2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[john john]

Wondering about the part-time lead was this a company want or a union want?

 

[NYer]

I like the scope. Finally
There would be less of a reason for sUs to need a joint contract than sAA. But since sAA controls the numbers, a joint contract could pass prolly with a 7-10 flight min even though that would b a concession to the current sUS TA.

You're really not that smart, are you.

The ONLY reason that Scope language is as it is, would be to his the current position until the Joint CBA. How can you even fathom an airline would man EVERY station they got into under an environment where the opposite is the goal of each airline and their stockholders.

I know you need to save face because you were monumentally wrong with the question of the mediation and supposed leverage....tsk ,tsk.

 

[WeAAsles]

You're really not that smart, are you.

The ONLY reason that Scope language is as it is, would be to his the current position until the Joint CBA. How can you even fathom an airline would man EVERY station they got into under an environment where the opposite is the goal of each airline and their stockholders.

I know you need to save face because you were monumentally wrong with the question of the mediation and supposed leverage....tsk ,tsk.

Of course Tim was "monumentally" wrong. From what we've seen about him that's usually the case and it's because he always put's his "personal" campaign before the thoughts of the members he wants to represent.

Good point on "Scope" It could be difficult to convince the company to subsidize members making $25 per hour in some stations where they aren't generating the revenue to afford those rates? Unless the people flying out of those stations are transferring on to other destinations that can support the origin city.

The other problem I think I see is the Part Time issue. PTers pay double the medical to support subsidized lower rate medical for FTers in the IAM contract, where thankfully we do not in our TWU contract. I don't think morally that's right and it creates a situation where the company would prefer to have PT employees over FT for the cost savings. I have to wonder what the final outcome is going to be when we all get to vote on a JCBA? 

 

[Tim Nelson]

Of course Tim was "monumentally" wrong. From what we've seen about him that's usually the case and it's because he always put's his "personal" campaign before the thoughts of the members he wants to represent.

Good point on "Scope" It could be difficult to convince the company to subsidize members making $25 per hour in some stations where they aren't generating the revenue to afford those rates? Unless the people flying out of those stations are transferring on to other destinations that can support the origin city.

The other problem I think I see is the Part Time issue. PTers pay double the medical to support subsidized lower rate medical for FTers in the IAM contract, where thankfully we do not in our TWU contract. I don't think morally that's right and it creates a situation where the company would prefer to have PT employees over FT for the cost savings. I have to wonder what the final outcome is going to be when we all get to vote on a JCBA? 

 

Not sure where I was monumentally wrong at?  The leverage was strong. I remember NYer saying to take a small bump in wages and any crumbs you can get otherwise, instead of fighting for every small station.  NYer was presenting his "reality of the environment' speeches mentioning the impracticality of getting scope for all stations.  Now, it seems he continues to carry that flag and is already once again, you and him, are presenting your realities that small stations will need to be sacrificed. 

 

[Tim Nelson]

Congratulation on achieving a workable contract in an environment that is some of them most challenging in the country. Going up against all odds with some the best negotiators in the business and some of the worst company feet draggers know to mankind. GOOD LUCK UNION BOTHERS AND SISTERS

Congratulations seems like a strong word considering that our complete health care plan will be in the hands of an arbitrator or management. The result includes the possibility of abolishing all 3 plans [100,90,80] and establishing a new plan which most likely will involve higher deductibles, out of pocket, contributions, etc.  In fact, you can kiss the 100, and 90 plans goodbye in 2018 as it will be extremely difficult to maintain these plans without the burden of the excise tax. 
Since the excise tax is the trigger, the company will have a right to abolish plans that go over $10,200 yearly cost for an individual and $27,000 for a family, if it can't modify them under the tax penalties.  [Obama hammered workers on this one] because no company can afford to eat an additional 40% excise tax.   My question is why did the labor movement lie to everyone and tell its members that Obamacare was great? 
 
Republicans are saying they want to abolish obamacare, so does that mean that I should vote Republican to get rid of the excise tax that Obama has hammered the middle class working people with? I mean, he taxes the corporations but then they pass down the buck to us or water down the plans. 

 

[Kev3188]

 

You're really not that smart, are you.

How can you even fathom an airline would man EVERY station

 
How can you not?
 

Good point on "Scope" It could be difficult to convince the company to subsidize members making $25 per hour in some stations where they aren't generating the revenue to afford those rates? Unless the people flying out of those stations are transferring on to other destinations that can support the origin city.

I doubt there's any cities still staffed from either L-carrier that are "that" small anymore.

That said-and just my .02- but even at $25, given the revenue we all generate for our respective carriers, we're worth the return on any investment.

 

[WeAAsles]

Not sure where I was monumentally wrong at?  The leverage was strong. I remember NYer saying to take a small bump in wages and any crumbs you can get otherwise, instead of fighting for every small station.  NYer was presenting his "reality of the environment' speeches mentioning the impracticality of getting scope for all stations.  Now, it seems he continues to carry that flag and is already once again, you and him, are presenting your realities that small stations will need to be sacrificed. 

Not at all am I saying small stations need to be sacrificed Tim. But just like your PTers subsidise the rates of medical so Fters can enjoy a cheaper price, the same may have to be done to protect "some" cities?

The question is will the company subsidize them through HUB profits or would we wind up having to do it through smaller gains in our JCBA? And would the members agree or understand that?

 

[WeAAsles]

Congratulations seems like a strong word considering that our complete health care plan will be in the hands of an arbitrator or management. The result includes the possibility of abolishing all 3 plans [100,90,80] and establishing a new plan which most likely will involve higher deductibles, out of pocket, contributions, etc.  In fact, you can kiss the 100, and 90 plans goodbye in 2018 as it will be extremely difficult to maintain these plans without the burden of the excise tax. 
Since the excise tax is the trigger, the company will have a right to abolish plans that go over $10,200 yearly cost for an individual and $27,000 for a family, if it can't modify them under the tax penalties.  [Obama hammered workers on this one] because no company can afford to eat an additional 40% excise tax.   My question is why did the labor movement lie to everyone and tell its members that Obamacare was great? 
 
Republicans are saying they want to abolish obamacare, so does that mean that I should vote Republican to get rid of the excise tax that Obama has hammered the middle class working people with? I mean, he taxes the corporations but then they pass down the buck to us or water down the plans. 

I don't think you should worry too much about it Tim. We can always shift the burdon of those extra costs on down to the Part Timers, right?

 

[737823]

I just hope all 17 sAA stations maintain scope but stations lurking with the threshold like ATL, SAT, STL and have cinderella dates may be endangered as more S80s are replaced with Envoy/Republic flying.

Josh

 

[robbedagain]

Kev  some of the smaller cities mainline is staffed is RNO   may be LGB
 
josh  go look at iam141.org and read the US TA  bec you really have to see the scope and how it is significantly improved

 

[WeAAsles]

 
 
How can you not?
 


I doubt there's any cities still staffed from either L-carrier that are "that" small anymore.

That said-and just my .02- but even at $25, given the revenue we all generate for our respective carriers, we're worth the return on any investment.
 

 
 
How can you not?
 


I doubt there's any cities still staffed from either L-carrier that are "that" small anymore.

That said-and just my .02- but even at $25, given the revenue we all generate for our respective carriers, we're worth the return on any investment.

There aren't any left on our side Kev. Not so sure on the other side? My interest in the future is going to be what the formula will be for station RE-Staffing?

The last few years the airlines have been micro managing where revenue is generated. They haven't been looking to subsidize anything. They are trying to size the right aircraft to generate profits but that seems to be difficult especially when even Commuter pilots are demanding better wages. People in smaller communities simply may not be able to afford the privilege of an airline servicing their community in the future?
 

 

 

[737823]

Kev  some of the smaller cities mainline is staffed is RNO   may be LGB
 
josh  go look at iam141.org and read the US TA  bec you really have to see the scope and how it is significantly improved

Robbed that's for US. US doesn't have mainline fleet at SAT or STL but does at ATL.

Josh

 

[john john]

Of course Tim was "monumentally" wrong. From what we've seen about him that's usually the case and it's because he always put's his "personal" campaign before the thoughts of the members he wants to represent.

Good point on "Scope" It could be difficult to convince the company to subsidize members making $25 per hour in some stations where they aren't generating the revenue to afford those rates? Unless the people flying out of those stations are transferring on to other destinations that can support the origin city.

The other problem I think I see is the Part Time issue. PTers pay double the medical to support subsidized lower rate medical for FTers in the IAM contract, where thankfully we do not in our TWU contract. I don't think morally that's right and it creates a situation where the company would prefer to have PT employees over FT for the cost savings. I have to wonder what the final outcome is going to be when we all get to vote on a JCBA?

How about enough of who was wrong and who was right. Your point on the company making part-timers a main part of the workforce is noted and should be a major concern. Seen the company in the past abuse this situation. Legacy American has been unionizes a long time and should have/had solid past history language in their contract

 

[robbedagain]

are you sure about SAT   I do know we have some Airbus that flies into SAT   I don't remember how many though   but that may change

 

[john john]

You're really not that smart, are you.

How can you even fathom an airline would man EVERY station they got into under an environment where the opposite is the goal of each airline and their stockholders.

There you go TWU on the record a hand