AMFA isn't a threat to me. If they get in I agree, I will get a big pay raise. I have more than enough seniority to stay on while about 5,000 or more lose their jobs. I have said many times that I am not okay with that. Bob, Ken, you, and many others are apparently okay with letting fellow union brothers that pay dues, just like Bob's JFK buddies, pay for your pay raise through having their jobs outsourced.
Just tell the truth. AMFA has a jobs for pay mentality, a LOT of jobs for a pay raise for a few. Either way you look at it, AMFA has provided higher pay for far less people. There is no other way to slice it. The facts speak for themselves. They had 18,000 members and now 2,700 in less than ten years. Yes we took concessions in 2003 but we would have had $38 two years ago if we had said yes in 2010 and the base would have been making $34 but for Bob and his vote no coalition that wasn't good enough. His group, and the AMFA group, want more and they are willing to give up as many jobs in order to claim the top pay trophy. The problem is they don't care that only a few will be raising that trophy and there is no participation trophy for the thousands that lose their jobs. The ones who get sacrificed for the craft in their view are expendable.
More lies.
I've never said that we should give away jobs to get a raise, I've said that we should get paid what our peers get paid. The company proposed different rates for the line but Tulsa told the company that was unacceptable. Tulsa's reps made the decision that to allow the line to get paid more than Tulsa OH was unacceptable, and they also would not fight to keep us all among our peers. They opted to pull down everyone because they did not want to risk fighting, unlike the Pilots. Their reps decided that they would accept the concessions but only if they could force the Line guys to accept them as well. The Line reps were never given the opportunity to present their proposals to the company. It was railroaded through and Ream refused to meet with the Line maint reps, simply turned his back and walked away. You voted in favor of that.
We gave the company the ability to outsource as much as they want. You say we limited them to 35%. Who came up with the "35% of maintenance spend" number? The company. Why did they pick that number? Because they knew that capacity was limited and nobody wanted to do their MD-80s anyway. They term sheet was actually more restrictive at 40% of the work than what we settled on, 35% of the spend. Even if it was just labor spend 40% of work would be less than 35% of spend because in theory they would be paying less for the labor overseas, and there is nothing in our language limiting them from sending work where ever they want. By the time the new aircraft start seeing OH on the new aircraft this contract will be amendable, in the meantime between now and then they plan to eliminate at least 4000 jobs from when they filed, if they want, if the pilots agree to outsource a lot of domestic flying, there is nothing stopping AA from eliminating all of OH. Cite your language and what you think it means, then cite the percentage of arbitration cases over language where they rule in favor of the Union. You voted in favor of that.
You come here and spin your lies but the facts are what they are. We have no system protection, the company can lay off any worker. They can outsource their OH to anyplace in the world, yet when they extracted concessions they used the higher US rates to minimize the credit that outsourcing work would generate. With the concessions we gave them they essentially get the labor of around 1800 mechanics for free, plus if they deceide they can maximze saving even more by sending work overseas, and we would not get credit for that. You voted in favor of that.
So in the end what will we have accomplished? Other than giving AA the cheapest mechanics labor in the industry? If AA decides to outsource all of OH there is nothing, other than Overspeeds interpretation of what the language says, not an arbitrators, stopping them. You voted in favor of that.
We have the worst deal in the industry. The lowest wage, the fewest and lowest paid holidays, the least amount of vacation, the least amount of sick time and the worst pension. Despite your claim that all these concessions were needed to save jobs some of those concessions cost jobs, such as less vacation time and fewer holidays, Those concessions allow the company to run their operations with fewer mechanics not more. you voted in favor of that.
The fact is that Overspeed and his buddies screwed us all and they try and spin the balme to those of us who acted like Union memn and women are supposed to act-say NO to concessions. They prevented us from asking to be released immediately after we rejected the 2010 deal which is what Unions normally do. In 1997 when the APA rejected their TA they were released, in 1993 when the APFA rejected their TA they were released, in 2011 when the pilots at Spirit rejected their TA they were released, we rejected the TA and even after two years of very little progress we still had not asked to be released. Whose fault was that OS? I had made the motion several times. Tulsa and Title II (mostly from Fleet Service locals) blocked it. Tulsa finally agreed to ask to be released, on Nov 30 2011, the company filed BK the day before. What did they know? Who told them to pick that day? If we had asked the NMB back in 2010 they would have run out of options, they would have had to release us, would we have been allowed to strike? Probably not, most likely would have been put into a PEB but our deal would have been based upon what was prevelent in the industry and not the worst of everything.
You voted in favor of that.
You voted in favor of everything thats wrong with this contract, yet in your twisted logic its the fault of those who voted against it. Spin Spin Spin,Overspin.