I hope I''m wrong but the more I read what I got in the mail the more unhappier I become...we can''t win..if we vote yes...we are screwed if we vote no we are screwed..it''s a no win situation..and I don''t see a happy ending either way.....how soon can we all say Mid-Atlantic...$13.01 an hour..welcome to unemployment.
CWA sold us out to increse membership dues $$$$....
- Thread starter Res
- Start date
Did you notice that neither the CWA nor management are saying how much $$$ they are going to be saving by getting this TA passed? I am willing to bet my job that it is over $150 million bucks on a group that costs only $231 million per year ($231 figured from last year of course!). The last one they mentioned which was when the company offered the 3 option deal was $110 million. But now they also get to insource our jobs to get about 40% to go from $21.86/hr to $13.01/hr and 30% from whatever they were making to about 60% of it. The other 30% at the top of our seniority lists will drop from $21.86 to $20.05/hr but they are so close to retirement that the early retirements coming later will cause that percentage of us still making $20.05/hr to be next to nothing in just a few months. I guess they would have only about 100 agents in RES still making over $20/hr after December. The rest of us are screwed royal.
Oh and did anyone else need proof that the CWA sold us out? Here it is. The agents on furlough about 4,000 of us which have practically no chance to come back to work even in 4 years are getting to vote on this contract!!!!! Never has any union ever had any non-active employees vote for an active contract period. It's against the union's charter and the current contract, all established proceedures and labor law! But, if the company and the union want it, then the rest of us are screwed royally! Then of course you have the Express agents at Piedmont, Allegheny, PSA, and Mid Atlantic being forced to have CWA representation without a vote! They will all be forced to pay dues to a union which never asked if they wanted them at all. I'm sure it's illegal to take money from someone who doesn't owe it, never had dealings with them, and never had a choice in the matter. But, the only way these things can be corrected is if we as a group pool some cash together to hire some attorneys to represent us against the CWA and then of course against the company too! Big time cash we're talking! I hope the next time the company wants to screw someone, they'll be looking at those people at the controls of those tin tubes in the sky! Then they'd really have a prize in their sights!
I still want this piece of crap to pass though, and get furloughed so I can take advantage of those flight benefits just like those who are already furloughed!
CWA and U, partners in crime?
Oh and did anyone else need proof that the CWA sold us out? Here it is. The agents on furlough about 4,000 of us which have practically no chance to come back to work even in 4 years are getting to vote on this contract!!!!! Never has any union ever had any non-active employees vote for an active contract period. It's against the union's charter and the current contract, all established proceedures and labor law! But, if the company and the union want it, then the rest of us are screwed royally! Then of course you have the Express agents at Piedmont, Allegheny, PSA, and Mid Atlantic being forced to have CWA representation without a vote! They will all be forced to pay dues to a union which never asked if they wanted them at all. I'm sure it's illegal to take money from someone who doesn't owe it, never had dealings with them, and never had a choice in the matter. But, the only way these things can be corrected is if we as a group pool some cash together to hire some attorneys to represent us against the CWA and then of course against the company too! Big time cash we're talking! I hope the next time the company wants to screw someone, they'll be looking at those people at the controls of those tin tubes in the sky! Then they'd really have a prize in their sights!
I still want this piece of crap to pass though, and get furloughed so I can take advantage of those flight benefits just like those who are already furloughed!
CWA and U, partners in crime?
RealityCheck
Senior
- Aug 20, 2002
- 289
- 0
Lilninj, you take such a staunch stance on things and then sell your soul for lousy flight benefits? Come on, where are your gonads?
You are correct,it is a no win situation no matter how you vote.The company might stay afloat, and in fact prosper nicely at the expense of thousands of 13 an hour agents, both new and old, when the economy turns around. With all these drastic cuts how can U not expect to start making a profit within the next 6-9 months? Or most certainly during the next few years? And CWA agts will be left holding the bag for 6 years while UM and the rest of the industry start re-lining their pockets.I finally received my copy of TA and looked at the salary scale chart for 6 years and when I saw 21.86 top out in 2008 versus 22.05 today, even though only a small perctg of the agents will be earning that amount, I basically said NO WAY.
I see a pathetic 5 days annual sick leave 'penalty if you use it' policy, and said NO WAY.
I see swapping priviledges on the quarter hour amended, and thought WHO CARES? WHY was this an issue? NO WAY.
I see in the future reduced compensation 10-30 year agents being watched by BIG BROTHER for every infinitesimal moment they are sined in and out of the phones and computers with no plans to back off, 'stats wise', from some of the most productive customer oriented group employees a company could ever wish to have(although cust svc is not a-priori any longer). I want to see revenue numbers, that is the bottom line,not how long you spoke to passengers on average...... I say NO WAY.
The folks who vote YES have a right to, as I do to vote NO, but my opinion is they are just delaying the inevitable. Rez will be downsized and shifted to a greater pctg. of dot com work at a lower pay scale.Ato's are becoming more express.People who have put years and years into this company are being shafted. CWA wants to keep the dues flowing in, and they get this either way, unless the company liquidates. Officers are pushing this because they don't want to lose their cushey deployment rights to do CWA paper shuffling work 1 or 2 a week, while getting a wonderful break from the stresses of the CS job, and at the same A scale pay rate.
And finally there should have been clauses indicating quicker snapbacks or salary benefit renegotiations permitted if company showed a certain pctg of profitability over and above expectations.Especially if debt equity ratio even with 1 BIL loan were to become more in line respectably in a couple of years. 6 years is too long to wait.
You are correct,it is a no win situation no matter how you vote.The company might stay afloat, and in fact prosper nicely at the expense of thousands of 13 an hour agents, both new and old, when the economy turns around. With all these drastic cuts how can U not expect to start making a profit within the next 6-9 months? Or most certainly during the next few years? And CWA agts will be left holding the bag for 6 years while UM and the rest of the industry start re-lining their pockets.I finally received my copy of TA and looked at the salary scale chart for 6 years and when I saw 21.86 top out in 2008 versus 22.05 today, even though only a small perctg of the agents will be earning that amount, I basically said NO WAY.
I see a pathetic 5 days annual sick leave 'penalty if you use it' policy, and said NO WAY.
I see swapping priviledges on the quarter hour amended, and thought WHO CARES? WHY was this an issue? NO WAY.
I see in the future reduced compensation 10-30 year agents being watched by BIG BROTHER for every infinitesimal moment they are sined in and out of the phones and computers with no plans to back off, 'stats wise', from some of the most productive customer oriented group employees a company could ever wish to have(although cust svc is not a-priori any longer). I want to see revenue numbers, that is the bottom line,not how long you spoke to passengers on average...... I say NO WAY.
The folks who vote YES have a right to, as I do to vote NO, but my opinion is they are just delaying the inevitable. Rez will be downsized and shifted to a greater pctg. of dot com work at a lower pay scale.Ato's are becoming more express.People who have put years and years into this company are being shafted. CWA wants to keep the dues flowing in, and they get this either way, unless the company liquidates. Officers are pushing this because they don't want to lose their cushey deployment rights to do CWA paper shuffling work 1 or 2 a week, while getting a wonderful break from the stresses of the CS job, and at the same A scale pay rate.
And finally there should have been clauses indicating quicker snapbacks or salary benefit renegotiations permitted if company showed a certain pctg of profitability over and above expectations.Especially if debt equity ratio even with 1 BIL loan were to become more in line respectably in a couple of years. 6 years is too long to wait.
The key thing is where are we to pick the battles??? There is a time and a place for everything...we have the place but it is at the wrong time. If the company was making money and still demanded what they are asking from us, then we have the correct time. The bottom line is if I vote yes I wind up selling out some of my fellow co workers to DotCom. If I vote no the BK judge will do the bidding either to some of my fellow employees or allow the company to outsource. I also keep in mind that the company basically wanted Carte Blanche in the outsourcing within the customer service group and CWA stood firm. We have to also keep in mind that the majority of the employee groups have given, and we will not be the exeption. We can either vote it in, or once again allow the BK judge to delegate it in. Tough choice for tough times. I have yet cast my vote but will sometime this weekend after rereading the TA many times this weekend. We all need also to keep in mind that this is only one phase of the changes....just the tip of the iceberg. More to come.
gilbertguy
Senior
- Aug 29, 2002
- 368
- 0
![14.gif']](/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2F%5Bimg+src%3D%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usaviation.com%2Fidealbb%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2F7.gif%27%5D+What%27s+even+sadder+is+while+the+rest+of+US+%28IAM%2CCWA%29see+our+futures+heading+down+the+crapper%2C+the+pilots%28ALPA%29+are+already+negotiating+an+iron-clad+contract+with+MDA....assuring+their+piece+of+the+pie+while+we+must+lick+the+plate...+%5Bimg+src%3D%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usaviation.com%2Fidealbb%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2F14.gif%27%5D&hash=259071a740ed54d457181b39e08b2c7e)
ChairPrefRes
Member
- Aug 19, 2002
- 89
- 0
CWA did a good job rising to the occasion going up against the best at what he does (Glass)... CWA was holding no aces in its hand...A no vote is a win for the company...You could lose everything as a employee at will...Where could I start...Givin the company mindset how about 15.00 per hr tops no more vacation this year no furlogh protection, no protection for us to do reservations period,they could set up contractors right in our own buildings and farm out the work...no more seniority protection...The union would have to start from scratch to get your bennies...And where the hell are you going to find a job right now that starts you w 6 weeks vacation and your crying about giving up partial pay on that...Your new job will get you 1 week after a year and 2wks after 5 years and thats even if you find one...This is a no brainer if you want a new job you can start looking now... than if your furloghed youll get 3 yrs flight bennies...You can't change things that mangement is getting by voting no on this...You control your own destiny...Choose whats best for you...
Could someone point me to the section in the current contract that protects us from a station or employees being reclassified? I was looking to do a language comparision -- but I can't find anything that protects us NOW, in the sense that folks are worried about everyone being suddenly cut to $13.01 an hour.
Thanks for the help!
Thanks for the help!
RealityCheck
Senior
- Aug 20, 2002
- 289
- 0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/14/2002 9:03:13 AM MCORORES wrote:
The bottom line is if I vote yes I wind up selling out some of my fellow co workers to DotCom. If I vote no the BK judge will do the bidding either to some of my fellow employees or allow the company to outsource. I also keep in mind that the company basically wanted Carte Blanche in the outsourcing within the customer service group and CWA stood firm. [/blockquote]
Not selling out just your fellow workers, it could be also be yourself, especially in Orlando. No outsourcing?You are correct, but reclassification of many many jobs at a lower scale accomplishes the same thing. Pure Semantics.To=may=to, To=ma=hto.CWA accomplished nothing there.Except to keep the dues coming in.
I easily visualize 1 office closing, and no standard rez transfers being made available to top CS positions.Those who wish to transfer to another office as internet tech will downgrade to dotcom pay, and to fill any other vacancies they will come from PAST furloughees who dont mind making 13 an hour or less, and last resort hire off the street.
So CS is screwed either way.Everything is becoming more and more automated now,no waivers are being granted for anything except obvious agent error. Dot com bookings and from other sources are increasing, itin. changes can be handled by them or a smaller complement of current REZ.
I see groups/international and specialty res desks hanging in for a longer haul, but general sales is slowly,actually, more quickly,going out the door as we know it today. And especially if we vote YES. Because that is the contracts intent. Read between the lines. And its not like there hasn't been any warnings,its been coming for years, most especially the last 2. That was the time for current frantic people to get their finances and careers in order. Not wait til now.
----------------
On 9/14/2002 9:03:13 AM MCORORES wrote:
The bottom line is if I vote yes I wind up selling out some of my fellow co workers to DotCom. If I vote no the BK judge will do the bidding either to some of my fellow employees or allow the company to outsource. I also keep in mind that the company basically wanted Carte Blanche in the outsourcing within the customer service group and CWA stood firm. [/blockquote]
Not selling out just your fellow workers, it could be also be yourself, especially in Orlando. No outsourcing?You are correct, but reclassification of many many jobs at a lower scale accomplishes the same thing. Pure Semantics.To=may=to, To=ma=hto.CWA accomplished nothing there.Except to keep the dues coming in.
I easily visualize 1 office closing, and no standard rez transfers being made available to top CS positions.Those who wish to transfer to another office as internet tech will downgrade to dotcom pay, and to fill any other vacancies they will come from PAST furloughees who dont mind making 13 an hour or less, and last resort hire off the street.
So CS is screwed either way.Everything is becoming more and more automated now,no waivers are being granted for anything except obvious agent error. Dot com bookings and from other sources are increasing, itin. changes can be handled by them or a smaller complement of current REZ.
I see groups/international and specialty res desks hanging in for a longer haul, but general sales is slowly,actually, more quickly,going out the door as we know it today. And especially if we vote YES. Because that is the contracts intent. Read between the lines. And its not like there hasn't been any warnings,its been coming for years, most especially the last 2. That was the time for current frantic people to get their finances and careers in order. Not wait til now.
The phrase dot.com does not really apply here. It is certainly included but it is all encompassing. The Internet Passenger Support classification will include all duties even remotely related to anything but a reservation made by RES via phone, and ticketed via RES by phone. Everything else is subject to the new classification. There is no protection for the vast majority of us being switched to that classification on day one meaning on SEPTEMBER 18TH!!!!!!!!!!!! You will be making a whopping $13.01/hour, 5 sick days, 8 holidays, max 2 weeks vacation, 75% vacation pay, 50% of whatever pension occurs and if it occurs etc etc etc etc. They need not close one center in fact, they just need to cut the numbers, we are talking in the neighborhood of 70 percent of us now will be switched but immediately!!!!!!!!!
They simply have 3 years in which to do that, but give me one reason why they would wait, there is none of course.
Let's take the flight benefits and leave so we can remember fondly what we did have and not resent what we have by staying!
Lilninj
They simply have 3 years in which to do that, but give me one reason why they would wait, there is none of course.
Let's take the flight benefits and leave so we can remember fondly what we did have and not resent what we have by staying!
Lilninj
While I am a CS agent in DCA with 18years, and I too do not like the T/A, I must confess that it was better than what I was expecting, and even though I do not like it, it is realistic.. I have not voted yet and will do some real soul searching this weekend before voting but I do not believe That CWA sold us out.. I honestly believe that those at the table did their absolute best with what they had to work with. Many people have expressed their outrage and contempt with what we ended up with, but before you do/say anything aloud or written ask yourself this question.. What have I done to help with the negiotions.. have you volunteered your time and energy to help your fellow agents with grievences?, are you a shop steward? Have decieded to run for any elected offices?.. Everyone and I mean everyone in CWA has had the chance, or oppurtunity to do those things, and if you choose not to, then stop complaining, except what our leadership has gotten us and deal with it..
The Presidents of the locals were at the table and they definatly had a fine line to deal with, cause everyone has their own agenda, and their own issues, likes and dislikes, and the balanceing act between all members in your locals and realization of what we were going to get was just not there..
ok flame away at me now... I can take it...i can deal with it..
The Presidents of the locals were at the table and they definatly had a fine line to deal with, cause everyone has their own agenda, and their own issues, likes and dislikes, and the balanceing act between all members in your locals and realization of what we were going to get was just not there..
ok flame away at me now... I can take it...i can deal with it..
RealityCheck
Senior
- Aug 20, 2002
- 289
- 0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/14/2002 1:57:45 PM Lilninj wrote:
They need not close one center in fact, they just need to cut the numbers, we are talking in the neighborhood of 70 percent of us now will be switched but immediately!!!!!!!!!
They simply have 3 years in which to do that, but give me one reason why they would wait, there is none of course.
Lilninj
----------------
[/blockquote]
3 years? I thought the TA said within 2? And you are correct in asking why would they wait.I dont think it will happen on 9-18 but somewhere near first of the year seems logical(assuming this vote passes).And if it does pass, I will join you in a few weeks/months in the box seat section of reality checks dedicated to the I TOLD YOU SO's, while the victims cry in their spilled milk because the bandaid fell off.
----------------
On 9/14/2002 1:57:45 PM Lilninj wrote:
They need not close one center in fact, they just need to cut the numbers, we are talking in the neighborhood of 70 percent of us now will be switched but immediately!!!!!!!!!
They simply have 3 years in which to do that, but give me one reason why they would wait, there is none of course.
Lilninj
----------------
[/blockquote]
3 years? I thought the TA said within 2? And you are correct in asking why would they wait.I dont think it will happen on 9-18 but somewhere near first of the year seems logical(assuming this vote passes).And if it does pass, I will join you in a few weeks/months in the box seat section of reality checks dedicated to the I TOLD YOU SO's, while the victims cry in their spilled milk because the bandaid fell off.
RC...what makes you sooo sure that MCO will be the Dotcom office??? Lets see...MCO is owned by the company and also the ajoining land is also owned. Room for expansion. INT is leased, but with speciality functions moving from PIT to INT they should be free and clear. That leaves us PIT. PIT speciality functions are going down to INT, PIT more than likely will become MDA hub just like CVG is really a Comair hub for DL. Both PIT and INT have more senior agents than MCO. Hate to say it and I do hope I am wrong which would not be the first time, IF and that is a big IF one office does go Dot Com...IMO it would be PIT. Of course this does make sense, but when has the company done anything that has made sense?????
Pay close attention to this three card monte.
The company and ALPA and AFA said they needed x dollars in concessions, and settled on about 85% of that target.
In 2003, the company will realize that savings, and no more, at ALPA/AFA.
OK, the company targeted savings at CWA/IAM fleet at x dollars, and settled at about 85% of that figure.
In 2003, the company savings will FAR exceed the negotiated amount. Here's how.
The negotiated savings are calculated on the current fleet of 245 to 280 aircraft. ALPA/IAM mech has language in their contracts agreeing not to furlough employees BELOW what is needed to operate those aircraft.
THERE IS NO SUCH LANGUAGE PROTECTING CWA/IAM FLEET!!
U is free to replace as many mainline agents with MDA as they please, in any or all stations. Note the 'seasonal' language in the CWA t/a. And if you think they can't MDA a hub, ask anybody in PIT what's about to happen to them.
I plan to begin pressing my union leadership tomorrow to hold U to the negotiated targets, and not to gain an additional windfall. So should you all.
Dave said he needed x dollars out of our groups. Why give him x plus millions more?
The company and ALPA and AFA said they needed x dollars in concessions, and settled on about 85% of that target.
In 2003, the company will realize that savings, and no more, at ALPA/AFA.
OK, the company targeted savings at CWA/IAM fleet at x dollars, and settled at about 85% of that figure.
In 2003, the company savings will FAR exceed the negotiated amount. Here's how.
The negotiated savings are calculated on the current fleet of 245 to 280 aircraft. ALPA/IAM mech has language in their contracts agreeing not to furlough employees BELOW what is needed to operate those aircraft.
THERE IS NO SUCH LANGUAGE PROTECTING CWA/IAM FLEET!!
U is free to replace as many mainline agents with MDA as they please, in any or all stations. Note the 'seasonal' language in the CWA t/a. And if you think they can't MDA a hub, ask anybody in PIT what's about to happen to them.
I plan to begin pressing my union leadership tomorrow to hold U to the negotiated targets, and not to gain an additional windfall. So should you all.
Dave said he needed x dollars out of our groups. Why give him x plus millions more?
The CWA got the express work in the hubs and those extra large cities and any city down the road who happens to become express....the existing express cities will remain teamster cities...The CWA and every other union here has its hands tied...this was a no win situation for anyone and if u think we had any chance at the table to come away with anything better than you should be drug tested....we are on the brink of total failure and all you can do is complain that a union let you down....13.01 hr does suck...but there is no way to stop the company from doing what they want unless you stop the company completely....the MidAtlantic portion of the contract has yet to be negotiated...I believe the rate of pay for Midatlantic work will be higher than 13.01...the company is not going to hand over every small city to the express group...the RJ plan is for Midatlantic and there will be Midatlantic cities and employees....as far as the CWA looking for more dues payers?...the union is paid to get and keep as many jobs as possible for its members...they cannot force the company's hand in this situation...but the fact is that we have those jobs now and somebody will be able to keep working period...I work in a small city and we are definetely in jeopardy of losing our mainline status and its driving me crazy...I dont want to have to go to phila to work but if i do and someone there junior is displaced to the street they will have an option...that is to keep working and go over to express....without that option there on the STREET....get it?????...on the STREET....so quit *****in about the CWA and what they didnt do...cuz ill bet my next paycheck that u whiners didnt do a thing to help this union since day one.....
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/14/2002 12:44:17 PM Meriel wrote:
Could someone point me to the section in the current contract that protects us from a station or employees being reclassified? I was looking to do a language comparision -- but I can't find anything that protects us NOW, in the sense that folks are worried about everyone being suddenly cut to $13.01 an hour.
Thanks for the help!
----------------
[/blockquote]
Hi Meriel,
The protection was in ALPA's scope clause, whch limited U to 70, then 140 RJ's. Bear in mind U never took full advantage of either number.
As a consequence, U 'expressed' ROA, FAY, and AVL under the pre-concessionary contract, per page 100 of that agreement.
So while U could 'express'themselves, they were limited in the means to do so. Obviously, that is out the window.
Now the joker in the deck is ALPA/IAM mech has language protecting them that states the company will not furlough employees below what is necessary to operate 245 aircraft as a result of 'new aircraft' (aircraft not currently in U's inventory). Fleet/CWA does NOT have this language; U is free to 'express' themselves at will. This leads to an interesting scenario. U negotiated savings at fleet/CWA of x dollars. By shifting a significant portion of mainline employees to express/MDA, they will realize, by millions of dollars, savings in excess of the negotiated target.
----------------
On 9/14/2002 12:44:17 PM Meriel wrote:
Could someone point me to the section in the current contract that protects us from a station or employees being reclassified? I was looking to do a language comparision -- but I can't find anything that protects us NOW, in the sense that folks are worried about everyone being suddenly cut to $13.01 an hour.
Thanks for the help!
----------------
[/blockquote]
Hi Meriel,
The protection was in ALPA's scope clause, whch limited U to 70, then 140 RJ's. Bear in mind U never took full advantage of either number.
As a consequence, U 'expressed' ROA, FAY, and AVL under the pre-concessionary contract, per page 100 of that agreement.
So while U could 'express'themselves, they were limited in the means to do so. Obviously, that is out the window.
Now the joker in the deck is ALPA/IAM mech has language protecting them that states the company will not furlough employees below what is necessary to operate 245 aircraft as a result of 'new aircraft' (aircraft not currently in U's inventory). Fleet/CWA does NOT have this language; U is free to 'express' themselves at will. This leads to an interesting scenario. U negotiated savings at fleet/CWA of x dollars. By shifting a significant portion of mainline employees to express/MDA, they will realize, by millions of dollars, savings in excess of the negotiated target.
