American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[wings396]

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?

Sadly, it's exactly that type of mentality that cost LUS fleet over 20 stations back in 2005 to keep catering. Not that I want to see it happen, but I do find it to be ironic that catering is on the chopping block now. Imagine that we could have kept a lot of stations staffed before and after this new CBA, whenever it happens.

 

[WeAAsles]

Sadly, it's exactly that type of mentality that cost LUS fleet over 20 stations back in 2005 to keep catering. Not that I want to see it happen, but I do find it to be ironic that catering is on the chopping block now. Imagine that we could have kept a lot of stations staffed before and after this new CBA, whenever it happens.

To be again fair and honest. Hub numbers dominate small Stations numbers when it comes to voting. In our Bankruptcy our Negotiators possibly could have proposed a $2 or $3 per hour give back to keep all those cities we lost staffed.

I learned unfortunately to my own naïveté that there was no way that would pass the votes. I learned that when I saw the extreme anger over having to give back a measly .40 cents per hour.

The longer we’re in this industry and the more involved we are, the more unfortunately sometimes we learn things.

 

[WeAAsles]

Sadly, it's exactly that type of mentality that cost LUS fleet over 20 stations back in 2005 to keep catering. Not that I want to see it happen, but I do find it to be ironic that catering is on the chopping block now. Imagine that we could have kept a lot of stations staffed before and after this new CBA, whenever it happens.

Hey Wings let me ask you this way.

Say NYer is right and the Company attempts to push a bad deal on the entire 18,000 collective by threatening the closure of a handful of cities affecting (unfortunately) 175 people?

Do you find that to be an acceptable weapon that we should bow down to? Would the 18,000 voters find that acceptable? Truthfully?

18,000 vs 175

 

[Steve Walegir]

Hey Wings let me ask you this way.

Say NYer is right and the Company attempts to push a bad deal on the entire 18,000 collective by threatening the closure of a handful of cities affecting (unfortunately) 175 people?

Do you find that to be an acceptable weapon that we should bow down to? Would the 18,000 voters find that acceptable? Truthfully?

18,000 vs 175

The number will be higher then 175 WeAAs, in ATL alone we have 120 TWU fleet. I'm fully aware they will at a minimum mention this is some sort of communication and have slowly been showing this to the membership here. I personally find the tactic rather childish but it is a card to play and this is a high stakes poker game. We need Doyle Brunson at the table for us.

 

[wings396]

Hey Wings let me ask you this way.

Say NYer is right and the Company attempts to push a bad deal on the entire 18,000 collective by threatening the closure of a handful of cities affecting (unfortunately) 175 people?

Do you find that to be an acceptable weapon that we should bow down to? Would the 18,000 voters find that acceptable? Truthfully?

18,000 vs 175

I don't believe that's the exact situation that we're currently looking at. Those stations can go away when the given agreed date comes absent of a new CBA.
We are not actualy going to be in a voting position as to keeping the stations at the cost of getting someting in return. We don't really know what the new threshold is going to be for weekly or yearly flight numbers. We have heard some speciation, but nothing confirmed. At one point years back, a lot of people who were in the hubs wanted to transfer and retire from a smaller station, but that option is all but gone.

 

[WeAAsles]

The number will be higher then 175 WeAAs, in ATL alone we have 120 TWU fleet. I'm fully aware they will at a minimum mention this is some sort of communication and have slowly been showing this to the membership here. I personally find the tactic rather childish but it is a card to play and this is a high stakes poker game. We need Doyle Brunson at the table for us.

Steve I’m not the one who’s been saying that their going to use your City and the others as pawns. Or even that they might. As a matter of fact if you recall I’m the one saying the exact opposite.

 

[WeAAsles]

I don't believe that's the exact situation that we're currently looking at. Those stations can go away when the given agreed date comes absent of a new CBA.
We are not actualy going to be in a voting position as to keeping the stations at the cost of getting someting in return. We don't really know what the new threshold is going to be for weekly or yearly flight numbers. We have heard some speciation, but nothing confirmed. At one point years back, a lot of people who were in the hubs wanted to transfer and retire from a smaller station, but that option is all but gone.

The conversation is simply NYer believes the Company “might” (Yes they can) use closing some more TWU cities as a Negotiations threat.

OF COURSE they can. I’ve never said they couldn’t. Again I just don’t “think” they will for multiple reasons.

 

[NYer]

The number will be higher then 175 WeAAs, in ATL alone we have 120 TWU fleet. I'm fully aware they will at a minimum mention this is some sort of communication and have slowly been showing this to the membership here. I personally find the tactic rather childish but it is a card to play and this is a high stakes poker game. We need Doyle Brunson at the table for us.

Some make the argument ATL can't be closed because the cross-utilization agreement protects that city. That protection is only for anyone hired prior to 8.4.16.

In ATL, I believe that's in the 20's. So they can lay-off those guys and transfer the work elsewhere.

 

[NYer]

The conversation is simply NYer believes the Company “might” (Yes they can) use closing some more TWU cities as a Negotiations threat.

OF COURSE they can. I’ve never said they couldn’t. Again I just don’t “think” they will for multiple reasons.

They could because they have the language.

Doesn't mean they might, don't know their intent or if they're willing to use that card.

 

[Steve Walegir]

Some make the argument ATL can't be closed because the cross-utilization agreement protects that city. That protection is only for anyone hired prior to 8.4.16.

In ATL, I believe that's in the 20's. So they can lay-off those guys and transfer the work elsewhere.

Ha I'd love to see how they run this place if they got rid of 20 people. That would be a funny show.

 

[Steve Walegir]

Steve I’m not the one who’s been saying that their going to use your City and the others as pawns. Or even that they might. As a matter of fact if you recall I’m the one saying the exact opposite.

I've thought it for a while. They seemingly have morals so why not make the threat. I'm expecting it, but I don't expect the Association to give in on it and I'd be disappointed if they did

 

[MetalMover]

And it also would have placed us into the IAM Medical pricing which would have given us an even further position of strength today to keep it if 30,000 Employees were in it instead of currently 10,000.

Note how the Company is trying to sell it that there’s only a few of them left, so c’mon let us have it.

Maybe a few in dog years!

 

[Steve Walegir]

I've thought it for a while. They seemingly have morals so why not make the threat. I'm expecting it, but I don't expect the Association to give in on it and I'd be disappointed if they did

They seemingly have no morals is what I ment

 

[WeAAsles]

Ha I'd love to see how they run this place if they got rid of 20 people. That would be a funny show.

I don’t think they’re going to move any lucrative flights just so they can lay off 20 junior paid people though.

Many things contractually can happen but common sense and business sometimes also need to be applied.

 

[Steve Walegir]

I don’t think they’re going to move any lucrative flights just so they can lay off 20 junior paid people though.

Many things contractually can happen but common sense and business sometimes also need to be applied.

With the exception of the LAX flight everything else is just feeders. And almost half the flights are AE flights