2014 Fleet Service Discussion
- Thread starter Falcon
- Start date
- Status
Tim Nelson
Veteran
"On ice", its NY's term but it fits. Following the negotiations over the past several months has had the mediator schedule meetings then ice things for two months, then do it all again and repeat itself. Presently no begotiations are scheduled but the pattern seems to be every two months. Not surprisngly only the iam claims there is an impasse. Most say that the NMB will continue to ice any release. Our hope is that a release is coming but not sure if anyone really knows.roabilly said:
"First bite" is a metaphor that is used to express normal merger negotiations prior to a union agreeing to joint talks. When a merger is effective, management never wants to negotiate improvements in every article outside of joint talks. Unions dont just jump into joint talks without getting a improvement prior (first bite). At united this meant 12% wage increase for iam, ibt, afa plus job security provisions and another item or two. Tha afa and ibt took the first bite approach. The iam decided to pass on that and instead demand that all articles be improved immediately before joint talks.it ended up walking away from what was on the table and got $0 prior to joint talks.
Otoh, exhaustive comprehensive negotiations asks for improcements in most articles. Our current proposal supposedly has 6 things, full sick time, wages, more vacation, more holidays or holiday premium pay, more retirement and one other item i cant remember. Attached to a release, it becomes interesting and something we can support. However, it looses its teeth as the idea of a release fades. My personal hope is to consider solutions that move negotiations forward and work through models that dont create polar opposite proposals between the two parties.
Parker is mostly correct when he says he has labor peace. He signed 8 first bite contracts, including all unions at sAA and the pilots and stews at sUS.but only the iam negotiations have deteriorated. Ask yourself, why?
Tim do you think the sAA agents being organized is a good thing for fleet? Most AA agents like being unorganized and it's not like the CWA really delivers at US with so many piedmont stations like Air Willy for the IAM. Would it be good to have them organized or would that mean fleet would get less in talks if the agents get more?
Josh
Josh
Tim Nelson
Veteran
obviously negotiating a treasure island contract in the context of pre joint talks buys votes. Everyone loves to hear $3 pay raise, more vacation, more holidays, more scope, full sick days. Same thing happened at united. Hopefully after elections, there can finally be forward movement.NYer said:
Tim Nelson
Veteran
its not for me to say but the cwa has done a decent job imo at usairways by having scope at all stations and much more in benefits than iam members.737823 said:
I dont think sAA get treated good but i really dont know their situation. In ord it appears to me that most ticket positions are contract help.
roabilly
Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2008
- Messages
- 2,136
- Reaction score
- 2,355
I not able to see any failure on behalf of the IAM regarding miscommunication, or lack of transparency in the “on ice” analogy. The RLA is specific in the mechanics of the procedures. The NMB is simply acting in accordance with it. What is your angle here? Are you asserting that Delaney is somehow responsible for the NMB’s prolonged time-frame in rendering a decision on a release?Tim Nelson said:
If you are... it’s just another political argument, and not based on fact...
Now... for the “first bite” analogy... If you will remember, I made a post to CB early last year regarding the importance of getting as much as possible in Section 6, as opposed to waiting for Transition Talks post merger. At the time, he was in full agreement, and indicated that the leadership had already determined that course would be the best for Fleet if they were willing to wait, and be patient. So...this is nothing new, and again... I see no angle that indicts the IAM, or its leadership in miscommunication, or failure to utilize the best strategy in these negotiations...
You are throwing this phraseology around like a dart aimed at Delaney's forehead!
Tim Nelson
Veteran
Nothing political intended.roabilly said:
Back to early last year, there was no reason to change complete course since there were only rumors of a merger, then a merger that still lacked approval. However, after November, the reality of the situation changed. I'm not going to go as far as NYer and say there will be no release. I'm uncomfortable saying that since none of us really know. I do think that everyone outside of the IAM would be surprised if a release was issued fairly soon, if ever.
I shared my opinion on the matter as it relates to current negotiations. It seems to me that there should be some recognition of several things that are apparently not being recognized by the IAM, and only the IAM. The result of the present negotiation strategy has created a polarization and stall of negotiations. If a release comes then we are all good! If it doesn't then we set our group on a collision course of getting $0 prior to joint talks. Just like at United. You do know that Delaney left 12% pay raise and job security, and same medical on the table at United when he went into joint talks, yes? Compare that with the United stews and mechanics, then ask yourself why our peeps got goose-egged when the other groups worked out a bump in pay and a few other items. Is it because management hates the IAM? Of course not, it was the result of failed strategy.
The problem is compounded with the association. To be sure, the association was a great idea. But after the TWU or its agent triggers the single carrier application by July, that will almost certainly force a single carrier ruling by the NMB by September. Why is that significant? Well, that brings us back to IAM communication.....what did the IAM say about stand alone talks as it relates to the association agreement with the TWU?
Below are their exact words,
"The IAM will continue bargaining with US Airways for its current members at the stand-‐alone carrier until the National Mediation Board determines US Airways and American Airlines are operating as a single carrier.
So, let nobody misunderstand, when single carrier is ruled upon and if the IAM follows through on its current bargaining 'until' single carrier, then fleet service will have itself to blame if it somehow thought that the IAM would continue forever in stand alone talks. Fleet service has been told very clearly only until single carrier. Why is that important? Because single carrier will almost certainly be by September. Our group could end up with $0 and have to walk away with nothing as it did at United. Folks will say, how can the IAM get away with it? Easy, just blame the NMB. Put out a bull sh*t letter, something like
"While we all wanted and pressed for the NMB to issue a release, the NMB has stalled in making any such determination. As a result of that and the reality of the single carrier that is expected to come down soon, your leadership has signed a letter of agreement with management to enter joint talks on the condition of accelerated negotiations, so we can be sure to come to an timely and expedited conclusion to joint talks."
That's not verbatim but that's very similar to the BS letter they blew at the United members. Sounds good doesn't it? All BS though.
At any rate, the reality of the situation is that, imo, the IAM needs to start recognizing some things and put politics aside. Pounding the chest saying strike and entering breakrooms talking about a bottom offer of 6 things that will insist on getting everyone more vacation, full sick time, more holidays, more pension, more pay, more scope, may be great at buying votes but it hasn't done anything to move things forward. Negotiations have now polarized actually.
And regardless of politics, moving forward is, or should be, the focus. Can a release move things forward? You bet! But there are other strategies in section 6 pre-joint talks that can and should be employed, and that brings us back to first bite solutions.
Remember, when Parker says there is labor peace at US AIRWAYS, for the most part he is spot on. He has signed 8 contracts dealing with this merger. All groups at sAA, and the Pilots and Stews at sUS. Instead of Joe Tiberi name calling and calling Parker a hypocrite [and I am no fan of Parker's unfair ways], maybe the IAM look in the mirror and ask why it is the only union out there in negotiations that isn't even close to securing an agreement? Why is it so profane to consider maybe that it should look at other options?
And I even differ over the comprehensive talks insomuch that if we insist on isolating this way then instead of saying in the press, "We are prepared to strike", I say "Prepare to strike". Meaning that we aren't prepared at all right now. Has there been a strike vote? Has anyone even seen a copy of the proposals? Do any of us have any idea what we are really striking over without any information? Be more forthcoming, Cripes! Does that make sense?
ograc
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2012
- Messages
- 1,868
- Reaction score
- 1,624
As I see it... this 'threat of a strike" by the union leadership has indeed been fruitless. No one seems too intimidated. The company, Wall Street, the media or the flying public. For the betterment of the membership; maybe it's time for a new approach. Maybe it's time to entertain other options. Maybe it's time for a new direction. Then again... haven't we heard and tried this before? Sometimes I feel we are like a dog chasing it's tail.Don't know about the rest of you but I'm getting dizzy. One thing is certain; jobs are eroding fast at UA under this DL endorsed and membership ratified contract. Is US/AA represented jobs the next into the buzzsaw? I don't have a warm and fuzzy feeling concerning our collective futures.
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 26,566
- Reaction score
- 5,361
I can hear the battle cries now: the NMB will release us and allow us to strike. Republic pilots will say that, after seven years of negotiations the agreement is simply unacceptable. But the union(s) should understand that the threat of a strike is not what it was 15 years ago. The NMB would be hard pressed to make a case to the White House that a sector-leading agreement in many important economic areas is not a good outcome and therefore allow the pilots to engage in a work action.
And, yes, commerce would be disrupted. Regional airlines provide the only air access for hundreds of smaller communities, making it even more unlikely that the NMB would grant a release. [Being remanded back to mediation only prolongs a process already gone too long] Consolidation in the mainline sector only compounds this factor as there is no longer sufficient capacity to accommodate the disenfranchised demand that would result from a work stoppage.
Yes it may be true that smaller cities could in the future lose air service in part because of a shortage of pilots willing to work for the regional carriers, but that argument would not outweigh the risks of a strike today. Are regional pilot salaries too low? Based on the education and skills required for the job, I think the clear answer is yes. But at a time the administration is focused on truly low wage workers and income inequality, it is highly unlikely that the White House would allow this issue to distract from its efforts to raise the minimum wage and allow a work action that could bring more financial pain to areas already punished by a weak economy.
So Republic pilots should perhaps think twice about the conditions for this particular battle and instead focus on the bigger picture and positioning for the future.
http://www.swelblog.com/articles/republic-pilots-forget-the-leaks-and-prepare-to-change-vesse.html
And, yes, commerce would be disrupted. Regional airlines provide the only air access for hundreds of smaller communities, making it even more unlikely that the NMB would grant a release. [Being remanded back to mediation only prolongs a process already gone too long] Consolidation in the mainline sector only compounds this factor as there is no longer sufficient capacity to accommodate the disenfranchised demand that would result from a work stoppage.
Yes it may be true that smaller cities could in the future lose air service in part because of a shortage of pilots willing to work for the regional carriers, but that argument would not outweigh the risks of a strike today. Are regional pilot salaries too low? Based on the education and skills required for the job, I think the clear answer is yes. But at a time the administration is focused on truly low wage workers and income inequality, it is highly unlikely that the White House would allow this issue to distract from its efforts to raise the minimum wage and allow a work action that could bring more financial pain to areas already punished by a weak economy.
So Republic pilots should perhaps think twice about the conditions for this particular battle and instead focus on the bigger picture and positioning for the future.
http://www.swelblog.com/articles/republic-pilots-forget-the-leaks-and-prepare-to-change-vesse.html
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 26,566
- Reaction score
- 5,361
This is another article that came out yesterday from the New York Times. I think it's an interesting assessment as to why our (Major Airlines) companies want to outsource the smaller stations to lower wage contractors? They have to have feeders of course to make the hubs work as not everyone will be living in the hub city to generate all that traffic but they also want to be able to make a profit from the route.
This also "may" be where that UAL contract was a little more forward thinking than most of us would care to admit? Unless we can organize all of them we're competing against people who today are more than willing to do our jobs for much less than we make. (That's why I love these airport minimums and the fight to raise the wage) Anyway. The UAL contract at least gives all these people the opportunity to stay in their cities if they want to agree to the new rates or they can chose to go to where they will remain better compensated. It's still better than what I believe they had before which from what I understand was no option at all if the company had decided to close the station.
Crappy realities aren't going to go away just because we don't like them or chose to ignore them and thump our chests at each other. What's the old saying "Don't shoot the messenger"
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/25/business/smaller-airports-are-being-left-behind.html?partner=yahoofinance&_r=0
This also "may" be where that UAL contract was a little more forward thinking than most of us would care to admit? Unless we can organize all of them we're competing against people who today are more than willing to do our jobs for much less than we make. (That's why I love these airport minimums and the fight to raise the wage) Anyway. The UAL contract at least gives all these people the opportunity to stay in their cities if they want to agree to the new rates or they can chose to go to where they will remain better compensated. It's still better than what I believe they had before which from what I understand was no option at all if the company had decided to close the station.
Crappy realities aren't going to go away just because we don't like them or chose to ignore them and thump our chests at each other. What's the old saying "Don't shoot the messenger"
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/25/business/smaller-airports-are-being-left-behind.html?partner=yahoofinance&_r=0
roabilly
Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2008
- Messages
- 2,136
- Reaction score
- 2,355
OK Tim...Tim Nelson said:
I read your detailed response, and I agree with about 50% of it...
The parts I am at odds with are your observations as an armchair critic, with nothing to lose if you’re wrong, but a lot to gain if you’re are right! We have been over, and over, and over, the TWU MOU, and the language therein. Even YOU agreed that it was an amendment to the existing TWU CBA. You also agreed that it would not be a breach if SCS was delayed. You also agreed that it would be a “Minor Dispute” subject to arbitration. Having said that... here you are again, making the SCS and the association a huge argument as a tool to cast doubt on the integrity of the Union(s)!
One thing for certain is this, if the IAM had decided to settle for less, or even nothing in 6 in lieu of promised gains in the JCBA (Transition Talks), you would have been on here publicly assailing the Leadership for “cutting backroom deals” as you have done so often in the past. Now that the IAM is actually sticking to their demands, and letting due process play-out regarding the RLA, you accuse them of letting the Government do their dirty work!
Either way... YOU win politically... am I not right?
Let's face it... if you are successful in your armchair political arguments, you will be elected to a position that pays six figures annually... correct?
Tim Nelson
Veteran
good to see the TWU filing for the Frontier Fleet service workers.
I also know that stasis was given a gift by the Local Chairman out of FLL, of125 cards from Spirit out of FLL so if he can get up off his butt and fetch another 30 or 40 cards elsewhere then the IAM may be able to organize Spirit airlines ramp.
I also know that stasis was given a gift by the Local Chairman out of FLL, of125 cards from Spirit out of FLL so if he can get up off his butt and fetch another 30 or 40 cards elsewhere then the IAM may be able to organize Spirit airlines ramp.
Tim, I think Frontier already outsourced a number of stations and are/were considering doing the same at their DEN base.Tim Nelson said:
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_22526550/frontier-airlines-outsource-some-jobs-at-stations-outside
As for Spirit, similarly they use vendors at most airports. Incidentally, I have seen US fleet workers handle them at BOS, not sure about passenger agents. But again given the UA agreement and lack of movement on negotiations for US what value will they gain from joining the IAM?
Josh
- Status
