2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[john john]

Presidential Emergency Boards (PEB's) have been formed numerous times throughout Labor History regarding Airlines. If you include ALL applicable industries covered by the Railway Labor Act, there have been a total of 244 cases since 1936. approximately 13 of those PEB's involved the IAM...
 
Here is a full history of PEB's on the NMB website...
 
NMB.GOV

And you do know after the PEB Congress can legislate its findings and force you to work under as your new CBA?

And has this every been done in the history of aviation
I know PEB have been issued I am asking about Congress legislate its findings and force you to work under as your new CBA?

 

[freedom]

regardless of the merger, a company has an obligation to treat its employees fair.  Refusing to give pay raises over the last year and now this year, then proposing only 1% is in very poor taste.  Shame on them, making billions of dollars and can't offer more than a quarter pay raise.  It's a true shame we can't drag that proposal through the streets.  I can't possibly imagine that the company would want such a sh*tty relationship with ground employees, especially noting that you have two sets of ground employees which means more of them.

 
welcome to the new normal in America.

 

[ograc]

I am not sure as to what "merger synergies" are to be had through fleet service, unless it involves a reduction in the number of AA/US agents.  If the company can operate (and dare I say, prefer to operate) with extensive use of fleet service contractors, then what's the real savings of keeping US and AA FSAs, outside of the few stations in which both groups are working and that would eliminate managerial positions in the process?  In the Big Picture, I am not sure that a whole lot of savings given even a measly $1/hour raise would be more than the additional management expenses in those overlapping stations.  How many stations are currently both US and AA?  LAX?  LAS?  SFO?  MIA?  ORD?  DFW?  Get desperate enough and have US FSA reporting to AA managers and vice-versa-- I doubt it violates either CBA.
 
This maybe part of the impasse... what the NC wants won't be covered by the reduction in "merger synergies" by eliminating managers and the only real savings are through FSA reductions in head count which happens with the next step of Joint Contract negotiations.

Fleet Service 'merger synergies" will be realized with dramatic reductions in Fleet headcount and increasing the use of vendors. It's why the company has strongly resisted any improvements to scope language in Section 6. Replacing as many $20.00 + per hour and benefits US/AA represented employees with vendors is indeed what they're after.

 

[ograc]

regardless of the merger, a company has an obligation to treat its employees fair.  Refusing to give pay raises over the last year and now this year, then proposing only 1% is in very poor taste.  Shame on them, making billions of dollars and can't offer more than a quarter pay raise.  It's a true shame we can't drag that proposal through the streets.  I can't possibly imagine that the company would want such a sh*tty relationship with ground employees, especially noting that you have two sets of ground employees which means more of them.

I gave up on anticipating good labor relations from this company years ago. In the meantime the disrespect continues. They have no regard for the status of relations with the IAM represented employees. Hell even DP thinks labor relations are great.

 

[Tim Nelson]

And has this every been done in the history of aviation
I know PEB have been issued I am asking about Congress legislate its findings and force you to work under as your new CBA?

Never has happened in the airline industry and I doubt non licensed personnel would be the first to trigger it.  What is interesting is that the IAM itself doesn't expect any strikes to be issued at this point so it seems contradictory for the IAM now to claim the NMB will allow a strike. Never mind a release.   
Below is what the IAM attorney told the United Airline members a few months ago.  If the IAM's lead counsel,  Ira Gottleib, has a correct opinion, then we are pissing in the wind with a full complete exhaustive contract overhaul. 
Granted, the IAM tried to put as much fear as possible in the ratification process to get the POS United contract ratified but, in doing so, implicitly suggested the union is powerless. 
 
CONSEQUENCES  OF UNITED MEMBERS FAILURE TO RATIFY:
"If the members do not ratify the Tentative Agreement (TA), there is little if any likelihood that the Union would ever be able to exercise a right to strike, and a substantial possibility that Congress would eventually intervene and impose an agreement on United and the Union similar to the Tentative Agreement.1" 
 
1. Ira Gottlieb letter to the United Airline ramp,
 
 
[maybe AH read the Ira Gottleib  letter. No?]

 

[Tim Nelson]

IAM/US has Ready Reserve like DL Tim? Is this for UA or US? Maybe communicator BLUTO/Dave can weigh in,

Josh

Yes. The IAM, under the Canale regime, agreed to ready reserve in the 2008 non bankruptcy agreement. No vacation, no holidays, no pension, no health care, not subject to the 'hours of service' article, nothing.  Not included in part time counts. Can be up to 10% of the workforce. Oddly, the IAM tells the Delta workers to sign an IAM card to dump ready reserve, yet the IAM supported ready reserve in several of its non bankrupt contracts.  Years ago, before the internet, a union could tell one group one thing, then say something else to another group.  Sorta how the IAM told the United members that if it rejected the monumental agreement that such a rejection would force congress to hammer the members, but at US AIRWAYS, it tells 10,000 members "We striking" and has steadfastly refused to negotiate a section 6 first bite contract as it opted instead to negotiate a comprehensive contract.   The risk to doing this was seen at United where the failed strategy ended up goose-egging the United members prior to joint talks with $0, then, as a partial result of not getting the first bite, the IAM mindlessly gave up and just told the members if they don't ratify a TA then congress will deliver 'great pain' to them. 

 

[Tim Nelson]

I gave up on anticipating good labor relations from this company years ago. In the meantime the disrespect continues. They have no regard for the status of relations with the IAM represented employees. Hell even DP thinks labor relations are great.

The problem comes in at when you compare the negotiation strategies.  The company offered 3 approaches as AH mentioned in his letter.  USAPA took one approach, AFA took another.  Both secured contracts fairly quickly. So labor peace has only eluded the IAM at US AIRWAYS.  All labor groups at sAA and all labor groups at sUS didn't have the labor unrest that is now being experienced by the IAM.  Thus, it seems exclusive to the IAM due to their negotiation approach.
CWA is in the midst of a representation election later this year so that unit is shelved.
 
The IAM chose to reject all paths that the company offered.  Chose to reject the section 6 first bite approach and instead it is mindlessly insisting on following its pre-merger failed United airline strategy which amounted to no job security and $0 goose-eggs as it finally was forced to admit this strategy failed as it entered joint talks as the only union that got nothing. ZERO.  Somewhat insane to employ the same strategy once again and my concern is that it has done so due to putting political gain ahead of the members.  Pound chest and piss off all negotiating  parties prior to elections, then after an election, they just enter joint talks and toss out some flyer saying why they did so.   
 
Hey, who doesn't like the sound of them saying they are negotiating for more vacation, more sick time, more pension, 15% pay raise, more security, full sick time?   Sounds good, right?  Has a comprehensive contract, without considering first bite ever happened before prior to joint talks? Nope.
 
That said, we are now stuck in a corner but I offered techniques to help the present situation, like using AH proposal against him, and securing a strong strike vote prior and engaging the membership.  Such techniques won't get us out of being boxed in but since we chose to be boxed in then I believe it sounds a lot better with members being engaged than Joe Tiberi's "elroy jetson" media tantrums. In short, we need a bigger trumpet if we maintain this approach.
 
Whatever the case, none of us know if the NMB is going to do an about face and side with the IAM.  Even if it does, I don't see AH signing a comprehensive proposal that enhances all the articles. My concern is that the current leaders do United Part 2 and after elections, should they win, leave stand alone talks by putting out some letter blaming the NMB and then signing some agreement with management to pledge accelerated joint negotiation talks.  Management will definitely dress up a way out for them.  What should happen, is that the union should be open to first bite talks, secure what can reasonably be put on the table, wage bump and job security, maybe another few items.  I just can't see AH doing anything other than jerking their current stance off since he considers a comprehensive proposal to be as much disrespectful as we do his 1% pay raise. 
 
In summary,  a careful look at the situation and you will see that AH has 8 signed labor agreements [sAA and sUS]  and that is why Parker says there is labor peace with this merger.  Mostly, he is accurate.
The only exception is....well,....this IAM leadership team which chose to once again embrace Delaney's insistent pre-merger United model. And again, my concern is that we have seen the fruits of that model and how it resulted in $0 prior to joint talks. 

 

[roabilly]

John John is right.  Never has a PEB occurred exclusively to non licensed ground personnel in this industry. Ever.  But getting to a PEB [should history be altered] means we got our release so that's a good thing.  At any rate, a PEB just delays things for a month, right?  And it forces settlements, right?  I'm not sure if that is the path that AH wants to pursue. Not saying any union wants a PEB but it does force mutual agreements. Right now, we don't have squat and aren't even close.

Tim you are correct...
 
When you review the NMB data I provided in the link, it is clear that virtually all PEB's involved licensed craft and class, the cases that did include ground workers were basically situations like ours, where the Union represented BOTH groups! 
 
When you review the date of creation and closure, there is a trend of approximately a one year duration for each case...
 
I tend to agree that AH probably doe's NOT really want a PEB... as there would be a massive amount of media coverage -- Media coverage during a mid-term election year with a partisan congress, and a labor friendly POTUS! However, If he continues on his current path of insisting on a sub-par agreement... he will send the process to strike, or a PEB, I feel that the PEB would be more likely in this scenario, as opposed to a strike where the 141 and 142 would honor each others lines!
 
For those reasons, i believe a T/A may be reached AFTER release, and a strike vote... it's a game of chicken!

 

[700UW]

It hasnt happened in the airlines, but happens in the railroads all the time.
 
But their is always a first.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim you are correct...
 
When you review the NMB data I provided in the link, it is clear that virtually all PEB's involved licensed craft and class, the cases that did include ground workers were basically situations like ours, where the Union represented BOTH groups! 
 
When you review the date of creation and closure, there is a trend of approximately a one year duration for each case...
 
I tend to agree that AH probably doe's NOT really want a PEB... as there would be a massive amount of media coverage -- Media coverage during a mid-term election year with a partisan congress, and a labor friendly POTUS! However, If he continues on his current path of insisting on a sub-par agreement... he will send the process to strike, or a PEB, I feel that the PEB would be likely in this scenario, as opposed to a strike where the 141 and 142 would honor each others lines!
 
For those reasons, i believe a T/A may be reached AFTER release, and a strike vote... it's a game of chicken!

Therein lies the question, after a release. Our hope has to be that the political wheels are spinning in DC to get us that release.  AH doesn't control that so there is an element of risk he is tampering with as well.

 

[mike33]

 
 
I tend to agree that AH probably doe's NOT really want a PEB... as there would be a massive amount of media coverage -- Media coverage during a mid-term election year with a partisan congress, and a labor friendly POTUS!
 
For those reasons, i believe a T/A may be reached AFTER release, and a strike vote... it's a game of chicken!

 
  Could we not create that same scenario with a pre-release strike vote? Create a question in the minds of the public? I believe we could and create a little disruption. Then if released you would have advance media coverage because the public would just be waiting for the release. They would already know our stance.

 

[Tim Nelson]

 
  Could we not create that same scenario with a pre-release strike vote? Create a question in the minds of the public? I believe we could and create a little disruption. Then if released you would have advance media coverage because the public would just be waiting for the release. They would already know our stance.

Waiting on a NMB release may take time and certainly we would need patience for that action.  However, it doesn't mean a pre-emptive action on the unions part can't be done. In fact, I'd say it ought to happen. Nobody respects fleet service. Most prolly don't even think we are bothered with all of this.  I say we owe it to ourselves and that we make the best of it right now with a 'throw down' strike vote.
 
Personally, I wouldn't mind that Dallas Morning News reporter eating a bit of crow.

 

[WeAAsles]

Many of us don't personally care for Tim because of the actions and things he's done in the past and will probably continue to do. Also by the way he interjects his personal agenda into most of his posts. But when he lays all of that down and makes sense he deserves props for that. He has been making sense his last few posts lately. At least from my perspective.

 

[freedom]

CAPS KEY SI STUCK AGAIN
 
AND WHAT IF THE PRE-STRIKE VOTE FAILS OR IS PROVEN TO BE WEAK ?  50/50

 

[mike33]

CAPS KEY SI STUCK AGAIN
 
AND WHAT IF THE PRE-STRIKE VOTE FAILS OR IS PROVEN TO BE WEAK ?  50/50

And what if the sky falls tomorrow?.....  You underestimate your fellow employees. what if?..  What if there were no merger US/HP merger?...you would still be making Min wages.