Cwa Contract

[Doc]

Is there a clause in the CWA contract for snap back in the event of a merger or acquisition? I was told there was and have been reading but can’t find it.

 

[Severed-N-Happy]

Even if there was, I would bet the Johnnie Cochrane scam artist clones would find a way to weasel out of it.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

There was one in the IAM mechanics contract under scope. Is it still in there 700 or was it worded out under the company proposal that was voted in?

 

[700UW]

The Alleghany/Mohawk Labor Protection Provisions are still in the contract along with succership language.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

The snapback to parity too?

 

[700UW]

Snapback to parity was voted away in the first concession back in 2002.

 

[dbcooper]

"The Alleghany/Mohawk Labor Protection Provisions are still in the contract along with succership language."

700, what exactly are the Alleghany/Mohawk Labor Protection Provisions?

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

This is dated and was written by the USAirways AFA


What ARE the Allegheny-Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before Deregulation of the airline industry, mergers had to be approved by the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB). The CAB usually required that the airlines provide for the protection of employees and their jobs, imposing these labor protective provisions' or LPPs as a condition before granting approval of a merger. After Deregulation, the CAB was eliminated so that any protection like the LPPs we had to be negotiated it into our collective bargaining agreement, which is exactly what we did.
The LPPs in our contract are the same as those used in the Allegheny-Mohawk merger in the early 1970's. These provide that we are to be treated in a "fair and equitable" way. The LPPs protect our compensation levels, displacement in the event flying moves as a result of the merger, seniority, and numerous other factors that could be effected by the merger. Our contract also provides other protection for our seniority and United has agreed not to furlough any employees.


Seniority Rights
Under the LPPs our seniority integration must be "fair and equitable." But beyond that, our contract provides that seniority integration is to be done as provided in the AFA Constitution and Bylaws. Since United and US Airways flight attendants are both in AFA, the AFA Constitution and Bylaws provides that seniority is to be determined by date of hire.


Compensation
Under the LPPs, we cannot be forced to earn less than what we earned prior to the merger. If we are unable to make what we did before the merger we would be entitled to an allowance to bring our new wages up to equal a monthly average of the last 12 months immediately before the merger.

These protections are good for 3 years after the effective date of the merger.

Employment
Our contract gives us better employment protection than the LPP's. We have a 'No-Furlough' clause in Section 1-E of our Agreement which covers all FA's on our seniority list now and until April 30, 2005. United has agreed to be bound by our contract, and they have also promised not to furlough any employees for two years.

 

[Hello Newman]

I just hope the CWA doesn't sell us out again like the spineless jellyfish did
last time. I fthis merger does come about, hopefully we can all go IBT as
HP voted them in recently.....Just think..to have a REAL union... 😀

 

[hharotz]

What is the story with the current CWA contract and outsourced stations in the 50 states? It is my understanding that most HP stations have the gate/counter/baggage functions contracted out (apparently to CO in many cases)...Would a merged US/HP mean that we would have to go on a hiring spree to put actual US employees in stations across the West? In the East, I'd assume that stations where CSA functions are currently contracted out for HP that US employees would simply take over the functions ASAP to reuce costs.

 

[tadjr]

HP has already advised CO that they will not be renewing their contract with them in TPA this summer. CO expects about 6 agents to lose their jobs. No official word yet on US handling them, but it would be stupid not to do it. We are currently hiring CARS to replace some of the 18 agents who will be taking the early out. All of them will be gone by Oct so we might actually have agent openings (EO positions though) to be filled by the end of the year. I have been trying to get a list of cities in the East that have actual HP employees at them, but have not received the info. I dont think they have too many cities with actual HP employees here.

 

[fmc]

MIA,ATL,JFK all have HP employees I was in training with them
COS actually contracts for CO as does TUS

 

[Columbia blue]

Minus TPA, HP has CO handling their groundwork in 10-11 stations...mostly in the east ( PIT,STL,SAT). CO has HP ground support in 4 or 5 stations in the west ( TUS,COS ).

 

[RedOne]

The Alleghany/Mohawk Labor Protection Provisions are still in the contract along with succership language.

[post="272015"][/post]​

....if it's in an IAM contract, it probably is called "SUCKER-SHIP" language

 

[gso2pit]

HP has already advised CO that they will not be renewing their contract with them in TPA this summer. CO expects about 6 agents to lose their jobs. No official word yet on US handling them, but it would be stupid not to do it. We are currently hiring CARS to replace some of the 18 agents who will be taking the early out. All of them will be gone by Oct so we might actually have agent openings (EO positions though) to be filled by the end of the year. I have been trying to get a list of cities in the East that have actual HP employees at them, but have not received the info. I dont think they have too many cities with actual HP employees here.

[post="272123"][/post]​

Actual HP employees?
Try looking in:
DCA/IAD/BWI/ORD/RDU/MIA/JFK/DFW/BOS to start.....