American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[WeAAsles]

Welcome to DL.

AA has begun to use “Cult-ture” in some of their descriptions now. So far just a little tester of it but Oh God YUCK.

But they did take the music out of their last propaganda video after I made fun of the first one. So I know they’re listening.

 

[WeAAsles]

Depending on how they count it, we're already at 34%.

I’ve asked you this before but I’m going to ask you in a different way.

Is there any scenario of a TA being released to the MIA Membership where you would make a public recommendation either up or down?

Or in your position do you feel like that’s just not your place to be a voice?

 

[Racer X]

PTers: The current TWU CBA contains the 1:1 language after certain numbers are met. In the case of MIA, let's assume our numbers are 1500 FT and 500 PT. That would mean that any number above 1500 would mean they can add the equivalent number of PTers, or 1600 and 600.

OK. So if we had 1800 FTers in MIA, it means they could add an additional 300 PTers. In order to make that more difficult for them to do we use our OT language to dissuade their use of more PT. They would need to hold all the FTers on OT before they could hold or extend a PTer. That has been a successful mechanism in order to control the proliferation of PT despite their contractual ability to raise their numbers.

The IAM has a different philosophy and culture with the PTers and the OT language may not mean a great deal. To the TWU side, having PTers held rather than FTers and having 3-hour shifts really puts the pressure on tamping down the PT numbers even if we keep our current language, nevermind if we go to a 40% number.

2X: We've had double-time before and in a station like MIA that may be an overall detriment rather than a plus. Obviously, if you get the double-time it would be good but they will clamp down on the ability to get it consistently. A benefit to having the 1.5x is that we get OT in the 6 to 8 range after your shift. Many people like that because they can get their OT in one day rather than stay multiple days. We'll take the 2x but it isn't a huge deal and some will argue it is a detriment especially with PTers taking some of that away. It is probable that some will have the earnings actually go down because the pool for the OT will increase.

In MIA, we have hundreds of hours of OT a day, but usually less than 100 PT extended hours per month. That will change drastically.

Grievance: Right now, the process we use is better suited to getting quicker results. In the future, the compromise means two added layers to the process and slows down the results and bogs down the machinery. If you have a disciplinary letter and it takes a couple of months to process waiting an extra couple of months is unneeded stress.

CS: Those in the know agree having contractual language is usually better than not, but when the policy in place has been pretty consistent over the years, except for a few hiccups, it makes that transition more worrisome. I don't think the change is too bad, but any change that places restrictions is seen as a negative.

In the IAM world, all this may seem perfectly reasonable but the TWU has had different systems, philosophies, and cultures.

NYer, While I can sympathize with local situations on any particular issue, the emphasis must be on all 40 locations (or more if we get them). I can also applaud your success in MIA ft/pt ratio but the fact remains that the company can still contractually choose to implement the 1:1 language there. (I do understand that they have not chosen to do that as of today).

 

[Racer X]

Well what makes it especially good is that in our old language back in the year 1862 second day off was also paid at 2x BUUUUUTTTTTT you went to the bottom of the OT list so it was almost an Act of God (Or major screwup) if they ever called you for that second day. In your current language and our new (someday) future language no more back of the line for second day.

And if I’m correct PT Members are not included for Day Off Call In, in the mix with FT? I assume they can sign up but will only be called if the FT list is exhausted?

Pt can get day off extra hours in the event of a pt absence or vacancy or any extra shifts that the company adds ( holiday help, etc. ) that are 5 hours or less.

 

[Racer X]

PTers: The current TWU CBA contains the 1:1 language after certain numbers are met. In the case of MIA, let's assume our numbers are 1500 FT and 500 PT. That would mean that any number above 1500 would mean they can add the equivalent number of PTers, or 1600 and 600.

OK. So if we had 1800 FTers in MIA, it means they could add an additional 300 PTers. In order to make that more difficult for them to do we use our OT language to dissuade their use of more PT. They would need to hold all the FTers on OT before they could hold or extend a PTer. That has been a successful mechanism in order to control the proliferation of PT despite their contractual ability to raise their numbers.

The IAM has a different philosophy and culture with the PTers and the OT language may not mean a great deal. To the TWU side, having PTers held rather than FTers and having 3-hour shifts really puts the pressure on tamping down the PT numbers even if we keep our current language, nevermind if we go to a 40% number.

2X: We've had double-time before and in a station like MIA that may be an overall detriment rather than a plus. Obviously, if you get the double-time it would be good but they will clamp down on the ability to get it consistently. A benefit to having the 1.5x is that we get OT in the 6 to 8 range after your shift. Many people like that because they can get their OT in one day rather than stay multiple days. We'll take the 2x but it isn't a huge deal and some will argue it is a detriment especially with PTers taking some of that away. It is probable that some will have the earnings actually go down because the pool for the OT will increase.

In MIA, we have hundreds of hours of OT a day, but usually less than 100 PT extended hours per month. That will change drastically.

Grievance: Right now, the process we use is better suited to getting quicker results. In the future, the compromise means two added layers to the process and slows down the results and bogs down the machinery. If you have a disciplinary letter and it takes a couple of months to process waiting an extra couple of months is unneeded stress.

CS: Those in the know agree having contractual language is usually better than not, but when the policy in place has been pretty consistent over the years, except for a few hiccups, it makes that transition more worrisome. I don't think the change is too bad, but any change that places restrictions is seen as a negative.

In the IAM world, all this may seem perfectly reasonable but the TWU has had different systems, philosophies, and cultures.

CS: I’m not sure what you mean with... except for a few hiccups. But that is my point with having language.

 

[WeAAsles]

Easy. Jerry Glass. That only changes when people consider withholding their labor as a viable option

Ok had to think a little on how to respond to this. So if I recall just what you propose is why many Laws including the RLA itself were brought into existence. I’m sure you’ve read that History even though as an Anarchist you’re totally opposed to it.

I’m sorry but as much as the Company might be peeving me off here just a little they by FAR don’t have me in the let’s “Shut it Down” mindset.

AMFA withheld their Labor and you admire their noble Death at your old Airline. Ok fine but I can still hear the winds rolling off the plains as those Tumble Weeds pass by. Again I’m not seeing any statues or monuments being erected.

The Hostess Bakers Union also made a choice to shut it down. My Cousin Sean Weigand up in Maine has a wife and two still young children. Admittedly I’m sure dropping down from $20 an hour down to $12 wasn’t going to make it easy to support them anyway and they sure did piss off a lot of Teamsters when they said piss off to Management but hey “William Wallace”

Yea Kev I’m sorry. I just really don’t see myself in either of those positions frankly. But good luck there buddy if you’re about to withhold your labor at the old widget.

 

[WeAAsles]

Pt can get day off extra hours in the event of a pt absence or vacancy or any extra shifts that the company adds ( holiday help, etc. ) that are 5 hours or less.

Is that your current language or both your current language and our upcoming JCBA language?

 

[NYer]

NYer, While I can sympathize with local situations on any particular issue, the emphasis must be on all 40 locations (or more if we get them). I can also applaud your success in MIA ft/pt ratio but the fact remains that the company can still contractually choose to implement the 1:1 language there. (I do understand that they have not chosen to do that as of today).

Your assumption they haven't done so because they didn't want to is not correct. They haven't added more PT because it doesn't make financial sense for them to do so. When they have a PT position to fill, they need to do it with a FTer on OT. That 5-hour position costs them 7.5 hours of pay to cover.

If they could cover those positions with PTers or if they could extend PTers before FTers it becomes a financial advantage for them to do so. We've managed to have hundreds of hours in OT which in turn helps us to get more FT than PT because it is actually more cost-effective in the long run.

 

[NYer]

CS: I’m not sure what you mean with... except for a few hiccups. But that is my point with having language.

During the BK there was an Executive VP that wanted to make changes to the CS Policy, but that was overridden by some of the other Executives. For the most part, it isn't something they've weaponized. It's been a mutually beneficial policy. The good will on this matter is what will make the transition to something different a little rocky, at first.

 

[Talos]

And the weirdest part is that anyone on the TWU side would expect you to. And I mean among the Rank and File. I’d like to hope TWU Leaders aren’t that stupid.

I don't think the LAA people expect the LUS people to give up anything. This is business. This is also why the TWU looks so stupid. All this was inevitable, and the TWU with prior knowledge of the differences in the 2 contracts should have known it. They were not tough enough when we got the raise and gave the right to work each others metal. I myself think the TWU leaders are that stupid sad to say.

 

[Jester]

Here is some food for thought for all of you "Must Have" guys...

If Medical was a "must have" for the Airline Business Model, why did LUS simply not take it away in bankruptcy when they could have without our consent?
The very same dude that was running LUS is now running AA. What has changed?
Cadillac Medical should be even less expensive for the combined companies, since larger employee bases ultimatly lower costs. Also, Trump killed Obamacare, so that is even more reason to keep LUS medical for the entire group! Thanks Trump!

The same for Catering, if it was not working in the pre-merger business model for LUS, why did they not take it away in abrogation? The two combined Companies have less competition, more resources, and more net profits than either of the two pre-merger companies combined!

Why were "must haves" post-merger, not "must takes" pre-merger?

>SPIT<

During the LUS pre-bankruptcies weren't the different work groups negotiating different health insurance rates? Now all combined work groups have the same insurance plans with the missing piece being LUS ramp and MX. Should the current negotiations exempt this group, then it won't be long before other groups break from the Company's one-size-fits-all approach on health insurance-- pretty much a "must have" for the Fort Worth Boys. That would eliminate much of the economies of scale for which you mentioned prior to your anti-Trump diatribe with the different plans.

The difference of now vs. then on catering could be simply attributed to the substantial topped-out wage differences of less than $20/hour vs. more than $30/hour. Not sure it would be a Company "must have" due to its negligible impact upon other work groups. I am certain if the Association were willing to sacrifice out stations to keep catering in the LUS hubs, then the Company negotiators would willing accept such a proposition (it has happened before with the US/AW JCBA)-- I hope this does not happen.

 

[WeAAsles]

I don't think the LAA people expect the LUS people to give up anything. This is business. This is also why the TWU looks so stupid. All this was inevitable, and the TWU with prior knowledge of the differences in the 2 contracts should have known it. They were not tough enough when we got the raise and gave the right to work each others metal. I myself think the TWU leaders are that stupid sad to say.

Actually I heard that a few (quite a few actually) individuals who owned shiny red tool boxes were causing a ruckus and were about to cause Armageddon if they didn’t get a raise so. They got their raise. “It’s MY money and I want it NOW”

At the end of the day you’re right it’s all business.

And don’t lie and tell me you’re not enjoying that paycheck either.

 

[NYer]

I’ve asked you this before but I’m going to ask you in a different way.

Is there any scenario of a TA being released to the MIA Membership where you would make a public recommendation either up or down?

Or in your position do you feel like that’s just not your place to be a voice?

A representative should just represent and that entails to give all the information available but not to suggest a vote either up or down. Decisions like that should be done on an individual basis. It is especially true when/if there is something that may be detrimental but the single representative doesn't have complete control over whether any changes can be made. All consequences of a yes or a no vote should also be shared.

I equate it to a grievance settlement. We may have the best argument to prevail in an arbitration and maybe win favorable language, but the decision to take or refuse a settlement and go to an arbitrations rests solely on the Member.

 

[ALUS78]

Rusty how about you provide a link to a good contract the IBT has ever done for an airline? I’ll be waiting

He got you on that Rat but he'll have to go back to 1979,80.....

 

[NYer]

I don't think the LAA people expect the LUS people to give up anything. This is business. This is also why the TWU looks so stupid. All this was inevitable, and the TWU with prior knowledge of the differences in the 2 contracts should have known it. They were not tough enough when we got the raise and gave the right to work each others metal. I myself think the TWU leaders are that stupid sad to say.

Making $24.09 (a little more because of contractual raises) rather than $30.81 would have been more harmful to us that it would have been for them not having the cross-utilization language.

Strategically, that was a mistake by the airline. At that point, it should have been obvious this process was going to take longer.