Amfa Members

[usairways_vote_NO]

Congratulations on taking a stand against everything the IAM and its members were scared to take a stand against. Corporate greed and mismanagement among the worst on them. Also your courage to do what in your heart you felt you had to do no matter what the consequences and to try to stop your careers from being totally destroyed and put in toilet. All other groups should thank you for taking the lead and setting an example of bravado in an industry where good careers are becoming a thing of past. Thank You

 

[Kev3188]

I'll second that...

 

[etops1]

congratulations on losing your jobs.

 

[Bob Owens]

congratulations on losing your jobs.

[post="244523"][/post]​

There are worse things that can happen.

The fact is that the jobs we once had are already gone. The only thing left is the working weekends holidays, shifts etc. If there is any chance of seeing the jobs that we went to school for, the ones we trained for and sacrificed for, we have to be willing to take a chance and fight for it.


Some people can afford to roll over and over and over, you probably make considerably more in this industry than you would selling those same skills in any other industry. We have never had that luxury, but we liked working on airplanes. It gets to the point that its just not worth it. Some may say quit. Well not until we give it the best fight we can.

I respect the mechs at UAL, I wish that we were able to convince the spineless sellouts that we had in Tulsa and MCI that voted this POS in to take a stand. At least somebody has pushed back a little bit.

 

[atabuy]

There are worse things that can happen.

The fact is that the jobs we once had are already gone. The only thing left is the working weekends holidays, shifts etc. If there is any chance of seeing the jobs that we went to school for, the ones we trained for and sacrificed for, we have to be willing to take a chance and fight for it.
Some people can afford to roll over and over and over, you probably make considerably more in this industry than you would selling those same skills in any other industry. We have never had that luxury, but we liked working on airplanes. It gets to the point that its just not worth it. Some may say quit. Well not until we give it the best fight we can.

I respect the mechs at UAL, I wish that we were able to convince the spineless sellouts that we had in Tulsa and MCI that voted this POS in to take a stand. At least somebody has pushed back a little bit.

[post="244536"][/post]​

Winning the battle and losing the war does not seem like a sound rational judgement in my way of thinking, but it does make sense when emotion is involved.
Logic goes out the window.
Eastern unions had the same emotional thinking when they took down that airline.

When you couple together a management that can't solve problems because employees seem to be fixed more, on destoying any chance they have of saving their jobs, It gives the company no choice but to cut off the infected part.

You make the point that you took this job because you liked working on airplanes.
Are you sure it wasn't because it use to pay a nice wage?

It isn't the airlines that are taking your jobs from you. It is competition from new maintenance groups who are taking your jobs.

Sometimes it is neccessary to make yourself more valuable to the company you work for than to take the crappy attitude I have seen for the last 4 years at Ual.

Those that fight the company will lose in a big way. It might already be to late to save your jobs.

 

[TheDog2004]

I'm curious - what is AMFA waiting for? Didn't they say they would strike if the judge imposed a settlement?

Trying to differentiate between a 1113e or c judgement is a face saving gesture, unless there is a legal reason for not acting at this time.

If you are going to send the message, then do it when it has the greatest impact - which is immediately after making the threat.

Now AMFA looks like a bunch of paper tigers IMHO.

 

[aafsc]

I'm curious - what is AMFA waiting for? Didn't they say they would strike if the judge imposed a settlement?

Trying to differentiate between a 1113e or c judgement is a face saving gesture, unless there is a legal reason for not acting at this time.

If you are going to send the message, then do it when it has the greatest impact - which is immediately after making the threat.

Now AMFA looks like a bunch of paper tigers IMHO.

[post="245219"][/post]​

In my opinion, AMFA did not call a strike (after the members said "no" to the TA and "yes" to strike) because like the TWU and IAM, they want to keep the dues coming in. It is all about dues. So much for the big bad AMFA and democracy. It seems that the AMFA supporters are shocked by this event. I know a UA mechanic that was laid off and AMFA still sends him letters saying that he still needs to pay dues even though he was furloughed. I am not a lawyer, but on the surface it looks like they can strike, but on the other hand the judge can impose temporary terms (like he did by not letting the leasing companies take their planes back when UA was not paying them). In my opinion, this is wrong with respect to the aircraft leasing companies, AMFA, and the IAM. If UA is not paying for the planes, then the leasing companies should be able to repossess them immediately (private property rights, wear and tear on the aircraft without paying for it) Likewise, the AMFA and IAM should be allowed to withold their services immediately. But unfortunately, the 4 months give UA management plenty of time to line up replacements. By the way, I am NOT a mechanic and these are just my observations and opinions.

 

[herkav8r]

AMFA and the IAM can withhold their services immediately. They can quit. The judge isn't forcing you to stay. Then we can bring on people that actually want to be here and not a bunch of people that want to destroy a company.

 

[aafsc]

AMFA and the IAM can withhold their services immediately. They can quit. The judge isn't forcing you to stay. Then we can bring on people that actually want to be here and not a bunch of people that want to destroy a company.

[post="245275"][/post]​

I don't work for UA, but if they all (AMFA and IAM) walked out right now it would be nearly impossible to replace all these people in a timely manner. UA would shut down permanently and would be liquidated.

 

[TheDog2004]

If all of that is true then it's clear AMFA was bluffing. They'd better get their act together and come up with something and sell it like crazy to their membership or they'll all be working for McDonald's wages.

 

[Boomer]

AMFA is working under a temporarily imposed agreement.

They did not give up their benefits or working conditions; they have temporarily given up twice what they agreed to as a wage concessions deal voted down by the members.

Amfa is still negotiating and while they negotiate under a 10% wage reduction v. a 5% wage reduction with associated reductions in their benefits and working conditions; they are meeting their targeted goal for concessions faster than otherwise.

If the numbers equal out when the parties go before the Judge, who is more likely to meet their burden of proof?

The longer the parties continue to meet in negotiations, the quicker AMFA will be towards meeting the number without gutting their contract.

Must be nice to have a Union that is only interested in your career.

 

[TDR1502C]

Bummer having clear vision, eh Boomer? (meaning you understand the situation)

 

[proAMFA]

AMFA does not "sell" contracts-you have them confused with another union

 

[Boomer]

Bummer having clear vision, eh Boomer? (meaning you understand the situation)

[post="245428"][/post]​

TDR,

I'm not sure that you understood my reply. I think that AMFA is actually quite brilliant in that by the time the parties gather berfore the Judge: the majority of the "ask" from AMFA, by UAL, will have been satisfied by the consecutive "temporary" adjustments in pay while leaving the bulk of the contract language intact.

Given the fact that AMFA has maintained an ability to deliver $100,000,000.00 in cost reductions refused for consideration by UAL; AMFA could very well walk from the meeting with a Judge facing the realization that the totality of his two temporary wage impositions coupled with $100 M/US in verifiable cost reductions cannot meet muster with the fair and equitable standard he is required to impose.

In essence, AMFA has met the ask number from UAL: but, on AMFA's terms and timeline; without gutting their contract.

Do the math: the Judge has to measure the protection of the creditors' interests with the imposed concessions plus the savings, versus the uncertainty of allowing UAL to play Russian Roulette through the violation of the Status Quo provision of the RLA and a strike if he allows permanent abrogation of the AMFA contract.
(edited for clarity)

 

[Checking it Out]

Amfa leaders negotiated a golden parachute equal to 1 million dollars. When the members rejected the terms and Amfa lost the money.

With the 4 month delay, United has no reason to negotiate. The terms of the cost reductions have been met. If anything comes out of the negotiations, you will see the attempts of Amfa to insert the 1 million back in. Amfa has yet to settle a contract in negotiations since 2001. Their lack of abilities are obvious.

As it was said earlier, the prime opportunity to make a point would have been the same day the judge imposed the pay reduction. With Approx. 47% of the members not voting, United would have achieved their goals of reducing head count immediately.

Amfa is between a rock and a hard spot, no confidence from its members and unable to negotiate during the down turns in the industry. I fear the mechanics thru-out the Airline Industry are the ultimate lossers.