2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[ograc]

Why would anything have to be sacrificed if something is explicitly in the contract like doh for application of boarding?

If FCFS boarding becomes an issue the company wants in negotiations for a Transition Agreement and the unions resist; the company will expect movement / compromise on another issue before backing off FCFS. It's a bargaining chip that may very well be played by the company.

 

[Tim Nelson]

If FCFS boarding becomes an issue the company wants in negotiations for a Transition Agreement and the unions resist; the company will expect movement / compromise on another issue before backing off FCFS. It's a bargaining chip that may very well be played by the company.

If its one more thing that the company may need but we have then it just puts a bit more leverage in the union hands.im not sure how anyone can be looking at this as anything other than something that we have that they will want. Also imo the company isnt going to back off fcfs but it may have to negotiate something to get it. It is worth something. Not sure how much. But we have already seen countless times that if we go soft that we get nothing in return except more grief. I dont personally see much reason to accommadate seamlessness in a merger unless management starts respecting and furthering the very reasonable wants of fleet service.

 

[ograc]

If its one more thing that the company may need but we have then it just puts a bit more leverage in the union hands.im not sure how anyone can be looking at this as anything other than something that we have that they will want. Also imo the company isnt going to back off fcfs but it may have to negotiate something to get it. It is worth something. Not sure how much. But we have already seen countless times that if we go soft that we get nothing in return except more grief. I dont personally see much reason to accommadate seamlessness in a merger unless management starts respecting and furthering the very reasonable wants of fleet service.

I agree. If the company wants FCFS boarding so be it. The NC should get something in return. The huge mistake by the District would be to sign off on FCFS boarding prior to a TA agreement. Additionally, IMO... the NC and the District would be unwise to resist FCFS at any cost. There are far too many more important issues that need improvement regarding our future contract. IMO... non rev passenger boarding procedures, pale in comparison, to the real issues that need to be addressed in future contract and Transition agreements. Issues such as wage, scope, sick leave, vacation accrual and pension contribution, to name a few, should be priority one with the membership and the NC. I view the issue of boarding procedure as a mere distraction from the issues that matter most.    

 

[roabilly]

I agree. If the company wants FCFS boarding so be it. The NC should get something in return. The huge mistake by the District would be to sign off on FCFS boarding prior to a TA agreement. Additionally, IMO... the NC and the District would be unwise to resist FCFS at any cost. There are far too many more important issues that need improvement regarding our future contract. IMO... non rev passenger boarding procedures, pale in comparison, to the real issues that need to be addressed in future contract and Transition agreements. Issues such as wage, scope, sick leave, vacation accrual and pension contribution, to name a few, should be priority one with the membership and the NC. I view the issue of boarding procedure as a mere distraction from the issues that matter most.    

I agree Cargo...

It appears this whole issue is a classic “red herring”! Space Available, is a “cost neutral” issue for the Company. I used to sit in amazement, and listen to members heatedly discuss the frequency, and quantity of ‘shift swaps’ for hours at time, while the company cleaned their clocks on compensation, vacation, and overtime with BK proceedings. Very few even understood what Corporate Bankruptcy was, and were convinced it was something the Union was doing!

Fast forward to today... and it’s ALL the Unions fault that BK was played like a violin to force members into a sub-par agreement! Additionally, we have one of the best spin doctors in the business lurking in these forums 24/7 to perpetuate this ideology to anyone gullible enough to believe it!

 

[cltrat]

the best spin doctoring I have seen here was done by Klemm and Bartz conning the UA members into buying a pig in a poke agreement.
btw who do they work for?

 

[roabilly]

Let’s see... UA fleet was misled. No one could read for themselves what they were voting for. The IAM is corrupt, so therefore it should be eliminated, or restructured (again)...

Let me guess... the ratification of the new Boeing/IAM agreement from the 751 will be the next issue to be linked to Fleet! There is a conspiracy in every corner; behind every curtain is a wizard!

It’s real simple... if you can read and comprehend English, and you don’t like a Tentative you vote it down! The collective/democratic will of the Membership has... and always WILL prevail!

 

[cltrat]

nice spinning there
so the IAM reps tell UA it's the greatest deal ever, even talking down to them like they are just to dumb to understand.
But yet it's all the members fault and not any to IAM reps selling it?
whatever you go ahead and believe that BS if you get told to by you know who but I'm not.

 

[pjirish317]

I agree. If the company wants FCFS boarding so be it. The NC should get something in return. The huge mistake by the District would be to sign off on FCFS boarding prior to a TA agreement. Additionally, IMO... the NC and the District would be unwise to resist FCFS at any cost. There are far too many more important issues that need improvement regarding our future contract. IMO... non rev passenger boarding procedures, pale in comparison, to the real issues that need to be addressed in future contract and Transition agreements. Issues such as wage, scope, sick leave, vacation accrual and pension contribution, to name a few, should be priority one with the membership and the NC. I view the issue of boarding procedure as a mere distraction from the issues that matter most.    

Mere distraction as it may be, but all we have left in this industry is SENIORITY! Which deals with everything we do in our work lives, be it shift bidding, vacation bidding, and TRAVEL, to OT. It is a bigger issue than people are giving it credit for. I for one want it to stay at DOH boarding, simply because I have put my time in and some 6 month employee who is faster on the keyboard shouldnt go ahead of me if I'm flying somewhere, where does the raping of our seniority stop?

 

[Tim Nelson]

nice spinning thereso the IAM reps tell UA it's the greatest deal ever, even talking down to them like they are just to dumb to understand.But yet it's all the members fault and not any to IAM reps selling it?whatever you go ahead and believe that BS if you get told to by you know who but I'm not.

+1

Be careful of anyone who places these things on the members and allows the leadership to wash its hands.
The reality of the situation is that the united airline members were 100% betrayed by the iam141 eboard. The members did read the contract, however, delaney and company manufactured ghe consent by telling outright explicit lies about the language. Those yhere are the facts. Then delaney posted on the iam webpage that i was lyin.
Reminded me of myself and others warning fleet service about how the 1113 letters of 2003 werent worth anything. Canale sent a letter to everyone blasting me and saying the 1113 letters "guarantee" tha seigel wont come back a second time.

The only one spinning anything is the retired roabilly who has reduced himself down to damage control for his district pals. He is entitled to do so though. I wish i was spinning things but the hal and ual contracts point clearly to who knifed the membership and chased dues.

Sorry roabily but just because you are reyired doesnt mean you get a free pass. Eliminating part time caps, doubling insurance rates, and going from all ramp service stations down to 7 with mainline scope wont affect you but it already has affected our brothers and sisters at united.

Supporting explicit lies should never be an option. And anyone who pegs these contracts on the membership after a ratification and vindicates the leadership is delusioned.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Mere distraction as it may be, but all we have left in this industry is SENIORITY! Which deals with everything we do in our work lives, be it shift bidding, vacation bidding, and TRAVEL, to OT. It is a bigger issue than people are giving it credit for. I for one want it to stay at DOH boarding, simpmy because I have put my time in and some 6 month employee who is faster on the keyboard shouldnt go ahead of me if I'm flying somewhere, where does the raping of our seniority stop?

it should be noted that the twu doesnt have this in their contract so unless the iam and twu waive it off, the company will be forced to either abide by it or give the iam and cwa a value for it. Until then, that change wont happen. Im sure that had something to do with postponing the boarding application indefinately.

I just hope we dont walk through the motions as our eboard did with the attendance policy. Mc wanted to do a system grievance but delaney just dragged things out until it faded away into the night.

 

[roabilly]

+1

Be careful of anyone who places these things on the members and allows the leadership to wash its hands.
The reality of the situation is that the united airline members were 100% betrayed by the iam141 eboard. The members did read the contract, however, delaney and company manufactured ghe consent by telling outright explicit lies about the language. Those yhere are the facts. Then delaney posted on the iam webpage that i was lyin.
Reminded me of myself and others warning fleet service about how the 1113 letters of 2003 werent worth anything. Canale sent a letter to everyone blasting me and saying the 1113 letters "guarantee" tha seigel wont come back a second time.

The only one spinning anything is the retired roabilly who has reduced himself down to damage control for his district pals. He is entitled to do so though. I wish i was spinning things but the hal and ual contracts point clearly to who knifed the membership and chased dues.

Sorry roabily but just because you are reyired doesnt mean you get a free pass. Eliminating part time caps, doubling insurance rates, and going from all ramp service stations down to 7 with mainline scope wont affect you but it already has affected our brothers and sisters at united.

Supporting explicit lies should never be an option. And anyone who pegs these contracts on the membership after a ratification and vindicates the leadership is delusioned.

Nelson,

When I voted on agreements in my past career, I NEVER let ANYONE... pro IAM... or anti-union (Company) voices persuade me not to READ the tentative fully, and in detail before basing my voting decision on the language I comprehended. It would not have mattered if you had a pathological liar with the charisma of JFK selling a substandard T/A... I would not have voted for it!

Attempting to portray the membership as unable to understand what they are voting on is pretty pretentious don’t you think? That’s pretty much calling them stupid...

 

[737823]

I agree Cargo...

It appears this whole issue is a classic “red herring”! Space Available, is a “cost neutral” issue for the Company. I used to sit in amazement, and listen to members heatedly discuss the frequency, and quantity of ‘shift swaps’ for hours at time, while the company cleaned their clocks on compensation, vacation, and overtime with BK proceedings. Very few even understood what Corporate Bankruptcy was, and were convinced it was something the Union was doing!

Fast forward to today... and it’s ALL the Unions fault that BK was played like a violin to force members into a sub-par agreement! Additionally, we have one of the best spin doctors in the business lurking in these forums 24/7 to perpetuate this ideology to anyone gullible enough to believe it!

But at Boeing the international took purposeful efforts to circumvent the democratic process, requiring a second vote on a proposal that was nearly identical to the preceding offer and scheduled it when they knew many members were still away for the company sanctioned vacation shutdown period. It's clear the IAM wanted to protect the dues they knew the company would move to a RTW state and the international would lose dues. Same thing at UAL, AGC pay was tied to the higher hourly wage that is why they wanted to get this ratified ASAP.

Josh

 

[mike33]

You know,  one of the problems with contracts is that they never clear up old issues and language the way it should be. Hell there are pages and pages of reference to other pages and Articles that the normal person doesn't have a chance to comprehend. I think it is the UNION who should clean that Sh*t up so all can comprehend. 

 

[roabilly]

You know,  one of the problems with contracts is that they never clear up old issues and language the way it should be. Hell there are pages and pages of reference to other pages and Articles that the normal person doesn't have a chance to comprehend. I think it is the UNION who should clean that Sh*t up so all can comprehend.

I agree Mike...

Many times as steward, I would see what I thought was a clear violation... only to find language in an article or LOA that superseded it. This is where wisdom and experience is needed with the G/C and stewards. I used to keep color coded tabs on the pages of my copy of the agreement to reference ALL articles applicable to any given issue.

For instance all pages with language regarding seniority were red, overtime, blue, scope green etc. This worked well, and it allowed me to research potential grievances thoroughly, and quickly...

 

[mike33]

I agree Mike...

Many times as steward, I would see what I thought was a clear violation... only to find language in an article or LOA that superseded it. This is where wisdom and experience is needed with the G/C and stewards. I used to keep color coded tabs on the pages of my copy of the agreement to reference ALL articles applicable to any given issue.

For instance all pages with language regarding seniority were red, overtime, blue, scope green etc. This worked well, and it allowed me to research potential grievances thoroughly, and quickly...

nice job. Thats a real good idea