Have been talking to friends around the system that have attended the informational meetings put on by the IAM (see iam141.org and click on US Airways Update,12/30/02 for a list of locations and information officers). This is a synopsis of those meetings, and there are witnesses to all of these statements.
1. Severance - the company MAY continue severance, but may invoke force majuere to cease furlough benefits.
2. 279 a/c - see point 1. The info officers some of us spoke with agreed the 279 a/c is meaningless with regards to preserving fleet service mainline jobs.
3. Express - The new language provides additional options in the event a station is converted to express. Previously the option was to transfer or accept furlough. The new option is remaining in place at express rates. The caveats remain;
a. Nothing prohibits the company from adjusting fleet service/CWA ratios.
b. Fewer agents will be required.
c. Still do not have a clear understanding what happens in mainline stations where express agents, not mainline, handle express flights. It appears mainline agents transferring into this situation may be junior to existing express agents. Further complicating this is some express carriers have CBA's.
There will be expansion of express agents handling express flights in the hubs and focus cities. That is already being done, but as mainline converts to express, it will just get bigger. The way it was put was "all of those RJ's have got to go somewhere, and they ain't gonna pay mainline to handle them."
Stated that 6 to 17 stations are being considered for conversion, but the company will not say when or where. Four stations to be reclassified from class I to class II soon. Likely candidates GSO, CLE, CMH and IAD.
4. The $14 million dollar question - All agreed the language does not compel 'x' furloughs/downgrades to express by 'y' date. They were simply incredulous at the notion that the company is not going to realize major savings on this issue, however.
5. Calling the bluff - all agreed this was a perilous notion. If there is a no vote on the part of the small fry (fleet,CWA) the company MAY elect to petition the court to ignore it's 1113 agreements, and abrogate the contract, and impose it's last offer. The company may also decide to liquidate. The problem with going to court is it's time-consuming. Bronner may elect to liquidate in order to preserve the remaining value of U, rather than allow further deterioration of his assets.
I welcome additional info. There are more meetings tomorrow, so if you have a question, get it to somebody attending - again, the list is on iam141.org.
In closing, we're between a rock and a hard place. Educate yourselves on the issues, assess yourself and the marketplace, and vote your interests.
Luck to us all.
