2015 Fleet Service thread

[robbedagain]

not in the case of UA  Al   They (mostly CO I believe) voted for the money    same thing happened in the 2008 contract    remember freedom  he admitted voting for the money knowing full well it containted throwing coworkers out the window.   People have got to speak up and let the union know what needed   Scope above all else should be the number one priority bec scope is the job security 

 

[ograc]

 It sounds like they must have been misinformed and or misled.   By whom or what  hmmm...? Could it have been by an organization in the ASS ?

 
Mislead or uninformed. Presented a bill of goods or a choice to vote based strictly on a bump in hourly and retro? The debate goes on and on. Kind of like a dog chasing it's tail. The mindset needs to change across the board. Let's learn from the past and focus on the future. Going forward; all parties, the Association NCs, the respective unions and most importantly the members will have an opportunity to change or repeat history. We need to get this right and reverse the trend. 

 

[Albert]

 
Mislead or uninformed. Presented a bill of goods or a choice to vote based strictly on a bump in hourly and retro? The debate goes on and on. Kind of like a dog chasing it's tail. The mindset needs to change across the board. Let's learn from the past and focus on the future. Going forward; all parties, the Association NCs, the respective unions and most importantly the members will have an opportunity to change or repeat history. We need to get this right and reverse the trend. 

I dont know where you work but here they were encouraged to vote yes by their union. Some people are sheep and the union knows it and uses it to their advantage

 

[Albert]

Clueless we never reached an agreement with the company and I was a Stock Clerk, my job was safe and not outsourced.

We never organized the vendors.

Keep up the misinformation.

Right now as I speak the cleaners (vendors) that are servicing Usairs planes are in the IAM. The same job you did and the same union you were (are) in. Your denial has reached a institutional level as has your obsession with the IAM I suggest you go to Austria where a panel can evaluate  your mental state

 

[Albert]

not in the case of UA  Al   They (mostly CO I believe) voted for the money    same thing happened in the 2008 contract    remember freedom  he admitted voting for the money knowing full well it containted throwing coworkers out the window.   People have got to speak up and let the union know what needed   Scope above all else should be the number one priority bec scope is the job security 

 Scope is number 1 because you are in a small station

 

[robbedagain]

I would not consider my station small compared to two other places ive been in but on the other hand scope SHOULD BE NBR 1 regardless where u work and regardless whether its a hub or not

 

[Albert]

t

I would not consider my station small compared to two other places ive been in but on the other hand scope SHOULD BE NBR 1 regardless where u work and regardless whether its a hub or not

 So i guess you are willing to open all of the former LUS and LAA cities that were closed over the years in exchange for pay and benefits. I dont want to see anyone lose their job at the same time I dont want to subsidize  a city that only works 2 flights a day. But you are all afraid to answer me when I ask what  is a fair amount of flights for a station to remain open. I say about 7 or 8 daily mainline flights

 

[JFK Fleet Service]

not in the case of UA  Al   They (mostly CO I believe) voted for the money 

Got it wrong,it was the UA types that went for the money,remember JetJob and RetroNow posting for the TA in the UA forums? They were supposedly IAM types and vanished after ratification.

Ask T5 towbar,UA wanted their retro,and by god they were going to get it!

 

[ograc]

 So i guess you are willing to open all of the former LUS and LAA cities that were closed over the years in exchange for pay and benefits. I dont want to see anyone lose their job at the same time I dont want to subsidize  a city that only works 2 flights a day. But you are all afraid to answer me when I ask what  is a fair amount of flights for a station to remain open. I say about 7 or 8 daily mainline flights

 
Consider this Albert. I work in a station that has 10 mainline a day and countless express flights. The IAM represented LUS Fleet Service absorbed all below wing former Envoy work one year ago this month. not sure what the total departures are out of here a day but I can assure you it's enough IMO. Norm is 6-7 flights in an 8 hour shift. I spent my first 19 years in a major hub. Never recall working that many flights in 8 hours. Your insinuation that you subsidize anything is, in itself self centered, and misinformed. Now we're going to point fingers about who works harder? Really? You are being led like a sheep to the sheers. Your post demonstrates the mindset that needs to change. You are not more deserving than another member, who shares your craft and class, based on what size station you work in. Take off the blinders. Unionism is about the betterment of the ENTIRE membership. We need to realize the importance of PROTECTING the existing work first. Then negotiate improvements to wages and working conditions for all. 
 

 

[Salty Dog]

Will the part time health insurance cost the same as the full timers?

 

[T5towbar]

not in the case of UA  Al   They (mostly CO I believe) voted for the money    same thing happened in the 2008 contract    remember freedom  he admitted voting for the money knowing full well it containted throwing coworkers out the window.   People have got to speak up and let the union know what needed   Scope above all else should be the number one priority bec scope is the job security 

Incorrect......
WE on the CO side didn't get much out of the deal, and especially money. The retro was for sUA. They had to throw us a few coins to keep from raising a stink. Many of us (save IAH from what I've heard) voted NO. WE felt pain before the contract was signed when we lost all of our cargo on the sCO side. JOBS WERE BEING LOST BEFORE THE CONTRACT WAS EVEN VOTED ON!!!!!   The rumor was that ORD and IAH (the two biggest hubs) voted in the affirmative for it. The YES votes had to come from somewhere.......   I myself know that EWR overwhelmingly voted NO, along with DEN. And subsequently both of our hubs felt the most pain, which we are slowly recovering from.  We we cut so deep, it was a shame.
 
I (personally) got NOTHING from this deal. SCOPE is more important than money. I saw the pain when hundreds of my co-workers were bumped out; sent to the street; or furloughed to PT. Only now that some are coming back (the furloughs; the restoring of FT from PT.) Many did not want to come back, and even with the JFK/LGA transfers coming in, we will have to hire of the street. Postings are out now. Which is a good thing. 
 

Got it wrong,it was the UA types that went for the money,remember JetJob and RetroNow posting for the TA in the UA forums? They were supposedly IAM types and vanished after ratification.

Ask T5 towbar,UA wanted their retro,and by god they were going to get it!

ABSOLUTELY.........
Many took the money and ran.  And some ran themselves out of a job when the ax came swingin'

 

[robbedagain]

Thx guys for my mistake. Apologies there. Agree w u Orgac. Al before Dec 2014 LUS had nearly 20 mainline plus roughly 10-15 commuters then we added in LAA metal and they had give or take 4-5 mainline plus commuters their ramp was Envoy. I believe the limit we currently have now should stand if not enhance it further.

 

[700UW]

Consider this Albert. I work in a station that has 10 mainline a day and countless express flights. The IAM represented LUS Fleet Service absorbed all below wing former Envoy work one year ago this month. not sure what the total departures are out of here a day but I can assure you it's enough IMO. Norm is 6-7 flights in an 8 hour shift. I spent my first 19 years in a major hub. Never recall working that many flights in 8 hours. Your insinuation that you subsidize anything is, in itself self centered, and misinformed. Now we're going to point fingers about who works harder? Really? You are being led like a sheep to the sheers. Your post demonstrates the mindset that needs to change. You are not more deserving than another member, who shares your craft and class, based on what size station you work in. Take off the blinders. Unionism is about the betterment of the ENTIRE membership. We need to realize the importance of PROTECTING the existing work first. Then negotiate improvements to wages and working conditions for all.

Best post, but you are wasting your time, he is greedy and is part of the "I got mine" crowd.

 

[Kev3188]

Consider this Albert. I work in a station that has 10 mainline a day and countless express flights. The IAM represented LUS Fleet Service absorbed all below wing former Envoy work one year ago this month. not sure what the total departures are out of here a day but I can assure you it's enough IMO. Norm is 6-7 flights in an 8 hour shift. I spent my first 19 years in a major hub. Never recall working that many flights in 8 hours. Your insinuation that you subsidize anything is, in itself self centered, and misinformed. Now we're going to point fingers about who works harder? Really? You are being led like a sheep to the sheers. Your post demonstrates the mindset that needs to change. You are not more deserving than another member, who shares your craft and class, based on what size station you work in. Take off the blinders. Unionism is about the betterment of the ENTIRE membership. We need to realize the importance of PROTECTING the existing work first. Then negotiate improvements to wages and working conditions for all.

^This^

Line stations are underrated, as is the worker productivity in them...

 

[ograc]

Will the part time health insurance cost the same as the full timers?

 
If your question is will this disparity in what a part timer has to contribute to health insurance vs. a full timer with a new JCBA; that remains to be seen. IMO... the company will resist any improvements to the part time contribution rate. They're saving way too much money on this issue. IMO... don't be surprised if the company wants a higher contribution rate for both. Additionally, I believe the company's agenda will be to increase the number of part time employees in the future. The company's position will be if you want equal contribution rates for health insurance; the union must concede on other compensation issues. For example; no or little hourly wage increase, less vacation, holidays or sick time, more outsourcing of existing work in outline stations and or existing catering jobs. If these future negotiations mirror the past; The company already has a $$$ figure established that they are willing to throw our way in a JCBA. As far as they're concerned the union and the membership can choose how they want to divide the $$$. Anyone who believes the company will come into negotiations, with the posture of replenishing all they have taken through the years and multiple bankruptcies, is being naïve. Holding part timers to a higher contribution rate is big $$$ savings for the company. Their question will be what is the union willing to give up in return? Their primary concern is profitability and return to the shareholders. Recognition of past sacrifices of the membership and employees is not on their radar. It's going to be up to us (the IAM, NCs and membership) to put it on their radar. This will not come easy. Lock and Load! Stay calm and empty the magazine!