AMR offers to merge seniority lists

[will fix for food]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/24/2003 5:48:04 PM RV4 wrote:

You have never once mentioned how many postings I create and you read, why the sudden change?
----------------
[/blockquote]


Because it had no importance. Did you expect me to update you with a running total of how many posts you had with no mention of a seniority list merge? It was a given that mainline employees didn/t give a s--t about Eagle. Actually, I would have fallen over in shock if you or anybody else had mentioned a merge a few years ago when A/A couldn/t get Boeings fast enough. Back then, and maybe even to a greater degree now, the mainline attitude towards Eagle ranged between apathy and disdain. (Actually it is more disdain now) Now however, when the economics point to increased small jet usage and decreased large jet usage all of a sudden you start mentioning merging the lists? Surely you know that Eagle mechanics would be nothing more than furlough fodder for you, even given DOH.

 

[RV4]

[BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/24/2003 9:32:09 PM will fix for food wrote: [BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]Because it had no importance. Did you expect me to update you with a running total of how many posts you had with no mention of a seniority list merge? It was a given that mainline employees didn/t give a s--t about Eagle. Actually, I would have fallen over in shock if you or anybody else had mentioned a merge a few years ago when A/A couldn/t get Boeings fast enough. Back then, and maybe even to a greater degree now, the mainline attitude towards Eagle ranged between apathy and disdain. (Actually it is more disdain now) Now however, when the economics point to increased small jet usage and decreased large jet usage all of a sudden you start mentioning merging the lists? Surely you know that Eagle mechanics would be nothing more than furlough fodder for you, even given DOH. [/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]This just shows how out of touch you really are. Many AA Mechanics that I have been around have wondered since the mid 90's, why the issue of "who does RJ maintenance" has never been an issue to the TWU. It seems quite strange that the TWU has never raised the issue of possible layoff of mainline mechanics and increases of EASI and RAMCI because of threats to increase RJ flying. They must have created the "upgrade building cleaners to mechanic" commonly referred to as SRP/OSM progam instead.[BR][BR]In fact, this RJ Maintenance issue was included in the AMFA Organizers "slide show" that Bob Owens likes to make jokes about. This slide show was created in 1999, which was when increase of small jet usage was being predicted by Mike Boyd. In fact, the pre-1995 Mike Boyd-APA video to educate the Pilots includes alot of information regarding RJ. Have you ever had the pleasure of watching this video? Or do you go to the TWU Union meeting for you complete industry update like the other sheep?[BR]

 

[AirwAr]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/24/2003 611 PM autofixer wrote:

Maybe it is because I have been affiliated with USAir for too long, but could AMR management be planning something more diabolical? Is this their version of jets for jobs? Who will be furloughed first in a massive downsize--Eagle? Then the AMR pilots can move down into the RJs and have jobs, a'la USAir's jets for jobs? Always be suspicious of management making a 180 turn...there is a hidden agenda.
----------------
[/blockquote]

It's true that someone would be put on the street. Carty even mentioned this as a deterrent to a merged seniority list in his road shows. However, is it possible that the current Eagle employees wouldn't be pushed off the list? Maybe, instead of laying AMR employees off, Eagle could expand to take over the AX flying. I'm not saying that I would like to see AX people pushed to unemployment, however, if it has to be, I would prefer that it be non-AMR employees.

 

[Hopeful]

Does anyone have numbers on Eagle mechanics, either by a master list or some line stations?

 

[will fix for food]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/25/2003 7:18:58 AM RV4 wrote:


"This just shows how out of touch you really are. Many AA Mechanics that I have been around have wondered since the mid 90's, why the issue of "who does RJ maintenance" has never been an issue to the TWU."


This must have been breakroom talk, as I have never heard you, or anyone else, say it. So yes, I will admit that I am out of touch with what you guys say while standing around the watercooler. BTW, how come the ATR and Saab maintenance wasn/t an issue prior to the mid 90's? Were they below you?


"It seems quite strange that the TWU has never raised the issue of possible layoff of mainline mechanics and increases of EASI and RAMCI because of threats to increase RJ flying. They must have created the "upgrade building cleaners to mechanic" commonly referred to as SRP/OSM progam instead."


I suspect that the same apathy towards Eagle that existed at A/A also existed at our much vaunted union. However, I do remember that in the most recent TWU contract proposal at A/A the issue of combining the forces was brought up. Was that just an issue meant to be dropped right away in exchange for money? I suspect so.


"In fact, this RJ Maintenance issue was included in the AMFA Organizers "slide show" that Bob Owens likes to make jokes about. This slide show was created in 1999, which was when increase of small jet usage was being predicted by Mike Boyd. In fact, the pre-1995 Mike Boyd-APA video to educate the Pilots includes alot of information regarding RJ. Have you ever had the pleasure of watching this video?"


I have seen neither the AMFA slide show or the Boyd video, although I did read what was probably the equivalent of the Boyd video in text format. I actually didn/t even know the AMFA slideshow existed, which doesn/t surprise me. AMFA, as you know, was trying to organize Eagle, and if it was known that they were advancing the idea of taking the RJ maintenance to mainline there would have been a backlash that would have hurt their drive at Eagle. Just like there will be an anti-TWU backlash in the future at Eagle which will benefit AMFA if there is talk of a list merger and there is any whisper of a staple.



"Or do you go to the TWU Union meeting for you complete industry update like the other sheep?"


Oh...ouch...I must have struck a nerve with you, as I am now a "TWU sheep".
Like I stated once before, I am no TWU cheerleader. But on the other hand, just because we share an interest in craft unionism it doesn/t mean that I have to agree with any or all of your statements. In fact I wonder about your objectivity sometimes as I remember you signing off one of your posts with the statement "Thank God for O.V. Delle-Femine" Can that kind of devotion and objectivity exist together?
----------------
[/blockquote]

 

[Buck]

If the pilot groups were to merge their seniority lists, would the TWU follow? Both AA and AE maintenance are represented by the TWU. Although (NHBB) I am not sure who represents Fleet Service at Eagle?

 

[will fix for food]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/25/2003 9:00:23 AM Hopeful wrote:

Does anyone have numbers on Eagle mechanics, either by a master list or some line stations?
----------------
[/blockquote]

According to the last seniority list available there are about 1000+/- 50.

 

[will fix for food]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/25/2003 8:57:39 AM Buck wrote:

If the pilot groups were to merge their seniority lists, would the TWU follow? Both AA and AE maintenance are represented by the TWU. Although (NHBB) I am not sure who represents Fleet Service at Eagle?
----------------
[/blockquote]

The TWU.

 

[Buck]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/25/2003 12:00:20 PM will fix for food wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/25/2003 8:57:39 AM Buck wrote:

If the pilot groups were to merge their seniority lists, would the TWU follow? Both AA and AE maintenance are represented by the TWU. Although (NHBB) I am not sure who represents Fleet Service at Eagle?
----------------
[/blockquote]

The TWU.

----------------
[/blockquote]
So it should be a breeze to combine the Flight Attendants and the Ground personal?

 

[TimeOff]

[/blockquote]
So it should be a breeze to combine the Flight Attendants and the Ground personal?
----------------
I don't think that mergeing the f/a's (APFA(AA) & AFA(AE))list will be that easy.
At Eagle there are 1,400 F/A (give or take) and about 26,000 AA f/a's (give or take).

It might end up on a vote to what will be the solution and if a vote on to merge comes thru I belive the outcome will be that AE f/a's be on the bottom of the senority list as it happened to TWA,LLC and then Eagle f/a's be furloughed as there are TWA,LLC F/A's on the street right now, they would have to be brought back as they will be more senior to the AE f/a's and then all of Eagle f/as will be furloughed.

I hope I'm wrong becuase if this merger does happen(and things I mentioned before happen) I for one will be at the unemployment line will a letter saying officialy, "That Im a 10year furloughed AA flight attendant(as Eagle will be non exsisting at the time of the merge)and I need to eat do you have any food stamps left.... Please!!!"

 

[will fix for food]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/25/2003 6:33:33 PM Buck wrote:

So it should be a breeze to combine the Flight Attendants and the Ground personal?
----------------
[/blockquote]


Buck, have you ever heard of a seniority list merger being a breeze? No matter what method is used, staple or DOH, someone is going to feel shafted. Besides, even though both employee groups are represented by the TWU, meaning a merger SHOULD be somewhat organized we still have Jim Little presiding over it....

 

[FA Mikey]

Its one thing to have the pilots on a single list. It has no benefit to do the same for the flight attendants. I dont think you will see that happen.

 

[RV4]

[BR][BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/25/2003 7:52:33 PM will fix for food wrote:[BR]Buck, have you ever heard of a seniority list merger being a breeze? No matter what method is used, staple or DOH, someone is going to feel shafted. Besides, even though both employee groups are represented by the TWU, meaning a merger SHOULD be somewhat organized we still have Jim Little presiding over it.... [BR]

 

[Buck]

[BR][BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/25/2003 7:52:33 PM will fix for food wrote: [BR][BR][BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/25/2003 6:33:33 PM Buck wrote: [BR][BR]So it should be a breeze to combine the Flight Attendants and the Ground personal?[BR]----------------[BR][/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR][BR]Buck, have you ever heard of a seniority list merger being a breeze? No matter what method is used, staple or DOH, someone is going to feel shafted. Besides, even though both employee groups are represented by the TWU, meaning a merger SHOULD be somewhat organized we still have Jim Little presiding over it.... [BR] [BR][BR][BR]BTW, Eagle watercooler talk is that if all of the Eagle guys were to get laid off because of a staple there might be grounds for a DFR lawsuit. Personally, I don/t know if it has legal merit, but I betcha Seham etc. would like to get their mitts on that one. [BR][BR]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]No it has never been easy. But I did get your attention. Just because Little Jim is presiding, does not mean it will be an organized event. I do not know what the American Eagle contract SCOPE states, but the AA/TWU Scope portion on Mergers, Acquisitions and Successorship is below.[BR][BR][BR][FONT face=TimesNewRoman][BR][BR]
[P align=left][/FONT][b][FONT face=Tahoma,Bold size=2][B][FONT face=Tahoma,Bold size=2](i) Merger, Purchase, or Acquisition by Another Company: In the event of a merger, purchase, or acquisition of the Company by another company, the TWU and the Company will meet to discuss the merger, purchase, or acquisition. The Company will provide the TWU with information concerning the proposed merger, purchase, or acquisition at the earliest feasible time to allow for the Union to prepare for those discussions. Those discussions will include the impact of the merger, purchase, or acquisition upon the TWU represented employees.[BR][BR]
[P align=left](j) Labor Protection Provisions: In the event of a merger, purchase, or acquisition of the Company by another company, the integration of the seniority lists of the respective employee groups will be governed by the provisions of Sections 3 & 13 of Allegheny-Mohawk, 59CAB22 (1972). The employee groups of each carrier will remain separated until such time as the seniority lists are integrated in accordance with this paragraph.[BR][BR]
[P align=left](k) Successorship:[BR][BR]
[P align=left](1) The Agreement will be binding upon any Successor. The Company will not bring a single step or multi-step Successorship Transaction to final conclusion unless the Successor agrees, in writing, to:[BR][BR]
[P align=left](a) recognize the TWU as the representative of employees on the TWU System Seniority lists consistent with the Railway Labor Act, as amended;[BR][BR]
[P align=left](B) employ the employees on the TWU System Seniority list in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement; [BR]
[P align=left]© assume and be bound by this Agreement.[BR][BR]
[P align=left](2) If the Successor is an Air Carrier or an affiliate of an Air Carrier, the Company will, at the option of the TWU, require the Successor to agree to integrate the pre-transaction System Seniority list of the Company and the Successor in a fair and equitable manner within twelve (12) months of the Successorship transaction pursuant to Sections 3 and 13 of the Allegheny-Mohawk LPPs. The requirement of this provision does not apply to the Company’s acquisition of all or part of another Air Carrier in a transaction, which includes the acquisition of aircraft and employees.[/b][/FONT][/B][/FONT][/P]

 

[will fix for food]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/25/2003 9:54:45 PM Buck wrote:


I do not know what the American Eagle contract SCOPE states....


[----------------
[/blockquote]


"In the event the Company is a party to any merger, consolidation, reorganization or similar corporation transaction, the Company will give the Union written notice of such transactions, and opportunity to discuss the transaction at least (30) days prior to its effective date."


That is it in it's entirety. That was written by Jim Little by the way.