What's new

2014 Fleet Service Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
700UW said:
Then since you arent a US employee and never have been and not an IAM member and never have been one, and never been a ramper, stay out of this one too.
I actually met Josh the other day. He caught me at work.  We had a coffee together.  Interesting conversation as he seems to have many friends in this airline.  Young guy.
 
And it says all about you if you met and like an anti-iam, anti-union, anti-worker and anti-us person.

Why should someone vote for you if you like him and he stands for everything opposite of the labor movement?
 
Tim Nelson said:
This is the figure that will be used in September.  The figure will rise to over $24 later in the contract.  For discussion, it's best to focus on the compensation of this year imo.    At any rate, it's much higher of a cost for the company than paying .65 cents an hour into a IAMPF for 40% of our members. Just saying.
Right now with 19 years I make $22.81 with base rate and longevity. At the end of the contract wages will be $24.47 for clerks ( Not Crew Chiefs) unless there is a modification due to the industry averaging Sept 2015? Not counting that possibility then I will be making $24.77 on 9/11/17 (base and longevity)
 
cltrat said:
I suspect that many of that 70% may have buyers remorse at this point esp CLE members and the many who have been been forced to drop to part time. apathy? mybe there will be some but not much on the UA side now on the US side there will be apathy aplenty.
Oh, there is a lot of "buyers remorse" now. That's for sure. People have been lied to about LOA #5 and many people have been reduced to PT because of it. We've been working so lean now, and they cut so deep, with FT to PT, that they want to bring some of the now reduced PT back to FT (but on a temp basis). But that messes with some people's situations. And CLE wasn't supposed to happen that quickly. And with the company's new "attendance policy", people are really pissed, whether with the union or company, morale is down, and people are upset.
 
Tim Nelson said:
I actually met Josh the other day. He caught me at work.  We had a coffee together.  Interesting conversation as he seems to have many friends in this airline.  Young guy.
Tim, I had a great time and hope to catch you on my next ORD layover. Generally don't fly through ORD but I do occasionally.
 
700UW said:
And it says all about you if you met and like an anti-iam, anti-union, anti-worker and anti-us person. Why should someone vote for you if you like him and he stands for everything opposite of the labor movement?
Even if I was any of the above it would show Tim can tolerate an alternative perspective and point of view. Not everyone sees things the way you see them. I am pro-worker, you are correct I am not a fan of USAIR but I support the employees. I happen to believe you guys would be better served unorganized than paying dues to the money hungry IAM for nothing in return.

Josh
 
737823 said:
Tim, I had a great time and hope to catch you on my next ORD layover. Generally don't fly through ORD but I do occasionally.
 

Even if I was any of the above it would show Tim can tolerate an alternative perspective and point of view. Not everyone sees things the way you see them. I am pro-worker, you are correct I am not a fan of USAIR but I support the employees. I happen to believe you guys would be better served unorganized than paying dues to the money hungry IAM for nothing in return.

Josh
Voting to be unorganized is pure, unadulterated insanity. You would have 2 of the three biggest airlines in fleet with no CBA's and that would absolutely push those 2 groups to severe paycuts just because it would be so hard to get a union back in. The average Non-Union baggage handler according to BLS figures makes $11.67 per hour with no benefits.

Before the debate turns into "Will They" do that or not? Just the sheer reality that they could is beyond enough for me to fight NEVER to see that day come.
 
700UW said:
And it says all about you if you met and like an anti-iam, anti-union, anti-worker and anti-us person. Why should someone vote for you if you like him and he stands for everything opposite of the labor movement?
I said he was interesting.  I haven't judged him much farther than that.   If you believe all of the things you say about him then why do you talk to him as well?  
 
Did you talk to dues objectors?   I show everyone respect, even those who I disagree with almost entirely.  Unlike you, I don't call people POS if they are not my favorite.
 
WeAAsles said:
Right now with 19 years I make $22.81 with base rate and longevity. At the end of the contract wages will be $24.47 for clerks ( Not Crew Chiefs) unless there is a modification due to the industry averaging Sept 2015? Not counting that possibility then I will be making $24.77 on 9/11/17 (base and longevity)
for quick reference, what is the top of longevity?
 
Tim Nelson said:
I actually met Josh the other day. He caught me at work.  We had a coffee together.  Interesting conversation as he seems to have many friends in this airline.  Young guy.
Did you guys happen to take a picture together? Something to maybe share on your FB pages?
 
WeAAsles said:
Voting to be unorganized is pure, unadulterated insanity. You would have 2 of the three biggest airlines in fleet with no CBA's and that would absolutely push those 2 groups to severe paycuts just because it would be so hard to get a union back in. The average Non-Union baggage handler according to BLS figures makes $11.67 per hour with no benefits.

Before the debate turns into "Will They" do that or not? Just the sheer reality that they could is beyond enough for me to fight NEVER to see that day come.
Out of 14,000+ I bet no more than 100 vote 'No'.   I even think the CWA stands a very good chance to win that representational election.  Especially with the way management just won against the non represented retirees. The CWA should pound that one item.
 
WeAAsles said:
.30 cents for 20 years.
As far as the retirement options, I think an option for members to choose which one is best.  The IAM did that at Alaska.  A one time option for those in a 401k to come over to the IAMPF.  Some chose to switch, some didn't from what I hear. That's what we should be pressing for.
 
Tim Nelson said:
Out of 14,000+ I bet no more than 100 vote 'No'.   I even think the CWA stands a very good chance to win that representational election.  Especially with the way management just won against the non represented retirees. The CWA should pound that one item.
It's sad what happened to the former NWA represented members over at Delta. But Delta was used to being unorganized and they put on one massive anti-union campaign there.

Sadly I think it will be over 100 but not enough anywhere near for the NO to win. But over 100 because people today are naturally stupid, uninterested and unengaged. All they give a damn about is that they have their new I-Phone.
 
Tim Nelson said:
As far as the retirement options, I think an option for members to choose which one is best.  The IAM did that at Alaska.  A one time option for those in a 401k to come over to the IAMPF.  Some chose to switch, some didn't from what I hear. That's what we should be pressing for.
As I said I'd be fine with that but "I" don't want to be forced into something that I feel in the future "possibly" will provide me less value when I need it most?
 
Show us the Freakn Proposals from the union and the company?  WTH?  
The union moved downward as well.  Our members need to see exactly what is being proposed and need our leaders to finally put the "Release" Bong down.  Nobody is getting released, most already knew that but now it is settled.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top