American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[WeAAsles]

So PRez commented on Jetnet:
"‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‍There are several reasons this isn't a good offer:
1. Thousands of jobs will disappear through attrition/buy outs.
2. (a)The Company will pocket money because of loss of jobs,
(b)loss of LUS insurance
(c)and loss of LUS pension.
3. Profit sharing dismal compared to DL/UA.
This is a piece of garbage offer."


#1 does't negatively affect anyone on the property ~wether you like it or not.
#2 (a) Thats how it works, they give us huge raises, they get something in return. If they continue to make bank, those left the next time around get more and better huge raises.
(b) LAA insurance not a big difference for the vast majority , it should not be the reason we don't vote
(c) LUS pension not "Lost", it's frozen, just like LAA and the 401k has been enhanced, it's up to each individual member to decide if its in their best interest going forward, but each member would get vote on this. What I found interesting is the current LAA 401K is a better deal than the scam IAMPF.
#3 Please lay out the dismal difference for all to see, saying so doesn't make it so.
Show me.

Ok P Rez, if thats your case, without seeing the rest of the contract, I'm calling it weak, but please show us the whole thing and let the membership decide after waiting several years now, which direction we go from here.

I believe that you are a Mechanic right? You do know that P. Rez is an IAM AGC for Fleet and it’s his primary duty to represent the Members who voted for him to represent them.

Just like your TWU President represents you. And mine is supposed to represent me.

Now Chill out you.

 

[Traymark]

Voting is liberating.
I wanted to vote on my representation.
I was denied.
The result is a fractured representation taking far too long when the company is at max profits.

It's time to vote.
If it is a bad deal, it will get voted down, CHILL.

 

[737823]

So PRez commented on Jetnet:
"‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‍There are several reasons this isn't a good offer:
1. Thousands of jobs will disappear through attrition/buy outs.
2. (a)The Company will pocket money because of loss of jobs,
(b)loss of LUS insurance
(c)and loss of LUS pension.
3. Profit sharing dismal compared to DL/UA.
This is a piece of garbage offer."
So Weaase~ apparently PRez is saying it's horrible horrible~

#1 does't negatively affect anyone on the property ~wether you like it or not.
#2 (a) Thats how it works, they give us huge raises, they get something in return. If they continue to make bank, those left the next time around get more and better huge raises.
(b) LAA insurance not a big difference for the vast majority , it should not be the reason we don't vote
(c) LUS pension not "Lost", it's frozen, just like LAA and the 401k has been enhanced, it's up to each individual member to decide if its in their best interest going forward, but each member would get vote on this. What I found interesting is the current LAA 401K is a better deal than the scam IAMPF.
#3 Please lay out the dismal difference for all to see, saying so doesn't make it so.
Show me.

Ok P Rez, if thats your case, without seeing the rest of the contract, I'm calling it weak, but please show us the whole thing and let the membership decide after waiting several years now, which direction we go from here.

P. Rez = Business Unionist

He seems to advocate for what is best for the IAM not listening to the members concerns about the IAMNPF. Supported UA agreement which has resulted in cuts to mainline UA PCE and ramp jobs.

P. Rez organized and supported TWU 580 in the garbage HP CBA.

Josh

 

[WeAAsles]

Voting is liberating.
I wanted to vote on my representation.
I was denied.
The result is a fractured representation taking far too long when the company is at max profits.

It's time to vote.
If it is a bad deal, it will get voted down, CHILL.

No it’s not time to vote and I don’t want to have my time wasted when the product isn’t quite ready yet.

I want a deal that I know I can vote yes for.

 

[Steve Walegir]

A person with 40 years gets the same amount to leave as someone with 15 years?
$3k bonus for everyone? That's a lot bigger to a new hire at $13 per hour then someone topped out, basically less then 1 paycheck
What is the medical cap going to be?
Title 2???
Pt % is ugly

Let AA put the entire deal out with the language they want in it then we will see if it's worth considering. Stop showing only fluff.

 

[WeAAsles]

A person with 40 years gets the same amount to leave as someone with 15 years?
$3k bonus for everyone? That's a lot bigger to a new hire at $13 per hour then someone topped out, basically less then 1 paycheck
What is the medical cap going to be?
Title 2???
Pt % is ugly

Let AA put the entire deal out with the language they want in it then we will see if it's worth considering. Stop showing only fluff.

This man’s comments are Weez approved.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

If you’re close enough in age anyway that 65k for Fleet will put you over the edge. Maybe some use it for Medical or maybe some have other plans. Like going to another Country, using their Wife’s insurance or just foregoing period?

Besides I think once all the Contracts are in place their could be even more buyouts in other groups to bring down the High cost employees even more over time.

what do you consider 'close enough' in age anyway...??

to me, if you're 61-62-63, you're staying. there's a few guys i know in their mid 50s, originally from down south. these guys want to leave and were telling me that $80k and they are going back home.

these guys are TOS, 32-31 years seniority. if the company wants what they perceive to be dead weight to leave, $65k won't do the trick.

 

[NYer]

A person with 40 years gets the same amount to leave as someone with 15 years?
$3k bonus for everyone? That's a lot bigger to a new hire at $13 per hour then someone topped out, basically less then 1 paycheck
What is the medical cap going to be?
Title 2???
Pt % is ugly

Let AA put the entire deal out with the language they want in it then we will see if it's worth considering. Stop showing only fluff.

Unfortunately, that will only happen if there is a TA.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

There’s a few areas that will affect us (TWU) that I need to see tweaked, there’s a few areas that affect them (IAM) I need to see tweaked and there’s a few areas that affect (ALL) of us that I need to see tweaked before I can say that I like the deal I’m looking at.

There is no them vs us to me cause we’re all going to be under one contract at the end of the day and who knows where I may want to transfer to in the future and which Union hat someone is going to hand to me.

i understand. i also feel it's not good enough..close, but not good enough.

again, the merger helped both sides with wages. previous mergers benefited all at ua/dl with wages.

the kaka will hit the fan when the arguments start about lus insurance and TOS.

a few years ago lus were earning what per hour? $20/hr? if TOS is proposed to go to $35.50/hr, not too may laa guys will want to hear this issue is the hang-up.

$15.50 x 2100 full-time hours = ??

 

[CremaDiLimone]

bob, you wanted to take company's 1st bull$hit proposal....24 cent raise on DOS. so, where did the company find more $$ to give us?

unless, the company has been stalling and f*cking around?? give this stuff and package it to the assoc., not us. what can we do with this info anyways? put pressure on the assoc.? is that what the company wants?

how come the company didn't have $31.9whatever/hr on DOS ready to go 6 months ago? 2 months ago? now, they have it?

these guys are laughing at all of us on the golf course.

bob, what are you disagreeing with?

- it's not true that you would have voted yes to the company's 1st proposal? you know, .24 cent raise on DOS, contract out deicing, all the AMT job cuts.

- it's not true that the company offered us barely over $31/hr on DOS in it's first proposal and now found some secret money to offer us nearly $32/hr on DOS??

just what exactly are you disagreeing with?

 

[bob@las-AA]

I see you looked at the Company’s purdy PDF’s and saw that $76K and you’re knees turned into Spaghetti.

Whoa, Whoa, Whoa, Money man. GIVE IT TO ME NOW!!!!!!

Ahh yes, another weez approved post.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

is oil down $3 today or up $3 today?

down $5 a barrel from monday?

 

[bob@las-AA]

bob, what are you disagreeing with?

- it's not true that you would have voted yes to the company's 1st proposal? you know, .24 cent raise on DOS, contract out deicing, all the AMT job cuts.

- it's not true that the company offered us barely over $31/hr on DOS in it's first proposal and now found some secret money to offer us nearly $32/hr on DOS??

just what exactly are you disagreeing with?

Because I can.

 

[gulfcoast1]

A person with 40 years gets the same amount to leave as someone with 15 years?
$3k bonus for everyone? That's a lot bigger to a new hire at $13 per hour then someone topped out, basically less then 1 paycheck
What is the medical cap going to be?
Title 2???
Pt % is ugly

Let AA put the entire deal out with the language they want in it then we will see if it's worth considering. Stop showing only fluff.

I agree. I also want more info on the PT ratio. That could hurt a lot of people. That is my first concern. Could anyone be forcibly downgraded in their current station?

I also think there should be some recognition of seniority in the signing bonus. Maybe not 5k to 1k from high to low seniority but 4k to 2k sounds better. We need to protect Title 2 in the same way Title 1 and 3 are protected.

The medical is a big question. Of course I think most TWU would like to pay what the IAM pays for full time workers. The company made some moves on Deicing.

The biggest thing I see wage wise that has not been mentioned as far as I can tell is a mid-contract adjustment. Surely DL and UA will pass us at some point and there really needs to be a mid contract lookback or adjustment at 2.5 years for a 5 year deal.

When taking into account DL's profit sharing, 3% is about the least the company could do. It really should be closer to 5% if we are keeping the same profit sharing formula which is much less than DL. With oil rising, I would probably prefer 5% anyways for now. If the current situation in OPEC countries improves later this year and oil comes down, maybe an enhanced PS would be better, but again 3% above DL is really not that great but something I would consider depending on the other items I listed and a decent shift differential. Maybe ask for DL plus 5% and settle for 4% on wages with a mid contract adjustment.

I think at least we are moving toward something I would consider as opposed to a flat out no. I am glad to see some movement.

 

[WeAAsles]

I doubt Bob will mind.