2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[Kev3188]

Tim, I think Frontier already outsourced a number of stations and are/were considering doing the same at their DEN base.

Everything (AW & BW) outside of DEN is farmed out...

But again given the UA agreement and lack of movement on negotiations for US what value will they gain from joining the IAM?

Josh

IMO, they've got nothing to lose, but how 'bout we let them decide for themselves?
 
 

At this point, I would think that the TWU would use their Southwest airline contract as a good vision of how it protects small stations by grandfathering all stations it worked prior to 2009. In much the same way, I would think that the NC at US AIRWAYS would use the same grandfather approach to make sure the IAM doesn't lose work in the merger.  Our members have worked these stations for 50 years, no reason why any of them should be left out when the industry is a rock star in the best industry climate ever.

^YES^

 

[700UW]

Anyone ever think that the Alliance will file the SCS instead of just the TWU?

See I can think out of the box.

Robbed if you go to 141's web page and go to US, pull up the Alliance Agreement and it will have th list of who will represent each station.

 

[WeAAsles]

Anyone ever think that the Alliance will file the SCS instead of just the TWU?

See I can think out of the box.

Robbed if you go to 141's web page and go to US, pull up the Alliance Agreement and it will have th list of who will represent each station.

Yes. And within the specified time frame between the TWU and the company.

 

[737823]

Anyone ever think that the Alliance will file the SCS instead of just the TWU? See I can think out of the box. Robbed if you go to 141's web page and go to US, pull up the Alliance Agreement and it will have th list of who will represent each station.

http://www.usaamerger.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Mechanic-and-Related-Association-Agreement1.pdf

Josh

 

[Tim Nelson]

Anyone ever think that the Alliance will file the SCS instead of just the TWU?

See I can think out of the box.

Robbed if you go to 141's web page and go to US, pull up the Alliance Agreement and it will have th list of who will represent each station.

the obligation is the twu's so they can file it or its agent the association. Makes no difference since the vote will be "association". And when it is filed in a few months, the twu is also obligated to support the filing, all triggering a process that should reasonably conclude before september (september as the absolute latest).

In any case, we have stubbornly backed ourselves into a last ditch corner, like at united, and have all our chips on a very quick decision by the nmb authorizing a strike.

 

[robbedagain]

thanks  

 

[700UW]

the obligation is the twu's so they can file it or its agent the association. Makes no difference since the vote will be "association". And when it is filed in a few months, the twu is also obligated to support the filing, all triggering a process that should reasonably conclude before september (september as the absolute latest).

In any case, we have stubbornly backed ourselves into a last ditch corner, like at united, and have all our chips on a very quick decision by the nmb authorizing a strike.

How is it backing into a corner?
 
I have explained to you several times, SCS doesnt end Section 6 negotiations and posted cases, PMUA and PMCO, for Mechanic and Related and Flight Attendants, who both achieved new Section 6 Negotiations Agreements AFTER single carrier status was granted.

 

[roabilly]

How is it backing into a corner?
 
I have explained to you several times, SCS doesnt end Section 6 negotiations and posted cases, PMUA and PMCO, for Mechanic and Related and Flight Attendants, who both achieved new Section 6 Negotiations Agreements AFTER single carrier status was granted.

Shhhhsh... Nelson needs for this not to be public. It is detrimental to his IAM sucks argument!

 

[Tim Nelson]

How is it backing into a corner?
 
I have explained to you several times, SCS doesnt end Section 6 negotiations and posted cases, PMUA and PMCO, for Mechanic and Related and Flight Attendants, who both achieved new Section 6 Negotiations Agreements AFTER single carrier status was granted.

pmua mx got a stand alone prior to joint talks and single carrier. Same with pmco mx. In fact i dont believe the ibt filed single carrier until 2013. They got the first bump stand alone.

Im not disputing that u can continue section 6 after single carrier and i wished that the iam did at united but the iam was very clear in the association agreement with the twu that it would only negotiate stand alone until (iam words not mine) a single carrier ruling.

Obviously thw twu isnt going to sit idly by singing kumbuya as september 2015 approaches with hundreds of their members still laid off.besides no management team is going to negotiate a treasure island contract prior to joint talks. Not until someone puts down the bong will our members finally start moving things forward in negotiations. Until then it looks like polar opposites and no pay raises again.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Shhhhsh... Nelson needs for this not to be public. It is detrimental to his IAM sucks argument!

i dont mean to imply the iam sucks, just that it should consider other solutions.

I dont claim to be the wisest guy and there is a helluva lot i dont know but i dont see what is being accomplished by not adjusting to the reality of a merger. I also see 60,000 folks at united who got stand alone contracts prior to joint talks except delaney. At USAirways i see 70,000 employees who already secured contracts prior to joint talks except delaney once again. In fact, our union and the company are now at polar opposites. Its so bad that even if we went on strike we would be striking just to chase whatever money is left on the table.

Make AH the devil, he isnt my favorite either, but please dont tell us we dont have a contract yet because AH has a vendetta against the iam. He signed 8 contracts with 8 different groups, so ask yourself why our union leaders have to scream in the press? Pssst, nobody is listening because its now the third time our leaders screamed wolf.

All im saying roabily is that it seems incredibly obvious to me that there is a better solution.

 

[NYer]

At this point, I would think that the TWU would use their Southwest airline contract as a good vision of how it protects small stations by grandfathering all stations it worked prior to 2009. In much the same way, I would think that the NC at US AIRWAYS would use the same grandfather approach to make sure the IAM doesn't lose work in the merger.  Our members have worked these stations for 50 years, no reason why any of them should be left out when the industry is a rock star in the best industry climate ever.  As far as Frontier or spirit, really none of those employees have nothing to lose by joining any organization since they make bare minimum, unsafe conditions, and have next to no benefits.  It isn't like they are working for Delta who maintains a decent quality of work life, presumably to keep unions away.

 
"Transport Workers Union Local 555 president Charles Cerf said the airline wants to be able to outsource up to 20 percent of its ground work to temporary workers. Based on the 9,400-plus TWU members in Local 555, that could allow close to 2,000 temporary workers, he said." --Dallas News
 
BTW--They're also in mediation and they're also facing outsourcing.

 

[NYer]

They gave up profit sharing in exchange for the raise, cost neutral.

 
Nowhere near cost neutral. The raise is absolutely a gain and outpaces the potential of profit sharing.

 

[NYer]

the obligation is the twu's so they can file it or its agent the association. Makes no difference since the vote will be "association". And when it is filed in a few months, the twu is also obligated to support the filing, all triggering a process that should reasonably conclude before september (september as the absolute latest).

In any case, we have stubbornly backed ourselves into a last ditch corner, like at united, and have all our chips on a very quick decision by the nmb authorizing a strike.

 
The MOU states the TWU is to file for Single Carrier within 6 months of Merger....The Association states that "by mutual agreement," the IAM and TWU shall submit for Single Carrier.....How do you reach the conclusion that it "makes no difference..."
 
It seems the Association needs both parties to participate in order to file the submission. The currently stated position for the IAM is that they won't move forward until they get a standalone deal first.
 
There are many moving parts there....

 

[Tim Nelson]

 
The MOU states the TWU is to file for Single Carrier within 6 months of Merger....The Association states that "by mutual agreement," the IAM and TWU shall submit for Single Carrier.....How do you reach the conclusion that it "makes no difference..."
 
It seems the Association needs both parties to participate in order to file the submission. The currently stated position for the IAM is that they won't move forward until they get a standalone deal first.
 
There are many moving parts there....

 I don't believe it says that the IAM and TWU shall submit for single carrier, but rather the association will submit the single carrier, at an agreed upon time, after mutual agreement between the IAM and TWU presidents.
 
I don't believe the IAM will submit any single carrier.  Not only does it not say that but there is no reason for the IAM to file a single carrier. Most likely the TWU will have the association submit the single carrier although nothing in the association agreement is stopping the TWU from filing a single carrier itself, then the Association intervenes by filing one. My best guess is that the association only will file the single carrier.  But whatever the case, as I said, it really doesn't matter because the Association will be the only application that the NMB will recognize and place on the ballot.  The TWU and IAM will yield to the association so it doesn't matter who fires the shot at the starting line.
 
At any rate, what the IAM has said in non binding updates isn't what is significant.  No moving parts if we look at what the IAM signed and not what it says on web sites, internet reports, or media outlets. You have to separate the politics.  In the association agreement Q & A, the IAM clearly says that it will negotiate stand alone 'until' the NMB rules on a single carrier.  I can't be certain but my hunch is that the TWU wouldn't enter into the association agreement without some durational limit to the stand alone talks, so that's prolly why the IAM signed off on stand alone until a NMB single carrier ruling.  The TWU has hundreds of members laid off and although it supports the IAM getting a stand alone agreement, imo, it also has timelines.

 

[Tim Nelson]

 
Nowhere near cost neutral. The raise is absolutely a gain and outpaces the potential of profit sharing.

As an aside, That raise was a gain, if the pay parity isn't triggered.  But if the pay parity is triggered in September, 2015, then wouldn't the resulting pay happen regardless if you got a 4.3%?