American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[Jester]

Scary to even consider a Hub being staffed over half or more with a PT workforce.

America West had those scenarios, and the Tempe Boys (Parker included) didn't mind either. Then again with the abysmal pay at the time, there was not much demand from workers to be full-time either.

 

[WeAAsles]

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.

Good answer and again I honestly respect it. So I also guess you don’t approve of an internal vote between the 12 of you in the room having any votes to release being publicly known?

If I knew that my Local President voted against releasing I’d probably want to know particularly why he made that choice.

I guess if I thought it could be highly detrimental to the city I represented I’d have to make my choice known but again that’s just a philosophical difference that neither one is necessarily right or wrong.

Otherwise I agree. Just explain it as best you can and let the Members decide on their own.

 

[NYer]

Good answer and again I honestly respect it. So I also guess you don’t approve of an internal vote between the 12 of you in the room having any votes to release being publicly known?

If I knew that my Local President voted against releasing I’d probably want to know particularly why he made that choice.

I guess if I thought it could be highly detrimental to the city I represented I’d have to make my choice known but again that’s just a philosophical difference that neither one is necessarily right or wrong.

Otherwise I agree. Just explain it as best you can and let the Members decide on their own.

Any decision made should be able to be backed up with the reasons why that decision was made. Representation equals transparency.

Some may not like the decision but that's true of just about every decision made by an elected representative.

 

[cltrat]

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

Al I think I’d have trouble counting 40 years ago,the times were as different as the aircraft were 40 years ago

 

[WeAAsles]

Any decision made should be able to be backed up with the reasons why that decision was made. Representation equals transparency.

Some may not like the decision but that's true of just about every decision made by an elected representative.

Long day. Nice conversations.

 

[aintgotnotimefodat]

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.

Pretty sad, that our LAA /TWU negotiated concessionary benefits are far worse than the LUS/ IAM benefits from bankruptcy...I don't blame the Assoc. to fight to keep their medical etc....TWU wants to "negotiate" it away, like everything else....rather than enhance our current medical to their level....

Only thing TWU worries about is their dues...case and point:

We will always get the $$$ because the dues are salary based...

Outsourcing will affect head count of dues paying members, even if we're protected, and job loss is due to attrition...

Why don't u think the TWU will never fight for member enhancing benefits like jumpseat authorization, especially for our commuters...pretty bad JetBlue mechanics can fly jumpseat on AA

TWU...its all about the dues

 

[Racer X]

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

Current

 

[Rusty Hilock]

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

For starters the UPS AMT's have been making $45.00 / HR + for YEARS while LAA was making in the high $30's / HR.


The 2016 UAL -IBT agreement is much better that than the current JCBA offer that has been released thru leaks..

Their EARLY OUT INCLUDED A Bridge to Medicare for anyone 60 and over and 100 K for anyone with 20 or more years service.

There has been NO TALK from Company or ASSociation concerning a bridge to Medicare included with the 105 K Buyout.

You got a computer and a keyboard- Find it for yourself.

I already have the UAL-IBT agreement on my tablet in PDF.

They have a revisit clause every 24 months to catch up with other airlines if needed. So in just a matter of time the UAL AMT's will be making more than LAA- LUS. AMT's.

HA! HA! HA!

NAHNA NA NA Hey Hey Goodbye!

 

[Racer X]

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.

I understand that Whatever the reason has been in the past has worked for MIA. I also understand your explanation on the financial point. No matter what the reason is....the company has had and continues to have the ability to enact the language if they so choose. So with all of the language for premium pay on days off, regular work days, etc. the only drawback for the MIA FT is any OT less than 4 hours would go to pt first. (which you say will drive the pt headcount higher in MIA).

 

[WeAAsles]

Current

So it’s kind of funny how something we were talking about in regards to ILC is pretty much impossible if you apply it to individual pieces of our two agreements, even if you tried to craft completely new language.

If in your current agreement PT can sign up and capture hours before or with FT but in the new agreement DO goes to FT first then that’s a concession to your PT Members.

 

[Racer X]

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.

Again....we shouldn’t have to GIVE anything to KEEP CATERING. We KEPT catering because WE GAVE in the past.

 

[Racer X]

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.

Arbitration/ grievance decision is Not the same thing as CBA ratification. I believec If the NC votes to bring an offer out for ratification they are saying that they recommend it. If they are at some point forced to bring one out that they would not have endorsed in the way of a Yay vote, they are saying they do not recommend it.
Telling members to decide for themselves without a recommendation for or against... is nothing more than riding the fence.

 

[NYer]

I understand that Whatever the reason has been in the past has worked for MIA. I also understand your explanation on the financial point. No matter what the reason is....the company has had and continues to have the ability to enact the language if they so choose. So with all of the language for premium pay on days off, regular work days, etc. the only drawback for the MIA FT is any OT less than 4 hours would go to pt first. (which you say will drive the pt headcount higher in MIA).

It's a bit more than just that.

 

[Racer X]

So it’s kind of funny how something we were talking about in regards to ILC is pretty much impossible if you apply it to individual pieces of our two agreements, even if you tried to craft completely new language.

If in your current agreement PT can sign up and capture hours before or with FT but in the new agreement DO goes to FT first then that’s a concession to your PT Members.

There were no possible scenarios where all work groups could stay as presently are on OT.
Either: FT gets all OT first .....Lus pt concession
Pt gets pt OT .....LAA ft concession
CC on seperate list for CC OT .....change for LAA CC
CC stays on list with agents....change for LUS CC.
Can’t get around it.

 

[WeAAsles]

Again....we shouldn’t have to GIVE anything to KEEP CATERING. We KEPT catering because WE GAVE in the past.

Have to love too how the Company distracts from us regaining any other lost work by going after work we already continue to own.

We get distracted by the Catering and Deicing ask and if they relent to back off on it we happily forget about anything else we may have proposed to recapture.

At least IMO that’s their simple game plan.