American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[NYer]

I know my guesses have been shall we say for lack of better words “sucky as hell” but I’ll glutton myself for punishment here again and say I think we’ll all vote on something before heading in to Section 6?

BTW if the Company did invoke the Nuclear option how many people would we be talking about in those cities anyway?

In the BK our Negotiators with a gun held to their heads made the choice to close 30 cities that if it weren’t for the merger we would never have seen most of them ever come back to us.

Let’s not forget that the Association has asked for some of those cities to be reopen.

View attachment 12936

Because something can happen, and they have the language to do it, doesn't mean it will happen.

You try too hard to read into things. Read the words, don't try to read the mind, gets you in trouble.

 

[Racer X]

how about at UPS? TOS drivers earning $36/hr on average.

corporatism doesn't allow strikes??

I’m sure NYer is referring to the Railway Labor Act. With being under the RLA we would basically need the approval of the POTUS. UPS is not goverened by the RLA but instead by the NRLA. Therefore they can strike when an impasse is determined

 

[Racer X]

I’m sure NYer is referring to the Railway Labor Act. With being under the RLA we would basically need the approval of the POTUS. UPS is not goverened by the RLA but instead by the NRLA. Therefore they can strike when an impasse is determined

Sorry NYer....I guess I should have let you respond..

 

[NYer]

Sorry NYer....I guess I should have let you respond..

That's fine, better to get the information out to clarify a conversation. Since this is mostly AA and airlines, I don't really go into specifics about the differences between the RLA and the restrictions it brings to our particular industry as opposed to most other public industries. (many unionized Municipal workers are also restricted from striking)

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Just too much tough talk always coming out of people that will never really walk the walk anyway.

Actually going on Strike is not a fun experience. It’s a very very serious decision and shouldn’t be an action taken lightly.

Contracts that are stalled for years should not be taken lightly either.

 

[Jester]

I agree with ur comments, but at the same time, some people come to the AA forum to stir the pot, not knowing anything, just to be annoying...I'm speaking generally nobody specific

I resemble that remark!

 

[WeAAsles]

Because something can happen, and they have the language to do it, doesn't mean it will happen.

You try too hard to read into things. Read the words, don't try to read the mind, gets you in trouble.

Not trying to read any minds. Just trying to say that again if the Company wanted to use the threat of closing a few more cities against us I don’t think unfortunately that threat will hold much concern Systemwide.

We have 18,000 Agents/Clerks currently.

“BTW if the Company did invoke the Nuclear option how many people would we be talking about in those cities anyway?”

Less than 500?

 

[NYer]

Not trying to read any minds. Just trying to say that again if the Company wanted to use the threat of closing a few more cities against us I don’t think unfortunately that threat will hold much concern Systemwide.

We have 18,000 Agents/Clerks currently.

“BTW if the Company did invoke the Nuclear option how many people would we be talking about in those cities anyway?”

Less than 500?

Threatening to close those cities isn't meant for the Members, it's meant for the people that have to make the decision on whether something is sent out for a vote or not.

 

[PIEDMONT784]

I’m afraid that the Company has set us up to be so focused on now trying to save things that we’re going to lose track of things we asked for.
They’re setting us up for the Middle Ground to be the Status Quo.

Weez... you are either the only one here that gets it, or the others are engaged in a campaign! You are absolutely correct...
It's like the shady car salesman telling you he's giving you big money for your trade in, when he is simultaneously increasing the sticker price on the sale car by the same amount behind his back!

Oldest trick in the book!

>SPIT<

 

[737823]

Not trying to read any minds. Just trying to say that again if the Company wanted to use the threat of closing a few more cities against us I don’t think unfortunately that threat will hold much concern Systemwide.

We have 18,000 Agents/Clerks currently.

“BTW if the Company did invoke the Nuclear option how many people would we be talking about in those cities anyway?”

Less than 500?

How many have entry into classification date=04/10/2001?

Almost everyone in STL and a number in SJU.

Josh

 

[WeAAsles]

Threatening to close those cities isn't meant for the Members, it's meant for the people that have to make the decision on whether something is sent out for a vote or not.

Still don’t think it’s much of an arm twister and the threat alone could cause Members to galvanize and fall in line even more if transmitted correctly.

Remember the threat or action would be outside of any Negotiation parameters the Mediator would expect the Association to abide by and it could also be construed as bargaining in bad faith over the threat alone.

Can you find any history that mirrors the scenario you’re speaking of under Section 6 at Major Carriers?

 

[CremaDiLimone]

I’m sure NYer is referring to the Railway Labor Act. With being under the RLA we would basically need the approval of the POTUS. UPS is not goverened by the RLA but instead by the NRLA. Therefore they can strike when an impasse is determined

Sorry NYer....I guess I should have let you respond..

That's fine, better to get the information out to clarify a conversation. Since this is mostly AA and airlines, I don't really go into specifics about the differences between the RLA and the restrictions it brings to our particular industry as opposed to most other public industries. (many unionized Municipal workers are also restricted from striking)

well, i do have to say that racer x is an ace, when it comes to seniority issues. i see he is also an expert on the rla, maybe even taft-hartley.

my post wasn't about the rla, my post was about corporatism. i wasn't worried about trump ordering a ups driver to deliver packages.

 

[Racer X]

well, i do have to say that racer x is an ace, when it comes to seniority issues. i see he is also an expert on the rla, maybe even taft-hartley.

my post wasn't about the rla, my post was about corporatism. i wasn't worried about trump ordering a ups driver to deliver packages.

I thought you were referring to being able to strike. Nothing more

 

[NYer]

Still don’t think it’s much of an arm twister and the threat alone could cause Members to galvanize and fall in line even more if transmitted correctly.

Remember the threat or action would be outside of any Negotiation parameters the Mediator would expect the Association to abide by and it could also be construed as bargaining in bad faith over the threat alone.

Can you find any history that mirrors the scenario you’re speaking of under Section 6 at Major Carriers?

How is executing a contractual provision bargaining in bad faith or considered a threat? As a matter of fact, it wouldn't be surprising if the Mediator themselves used that as way or a mechanism to apply pressure on the Association.

 

[Kev3188]

”BTW if the Company did invoke the Nuclear option how many people would we be talking about in those cities anyway?”

Less than 500?

Does it matter?

An injury to one is an injury to all.