.
 
And it both M&R 30 Day Cooling off Period or Strike it applies pressure as it causes people to book away.
 
I wouldnt expect you to understand this since you havent experienced it and the TWU rolls over anytime AA tells them too.
 
And if the company didnt want the threat of a strike, maybe the should negotiating in good faith.
 
Do you always live in FEAR?
 
Must suck not to want to stand up for yourself.

 

[NYer]

ill tell you this much, if im elected, id rather have the backing and leverage of you and 95%+ of all members with your strike vote instead of joe tiberi tantrums and name calling after every round of negotiations.
A strike vote is an incredible display.
Id one up things. Instead of stopping short by having only pickets, id press for some votes. Until then im going to press the union to put the ball in the members hands.

 
Too soon to vote. The NMB has given no indication of a release.
 
It might be a feel good tactic meant to show some kind of togetherness, but it could also cause Members to get disenchanted because although a strike vote is taken, no action will certainly follow.
 
For the public, it becomes old news once the papers say the IAM took a strike vote but due to the RLA they cannot strike until the NMB releases them...and they'll go on and mention how there are more scheduled talks.
 
A strike vote and hoping for a release is not a solution to get what you want. It is a mechanism to be able to get the best deal you can. We really have no way of a full proof manner in which to create havoc and that's the because of the laws that hamper us.
 
Instead of spending years talking tough, we needed to get together and try to change the laws that handcuff us during negotiations. Right now, we're like a bully yelling tough from a window. It noisy, but it scares no one.

 

[Tim Nelson]

While I agree a strong strike vote would certainly increase leverage I think AH would still yawn. The company, I believe, knows they have time on their side. The NMB's refusal to release buys them unlimited time. Even if, or when, the NMB were to release they have another 30 days. If a PEB is appointed, which most likely would happen, it buys them an additional 30 days. The company is in no hurry to provide any relief or improvements to the working conditions, wages and benefits of the US Fleet or MTC. & Related for that matter. The past two and a half years of fruitless negotiations are evidence of this. Why would the company be in any hurry? The longer they keep us down the more money in their pockets. I agree a strong strike vote always sends a powerful message but I don't see how a strong strike vote accelerates the process of getting AH and the company to negotiate in good faith. IMO... The only thing that will raise their urgency is a countdown.

I think fundamentally, the members need to see the proposal.  Unless someone 'sees' something [as in anything in life], the true vision and knowledge almost certainly can't be attained. Prez said he is utterly disgusted with the company proposal. I'm sure he is. But, at this point, how is that going to sink home with the members if they haven't actually seen the proposal.  Parker yielded to the NMB when asked the question by Laurie O,  down in CLT and said he is wanting to offer something fair to all parties and working with the union and NMB through that process. 
 
Well, why don't our NC bring back his proposal and allow Parker's employees to determine how fair a 1% pay raise over 3 years is?  That thing will be shot down and 'dragged in the streets' with the proper information.   In negotiations, it's not just objective, but leaders must be willing, and able, to use the tools and techniques and their personal skill sets to move the membership upon management if management is being unfair.  A picture says a thousand words, right?   Well, let's start showing the picture instead of the very non charismatic Tiberi talking about it. 
 
Dragging that proposal in the streets puts forth a "Deep image" of a very non compassionate management.  That's the image that needs to be drawn.  Not Tiberi's image every two months saying , "We going on strike", and "Parker is a hypocrite".   The name calling isn't going to get anybody one more red cent and shows a weak hand, and the media is already getting tired of Tiberi's eruption every two months.  Without a release, IMO, these negotiations are a disaster and have come to a grinding halt.  Nobody from the IAM apparently knows what they are doing.  And it is mind boggling to walk right back into talks and do it all over again and again and again without changing proposals or techniques.  The IAM's position is to enhance the entire contract right now, i.e., vacation, holidays, overtime, wage, retirement, etc.  Management's position is that it is absolutely absurd to do that immediately ahead of joint talks and returned the IAM"s offer with a ridiculous 1%.  Both are dug in.  And for those who say the United contract doesn't matter....what template do you think management is using prior to joint talks....yep, you guessed it, the United one which IAM141 eboard F us all with.  Ah is prolly saying, "You pissed on stand alone talks with United, so we will meet you in joint talks."  Knuckleheads who say United doesn't matter are truly ignorant or covering their own "Sins of Endorsements'.
 
There needs to be changes.  Bottom line.  If there are no changes to the style and techniques in these negotiations then you can be assured that NOTHING is going to change and management will ride this thing out until September 2015 when joint talks will be virtually forced upon the association. I'm 100% convinced, through past actions, that this current bunch not only lacks the skill sets to properly understand this negotiation setting but will eventually waive off stand alone if it goes on another 6-12 months, and announce some "We entered into an agreement with management to recognize joint talks and accelerated negotiations in hopes of bringing these negotiations to a close with a leading industry contract."   That's what happened at United and if folks get fooled again then I will finally agree with you that the membership just might be to blame.  No change = same insanity.  In 6 years, not a damn productive thing has been done.  All Bull S. 

 

[NYer]

Being told "We are ready to strike" carries no weight and no leverage at all.  Zero.  In fact, I think this is the 4th time tiberi said it.   The union has to do better than that because AH is yawning.
 
The union leadership has been given no authority whatsoever regarding that by the way.  Such authority only comes with a strike vote and/or a rejection of a TA.    AH isn't going to raise any ante with a group who says 'strike' but has no authority to carry that out.   I can apprehend your "Enough said" comment but it leaves me uncomfortable since I really don't think nothing at all has been communicated to the membership other than "Prepare to strike".  What does that mean when we haven't been given any disclosure whatsoever?   Is it profane to show the company proposal? WTH?  Use the company proposal against management.   If we wait on self help and tie everything to self help, the very real risk is that we may be waiting an incredibly long time that we may not have.  We can't simply depend upon the NMB and expect it to rule in the next few weeks or months.  Most will say that the NMB isn't even close to ruling.  The NMB hasn't even ruled there is an impasse.  If a release happens in the next few weeks then I can agree with you but I think that is unlikely and that we must proceed.
 
What appears to be the case is that the leadership simply doesn't trust the membership with a strike ballot.  I think that is unfortunate and that is exactly what AH must think.  That unknown must be resolved and plenty quick. Covering our bases is key. A strong strike vote will increase leverage and solidarity. Whatever the case, there isn't any option but to trust the membership.

 
You can have a 100% strike vote and it means NOTHING unless the NMB releases the parties and you yourself have made the argument that release isn't coming...so what's the point?
 
Spend the time trying to get the best deal instead of trying to apply pressure that you are not in control of applying. There is a reason EVERY contract since deregulation has been concessionary. We don't get together and change the laws that have fighting with our hands tied behind our backs. When that is realized, then we can progress for the long term....Until then, all we have is people yelling at each other, then pointing fingers at each other and we go through the same process every contract cycle.
 
The AA side went through this already. Making the same argument you make...Heck, we even had a newly elected President with a Democratically controlled Congress. It meant nothing.
 
In the spring of 2010 we turned down a TA because we felt the NMB would release us since it was a Labor friendly Administration. Didn't happen, quite the opposite. We were put on ice for more of the mid-term elections and face a completely different scenario once we got back to the table. We overplayed our hand because he expected leverage. We turned down, what now seems like a pretty good deal.
 
In the PATCO case, the air traffic controllers overplayed their hands with President Reagan and that has created the current atmosphere that it's OK to permanently replace striking workers...In this quest to beat on your chests, I hope you tell your membership about that case and the NWA cases.
 
It is the goal to get a deal...but it needs to be the best deal possible. The NMB doesn't care about your cries of fairness, respect and any other descriptive words....They want a deal and they don't care who gets the best side of it.

 

[NYer]

While I agree a strong strike vote would certainly increase leverage I think AH would still yawn. The company, I believe, knows they have time on their side. The NMB's refusal to release buys them unlimited time. Even if, or when, the NMB were to release they have another 30 days. If a PEB is appointed, which most likely would happen, it buys them an additional 30 days. The company is in no hurry to provide any relief or improvements to the working conditions, wages and benefits of the US Fleet or MTC. & Related for that matter. The past two and a half years of fruitless negotiations are evidence of this. Why would the company be in any hurry? The longer they keep us down the more money in their pockets. I agree a strong strike vote always sends a powerful message but I don't see how a strong strike vote accelerates the process of getting AH and the company to negotiate in good faith. IMO... The only thing that will raise their urgency is a countdown.

 
Good post.

 

[700UW]

PATCO were federal workers and by law werent allowed to strike.
 
Compare apples to apples, not oranges.
 
And why are you so dead set against the IAM and its three represented groups at US going on strike?
 
You havent lived it at US, you havent been in bankruptcy twice in less than two years, and you didnt have your management go behind your back and negotiate with employees that dont even work for them and give them deals, why your own employees have been in negotiations for almost three years and you insult them.
 
Go back to the AA board and spew your fear there, the IAM folks here want a new CBA with the respect they deserve or they will strike when the law permits.
 
Do hard to understand the concept of people standing up for themselves?
 
Like I stated before the AFA and CWA both took strike votes and forced the company to deal with them more fairly during bankruptcy part 2.

 

[WeAAsles]

PATCO were federal workers and by law werent allowed to strike.
 
Compare apples to apples, not oranges.
 
And why are you so dead set against the IAM and its three represented groups at US going on strike?
 
You havent lived it at US, you havent been in bankruptcy twice in less than two years, and you didnt have your management go behind your back and negotiate with employees that dont even work for them and give them deals, why your own employees have been in negotiations for almost three years and you insult them.
 
Go back to the AA board and spew your fear there, the IAM folks here want a new CBA with the respect they deserve or they will strike when the law permits.
 
Do hard to understand the concept of people standing up for themselves?
 
Like I stated before the AFA and CWA both took strike votes and forced the company to deal with them more fairly during bankruptcy part 2.

So what do you do if the "law" never permits it. What if the "law" and those who control it keep stringing you along every few months putting you on ice?

You can keep attacking my brother who is only trying to tell you what we went through and the history behind it. In many regards it's an exact mirror of the road we went down as well except we weren't going to get a second bite at the apple somewhere in the future if we had voted yes or no on something.

I'm beginning to wonder if you are more angry at the TWU for doing what it needed to do which was at the time to represent THEIR members than you are at wanting to listen to others who are honestly only trying to help and give you advise from their own experience?

Remember something I said when I came back to this site. What you do from now on has an affect on me and my future. We may not have a vote on those decisions at the moment because you're in the drivers seat, but we are in the car with you and if you crash we get injured as well.

 

 

[700UW]

You guys dont get it.
 
The only pressure the unions and its members can do is work safe, and use the media.
 
The AFA and CWA were quite successful in using a non-binding strike vote to get US to the table in chapter 11 part 2.
 
We lived it, have you?
 
It shows strength and solidarity to the company and hopefully upsets Wall Street and future bookings, thats what it takes to get a fair CBA in the industry, been going on in my 20 years at US.
 
And I am telling him the history of what has happened at US, AA was in financial mess during your talks, US is making money and has been for years and wont pass it on to the very same employees who earn that money for US.
 
He is chicken little, let the US and the IAM handle their issues instead of chicken little coming over here and telling whats gonna happen, dont do this, dont do that.
 
This is the IAM and US, he isnt either and let them decide their futures and their CBA, not someone who wont be effected by it.
 
US' employees have been under basically Chapter 11 CBAs since 2002, its time make some gains and be respected.
 
Doug and Al slapped his own employees in the face by agreeing to MOUs with AA and its employees giving them increases while he spit in the face of his own employees.
 
The NMB doesnt give a crap about Wall Street and stock prices, yet he is trying to throw out some much garbage and see what sticks.
 
He doesnt have a vote in the matter, so let the US employees decide their future.
 
And I guess some of you dont realize the better CBA the three IAM represented groups get at US means a better JCBA contract for both US and AA.

 

[Tim Nelson]

It's anybody's guess when the NMB will rule on a release, but other than the IAM rhetoric, everyone else says any possible release won't come for months or another year, if then.  I have supported and continue to support the IAM's request for a release, although I have no opinion on the actual proposals exchanged since I haven't seen them.
 
At any rate, below is where we are currently at, plus the known timelines for legal processes that will take place soon.
 
Our NC has told all of us that it wouldn't consider going any lower than its current proposal so it put that proposal in stone and told the NMB it was the final proposal.  Once it did that, any conceding movement downward would be seen as movement and compromise a release.   The company's position is that the IAM is being absurd trying to improve upon every article in the contract prior to joint talks, so it also has dug in and only offered 1% over 3 years. Thus, it seems, both parties have taken polar opposite approaches and are far away from much of anything.  Again, I'm not sure if the company only offered 1% as wikileaks said, and I'm not sure if the IAM wanted improvements in all articles prior to joint talks.  Not saying who is right or wrong but things are not moving forward at all.
 
The negotiation problem is compounded in the fact that we already know that the TWU gave us 6 months to find a solution in negotiations, but now will have to move forward with a single carrier application in a couple months.  I know some IAM leaders are saying the TWU won't do this, but the reality is that it has to otherwise it will violate its contract and subject its own members.  In fact, the TWU contract says the TWU must not only file the single carrier but support it.
 
The NMB will view and rule on the single carrier application totally separate from a release. There is nothing the IAM can do about that since it only takes one Union to trigger this.   That was the 'extra base move' that AH made, and with plenty reason he gave the TWU members a 4.3% wage increase for this language.  At any rate, single carrier applications usually take a few weeks or up to two months before the NMB rules. That takes us to September at the latest. That's the timeline guys.  Nothing will stop that other than contract violations which I don't personally see as a reasonably happening.  Of course, a release sometime this spring would also stop the process that AH charted.
 
Nonetheless, assuming there won't be a release, in September,  a NMB single carrier ruling means that we are now the #1 carrier and that makes it extremely more difficult to get a release, if one hasn't been granted by then.  
 
A single carrier ruling also means the members have to go through a representational election.  Yep, , a representational election, presumably anywhere between October-January. 
To be sure, stand alone talks can continue afterwards.
 
Those are the legal processes that we know will come this year.  I suggest that the leaderships of the TWU and IAM start educating the members on all of the above otherwise members are going to start questioning what the hell is going on, and why they were not informed. That single carrier tsunami is going to hit in a few months, PREPARE THE MEMBERSHIP and advise them on what it means.  Don't Bull s folks into thinking the TWU will violate its contract.  And prepare them for all of the above that I said. 

 

[ograc]

 
And a strike or even the threat of a strike is supposed to cause financial pressure on the airline. That is what supposed to turn the leverage towards getting a deal. If no one expects something to happen, such as a reporter which is needed to report to the pending doom...of a financial analyst that is supposed to scare people away from investing in the airline...then what do you have....nothing.
 
If you're going to use your past experience as a way to gain more credibility then you shouldn't throw that away by making comments that clearly go against what a strike and the threat of a strike is supposed to cause....which is passengers booking elsewhere to cause financial harm....for Wall Street to run away from the stock in order to cause a sell off....those issues hurt the bottom line which may cause financial and stockholder pressure to settle the issue.
 
If none of that happens, then there is no leverage to force a deal to better suit your wants.

I'm really torn on this idea of sharing the most recent company proposal with the members and taking a strike vote. I'm inclined to agree that sharing it with the membership would infuriate the masses. I'm also inclined to agree; an infuriated membership would most certainly produce a strong strike vote. Wheather it would have an impact on Wall Street or passengers booking elsewhere is debatable. One thing is certain; if the strike vote did start having an impact on one or the other or both we have gained leverage and the company may raise the urgency of getting to an agreement. If none of that happens NYer... what have we lost? As I see it... we're no worse off. Nothing ventured; nothing gained so tp speak.