Aircraft maint issues

[aintgotnotimefodat]

Yes he did say that. He was talking about our current TWU and IAM AA Contracts though. Watch the video again.

Now again.

Sorry I don't listen to company videos....LOL

So post the Contract that is so great and ask why Doug Parker has said “straight from the horses mouth” that he’ll give you in a heartbeat any other Contract that’s out there? (In the industry)

Why is the Company pushing to mirror those other agreements there Jethro?

 

[aintgotnotimefodat]

Sorry I don't listen to company videos...LOL


But it is sad, when the company puts out more info than your own union, that u pay dues to...

 

[Vortilon]

And what if Fleet Services head count numbers were comparable by percentage of Fleet size to both UAL and Delta.

Saying that you have more (in house) Headcount than other’s is not a guilt trip.

AMFA inspired the Contract in 2001 for AMT’s? Well even though it only lasted 2 years (Maybe that was the plan anyway) who inspired the Contract for Fleet Service then since that was also the best Contract we ever got too. Was that also AMFA inspired?

Look, headcount is none of my concern. Most any American would prefer more Americans employed. I'm pretty sure we all work here to make money doing what we are schooled and trained to do, and make as much as possible doing it. I'm done accepting less to subsidize headcount, and so is everybody else. So, yeah it really has been nothing more than "oh you're so greedy, why not accept less in pay and benefits so more can remain employed a little longer."

Fleet just hung on to our coatails in 2001.

 

[WeAAsles]

Look, headcount is none of my concern. Most any American would prefer more Americans employed. I'm pretty sure we all work here to make money doing what we are schooled and trained to do, and make as much as possible doing it. I'm done accepting less to subsidize headcount, and so is everybody else. So, yeah it really has been nothing more than "oh you're so greedy, why not accept less in pay and benefits so more can remain employed a little longer."

Fleet just hung on to our coatails in 2001.

HOME RUN cause you said the TRUTH how you feel. All I’ve ever tried to get out of most of you. And we didn’t ride any coattails in 01. 2016 maybe? But not 2001.

 

[Buck]

https://www.news-press.com/story/ne...alujet-crash-everglades-killed-110/497044002/



A $10,000 reward has been offered for information on a fugitive airline mechanic who may have had a role in the crash.

For more than 20 years, the FBI’s Miami Field Office has been searching for Valenzuela-Reyes, who fled before his federal trial.

Valenzuela-Reyes worked for the airline’s maintenance contractor, SabreTech. He was facing criminal charges in 1999 after crash investigators determined he had a role in the mishandling and packaging of oxygen generators that were placed in the DC-9’s cargo hold.

I bet he had Fleet Service helpers

 

[swamt]

I swear Swampy you are bi polar on the SWA page it's not enough for you to vote yes. On this American page AMFA is wonderful and they did a fantastic job, going line by line taking their time to produce a T/A.

What you fail to understand, and everyone else here does understand is I will not make my decision until after the RS's. I have stated that from day one, period. So How can you sit there and claim I am a yes vote in one thread and a no vote in another? Comprehension man. Our NC did great holding out for what the membership wishes are, and yes, as history has proven in our past, if we were teamsters we would have been done long ago with our scope ripped to shreds, no ETOPS maint done by us, no Hawaii, more international outsourcing and the loss of heads and positions (not jobs unless they retire). I can still post why I disagree with the numbers being offered and explain why we should be getting more, that does not mean I'm a no vote as of yet. You just can't see that I am working thru it all and weighing all options, and yes, one option is to vote it down and hold for what we really deserve not just what the co. thinks we should get, or what they want to buy us on the cheap for the 6 year absence of raises to focus on the investors. I will tell you this, I am not a flat out yes vote either. And I have told you what it would take for me to vote yes without any input from my NC and union, just make me whole in all years past and going forward with a history average 3% raises, med caps, retirement boost, and maybe even an early out option so guys could retire early, LOA 2 stays, scope untouched, Hawaii and ETOPs as previously agreed to (and that's with the union moving) etc... No matter what happens we are sitting just fine with everything as is, if this gets voted down we will take however long is needed, but the co. has to remember that full retro will still be a must. All they would really have to do is pad the contract in 3 main areas and they would have a yes vote, but as is there are too many missing items and they know this. I repeat driver, my mind is not made up, but, it is leaning more towards the no vote as we go into the NC and union RS's and then I will make my final decision. Comprende now???
And BTW; all the "mechanics" except for one from SWA understands exactly where I stand, they really do get it...

 

[B737 driver]

What you fail to understand, and everyone else here does understand is I will not make my decision until after the RS's. I have stated that from day one, period. So How can you sit there and claim I am a yes vote in one thread and a no vote in another? Comprehension man. Our NC did great holding out for what the membership wishes are, and yes, as history has proven in our past, if we were teamsters we would have been done long ago with our scope ripped to shreds, no ETOPS maint done by us, no Hawaii, more international outsourcing and the loss of heads and positions (not jobs unless they retire). I can still post why I disagree with the numbers being offered and explain why we should be getting more, that does not mean I'm a no vote as of yet. You just can't see that I am working thru it all and weighing all options, and yes, one option is to vote it down and hold for what we really deserve not just what the co. thinks we should get, or what they want to buy us on the cheap for the 6 year absence of raises to focus on the investors. I will tell you this, I am not a flat out yes vote either. And I have told you what it would take for me to vote yes without any input from my NC and union, just make me whole in all years past and going forward with a history average 3% raises, med caps, retirement boost, and maybe even an early out option so guys could retire early, LOA 2 stays, scope untouched, Hawaii and ETOPs as previously agreed to (and that's with the union moving) etc... No matter what happens we are sitting just fine with everything as is, if this gets voted down we will take however long is needed, but the co. has to remember that full retro will still be a must. All they would really have to do is pad the contract in 3 main areas and they would have a yes vote, but as is there are too many missing items and they know this. I repeat driver, my mind is not made up, but, it is leaning more towards the no vote as we go into the NC and union RS's and then I will make my final decision. Comprende now???
And BTW; all the "mechanics" except for one from SWA understands exactly where I stand, they really do get it...

Oh I understand perfectly, if stuff doesn't change , you will vote no. I just don't personally understand , how you think this mess is totally the company's fault, and no blame rest with our union. It's one thing to hold out for your language, and how do you know what the Teamsters would do? We always had not bad language from them. If you were going to kick me out, I wouldn't spend a bunch of money on grievances either. When they were laying guys off at Northwest airlines, they told the guys here is your lay off notice, here is your AMFA grievance, now roll your tool boxes out. So the Teamsters are not the only union to leave a mess. Just ask the American guys what the IAM left with the TWA. Where I am at we are just tired of the excuses. We are working on the Alaska airlines integration per our AMFA president. So if you don't like the deal, and you don't think it is fair, then vote No.

 

[swamt]

Oh I understand perfectly, if stuff doesn't change , you will vote no. I just don't personally understand , how you think this mess is totally the company's fault, and no blame rest with our union. It's one thing to hold out for your language, and how do you know what the Teamsters would do? We always had not bad language from them. If you were going to kick me out, I wouldn't spend a bunch of money on grievances either. When they were laying guys off at Northwest airlines, they told the guys here is your lay off notice, here is your AMFA grievance, now roll your tool boxes out. So the Teamsters are not the only union to leave a mess. Just ask the American guys what the IAM left with the TWA. Where I am at we are just tired of the excuses. We are working on the Alaska airlines integration per our AMFA president. So if you don't like the deal, and you don't think it is fair, then vote No.

Correct. If offer stays as is I will vote No. If you cannot understand a person wanting to be made whole then that's your problem not mine. I do blame the company 100% for the first 5 years, the after 5 years is simply regular nego time frame, which is at this point not even one year. And, you simply cannot fault the union for just caving to the first offer from company after the 5 years just because the company wants it to happen that way, it's called nego's. How do I know what the teamsters would do? That's easy, I witnessed it first hand with the teamsters, I was very active during the teamsters nego's and I was one of the few that brought it all out. I know because I witnessed it first hand and in person, that's how. I will not let co. threats stop me from voting for or against an agreement. If I don't like it and not fair for me and my family I will vote No and proudly say so and why. Intimidation by the co. will just spark up more No votes watch...

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

I'm done accepting less to subsidize headcount, and so is everybody else. So, yeah it really has been nothing more than "oh you're so greedy, why not accept less in pay and benefits so more can remain employed a little longer."

Sounds logical to me.

Fleet just hung on to our coatails in 2001.

I rather doubt it. Even if they did who's fault is that?

 

[B737 driver]

Correct. If offer stays as is I will vote No. If you cannot understand a person wanting to be made whole then that's your problem not mine. I do blame the company 100% for the first 5 years, the after 5 years is simply regular nego time frame, which is at this point not even one year. And, you simply cannot fault the union for just caving to the first offer from company after the 5 years just because the company wants it to happen that way, it's called nego's. How do I know what the teamsters would do? That's easy, I witnessed it first hand with the teamsters, I was very active during the teamsters nego's and I was one of the few that brought it all out. I know because I witnessed it first hand and in person, that's how. I will not let co. threats stop me from voting for or against an agreement. If I don't like it and not fair for me and my family I will vote No and proudly say so and why. Intimidation by the co. will just spark up more No votes watch...

Good for you, do what you want, the company saves more money, and the other groups get more, as their stuff comes due. Why we argue among ourselves.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Fleet just hung on to our coatails in 2001.

The more I think about this post the more it pisses me off. I won't deny the TWU has leveraged title groups to maximize dues. That being said that is an action of the TWU. Fleet Service Clerks are not plotting and scheming to get YOUR money, they are just trying to get the best deal they can, just as you would.

So why don't you knock this "riding our coattails" B.S. off. If your going to complain then it should be about the TWU leveraging title groups to line their pockets not against rank and file employees trying to earn a living.

Fool.

 

[Vortilon]

The more I think about this post the more it pisses me off. I won't deny the TWU has leveraged title groups to maximize dues. That being said that is an action of the TWU. Fleet Service Clerks are not plotting and scheming to get YOUR money, they are just trying to get the best deal they can, just as you would.

So why don't you knock this "riding our coattails" B.S. off. If your going to complain then it should be about the TWU leveraging title groups to line their pockets not against rank and file employees trying to earn a living.

Fool.

Hey Bro, don't misunderstand my post. If I were you, I would do the same thing. So, to be clear, I am not blaming the individuals so much as the way the whole thing is set up. Bottom line, there is zero benefit for AMTs to negotiate with non AMTs. It's just the nature of this communist style union - to take a little more from the higher paid, and redistribute it to the rest. So a part time clerk with 1 year seniority - has has the exact same benefits as a 30 year AMT, and up until not that long ago - got a full vote on our contract.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Hey Bro, don't misunderstand my post. If I were you, I would do the same thing. So, to be clear, I am not blaming the individuals so much as the way the whole thing is set up. Bottom line, there is zero benefit for AMTs to negotiate with non AMTs. It's just the nature of this communist style union - to take a little more from the higher paid, and redistribute it to the rest. So a part time clerk with 1 year seniority - has has the exact same benefits as a 30 year AMT, and up until not that long ago - got a full vote on our contract.

Well in that case I would say "TWU leveraging title groups to maximize dues" instead of "Fleet Service riding our coattails". That being said how many times did mechanics vote to take lower pay to "save" jobs. That hardly had anything to do with leveraging title groups. That bit was self induced. Your compensation issues go a bit deeper than redistribution of wealth.

 

[swamt]

Good for you, do what you want, the company saves more money, and the other groups get more, as their stuff comes due. Why we argue among ourselves.

Good. Now that you understand, this should stop your antics.

 

[B737 driver]

Good. Now that you understand, this should stop your antics.

The only thing I understand as a former union steward, the Union's job is to negotiate a contract, present the contract to the membership, and let the members decide. When they are stonewalling for whatever reason, to not bring it to T/A. They are not doing their job.