Fleet Service topic IAM 141

[Tim Nelson]

Tim, I have a some questions about the info on "joeyspage" vs. Sept T/A vs. Present T/A:



From joeyspage:
1. Holidays
Last TA allowed 10 holidays with Holiday pay [time plus 1/2 for hours worked on a Holiday]]. This TA restricts holidays up to 7 with no holiday pay.

From Sept T/A:
Article 14 (Holidays) All Employees will be granted the holidays as described in the CBA
effective on the transition date.

Present T/A:
Article 14 (Holidays) Will apply to West Employees on date of ratification.

Effective on date of ratification amend CBA as follows:

· Effective on date of ratification add Memorial Day.

· Effective 1/1/ 2009 add Martin Luther King Day.

Help me here...the 2005 CBA had a total of 5 holidays...Sept T/A mirrored that...and the Present T/A added two. Right or wrong?


Now let's look at double time:

Joeyspage: Double Time
The double time is the exact same as the September rejection, but it was brought from 2011 to the front at date of signing. Although the double time has heavy restrictions and is only available on Saturday after 8 hours, it is nonetheless a gain.

Sept T/A:
6. Article 6 (Overtime) Will apply to East and West Employees no later than (OEI) and is
amended as follows:
Amended language below effective through December 31, 2011.
• Employees will be equalized for actual overtime hours worked and, if signed up on the
overtime availability list, for actual overtime hours offered and refused and for those
overtime hours for which the signed up Employee could not be contacted. Employees who do
not sign up on the availability list will not be charged any hours eligible to work for the
purpose of equalization unless they work the overtime.


Present T/A
Article 6 (Overtime) Will apply to East and West Employees no later than OEI.

Effective on OEI amend CBA as follows:

· Employees will be equalized for actual overtime hours worked and, if signed up on the overtime availability list, for actual overtime hours offered and refused and for those overtime hours for which the signed up Employee could not be contacted. Employees who do not sign up on the availability list will not be charged any hours eligible to work for the purpose of equalization unless they work the overtime.


· Effective OEI the following provision will become effective.


Overtime - Article 6.Q will be modified as follows:


Modify 3. After the weekly overtime qualifier has been met, overtime will be paid at one and one-half (1½) times the regular rate for the first eight (8) hours overtime worked and two (2) times the regular rate for all overtime hours worked thereafter except as provided for in items 4 and 5 below.


Add 4. Employees must work a minimum of four (4) hours at an overtime premium rate on their first regularly scheduled day off in order to be paid two (2) times the regular rate for all overtime hours worked on their second (or third) regularly scheduled day off.


Add 5. Employees who shift trade to be off and who work overtime on the day off shall be paid a maximum rate of time and one-half 1 (½) for the first eight (8) hours of overtime worked and two (2) times the regular rate for all overtime hours worked there after.

What am I missing here...Did the Sept T/A even have the provision for double time? Or did the CBA of 2005 have double time in it...and I miss read it ?


Next...Sick Pay:

joeyspage:
3. Sick Pay
The rejected TA allowed full sick pay. This TA restricts sick pay to only 50% pay and no snapback.


Sept T/A:
13. Article 13 (Sick Leave) West Employees will fall under the sick leave policy beginning on
1/1/2008. In addition, any remaining unused sick leave days from the Employee’s sick leave
bank that were rolled over on January 1, 2006 and all unused sick days accrued in 2006 and 2007
by West Employee will be placed into the Employee’s sick leave bank. The CBA will be
modified as follows:
• Modify paragraph B so that the first three (3) days of each occurrence will be paid at 50%
and decremented at 50% rate.
• Employees who have 150 or more days in their sick leave bank on the date of the sick leave
occurrence will be paid 100% and 100% deducted from their sick bank.
• Employees hospitalized overnight within the first three (3) days of any occurrence will have
applicable sick leave days paid at 100%.

Present T/A:
13. Article 13 (Sick Leave) Will apply to West Employees on 1/1/2009. In addition, any remaining unused sick leave days from the Employee’s sick leave bank that were rolled over on January 1, 2007 and all unused sick days accrued in 2007 and 2008 by West Employee will be placed into the Employee’s sick leave bank.

Effective on OEI amend CBA as follows:

· Modify paragraph B so that the first three (3) days of each occurrence will be paid at fifty –percent (50%) and decremented at fifty-percent (50%) rate.

· Employees who have one hundred (100) or more days in their sick leave bank on the date of the sick leave occurrence will be paid one-hundred percent (100%) and one-hundred percent (100%) deducted from their sick bank.

· Employees hospitalized overnight within the first three (3) days of any occurrence will have applicable sick leave days paid at one-hundred percent (100%).

Now what am I missing here...Full sick pay on the Sept T/A...umm where?

Also, the following is from the 2005 CBA on "Sick Leave"

B. Accrued sick leave is used to compensate employees for
absences due to personal illness or injury only (off the job).
Sick leave will not be used to supplement statutory benefits
for OI. Employees will not be paid for the first sick day of
each occurrence. The second through fourth sick leave
day(s) of each occurrence, where employees are eligible to
use accrued sick time, will be paid at fifty (50) percent of the
employee's scheduled hours and decremented at a fifty (50)
percent rate.

The comparison was between this "Wal Mart" contract against the one we voted down in September. I don't follow what you're missing? Language is everything in contracts. Kindly read the 'whole' September agreement. When you do, you'll get your answer. Instead of telling you, I'd rather you read it with your own eyes so you can know the truth.
This contract was a "DEEP" concession to the one that fleet service rejected. You lost not only 3 Holidays but you lost Holiday pay on ALL holidays. The rejected contract also allowed Full sick pay, shift differ, pension increase, insourcing language. All of those are BIG CONCESSIONS and they are all GONE and Gutted! This contract is a skeleton with bottom of the industry sick time and vacation. Why on earth would ANYONE vote for such a garbage thing? Especially since we have collective bargainging, this shouldn't be tolerated. The only reason why it was is because of the mixed signals Randy Canale sends to the company. Canale and crew didn't negotiate squat, Hemenway just red circled all the meat in the last contract and eliminated it and told Randy to deal with it. Randy will be voted out in less than 50 days so we won't have to deal with his treason after we vote this contract out.

This contract 'rapes' fleet service of any dignity and respect they have. It guarantees fleet service to be behind non-union Continental by a $1.50 and it guarantees fleet service to have the absolute WORST vacation schedule and sick leave schedule in the entire industry. United's bankrupt contract BLOWS this non-bankrupt proposal out of the water. Doesn't it say something and doesn't it ring a bell when your company made $1 billion over the last two years and has the second best balance sheet in the industry but doesnt offer you something even remotely close to United's bankrupt contract? Don't you believe you deserve better?
Don't let Canale and his goons beat you folks down telling you oil is high, Aloha went bankrupt, so you Must let your company shove this up your a$$ so you can live to fight another day!

This contract blows and it is worth MILLIONS less than the one you rejected.

Read the Facts here highlight sheet and information on the vote so you can have an informed decision. More facts are coming out daily on that site as we just intercepted an email from one of Canale's that contains blatant lies and we will expose it very soon.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago
email: appearances1@aol.com
website: www.joeypage.com/voteno

 

[The Bagfather]

Jester: I honestly don't understand the gist of what your trying to
say about who's right and who's wrong and what canale said or didn't
say. I'm really just asking a question which is what is the process
by which the TWU contract becomes obsolete. I could be wrong but
if I am I want to know what the rules are that make me wrong. How
can a valid contract be changed without a vote? And if this can
happen my belief in this case is that it would be open to legal
challenge.

The reason for this is their would be significant changes for the west
not the least of which would be the potential for outsourcing.
Thanks BF

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim, three questions for you since "merger talks are looming" and most probably with United.

1.-If Usairways merges with United Airlines will IAM Fleet still be held to the TA until 2012 even though United is represented by IAM under a different contract?

2.-Will US IAM fleet merge into present IAM fleet contract of United since they are the bigger group?

3.-When is UA IAM contract expiring?

I would hate to see fleet vote yes on this TA and potentially be locked into it until 2012 while UA reaps the bennies on their own contract and raises Canale got them. History will repeat itself one more time merging these groups together.

United's contract expires in 2009 I believe. Merging seniority list is always negotiable under any merger. So your opininon is as valid as mine on post merger issues.

The one thing we know is that fleet service will be hosing themselves bigtime if they put this in since you hit the nail right on the head "merger talks are looming". This contract is the worst contract in the industry if voted in. It will have the worst sick leave, worst vacation schedule, and among the worst in everything else. If signed it will start off $1.50 behind Continental [which isn't even close to industry wage standards]. Click here for Contract information

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, chicago
email: appearances1@aol.com
website: www.joeypage.com/voteno

 

[GoldenRam94]

IMO what this whole forum is about
I guess it comes down to who's trying to sway who. I would love to
sway votes if I could but I have very little power. So what I do is
join up with like minded people and together maybe we can have
some power.

The idea that we need better protection than the TA provides in
regards to mergers is really just one small reason I'm a no on
the TA, but don't you think it's worth debating? Thanks BF

Agree with that one, make an informed decision, debate it intelligently, understand the impact of a vote on each side, weed through the propaganda from both sides and do what you feel is best, but do not believe that you can somehow halt the inevitability of a merger.

No Direction or Cornhole is all the same when it comes to this, the bottom line is what do you do?

 

[Tim Nelson]

Jester: I honestly don't understand the gist of what your trying to
say about who's right and who's wrong and what canale said or didn't
say. I'm really just asking a question which is what is the process
by which the TWU contract becomes obsolete. I could be wrong but
if I am I want to know what the rules are that make me wrong. How
can a valid contract be changed without a vote? And if this can
happen my belief in this case is that it would be open to legal
challenge.

The reason for this is their would be significant changes for the west
not the least of which would be the potential for outsourcing.
Thanks BF

Jester is just stirring up lies to incite fear and deception so his west brothers and sisters will have a phobia about voting No.

The fact is that Randy Canale can't 'just merge the west in with the east' even if he wanted to. First off he would have to be a madman to do so since it would be the most destructive thing ever known to Labor. Further, the IAM would never allow such destruction. So what Jester sez doesn't make 'good sense', hell it doesn't even make 'bad sense' since his insinuation is so wacky.

Further, the district bylaws restrict any major changes to agreements to ratifications. It's in the bylaws and it's case closed but Randy doesn't tell you that. In fact, as a Local Chairman back in 2001, I asked Tom Miklavic why we had to have a ratification vote on some minor change in our contract called, "Lead referendum" and he reminded me that the District can't change anything in the contract without a vote if there is the least bit negative impact on someone. This negative impact of the Lead referendum only affected a few dozen people BTW.

Thirdly, Canale won't be around anyways so, in theory, if he wanted to violate the biggest article in the bylaws and if the IAM INTL gave him the go ahead, then he won't be able to anyways since he'll be gone.

No my sire, Jester is just running at the mouth. To Jester, kindly ask the east siders about the Lead Referendum. Would you like me to post the District Bylaw for you that is VIVIDLY clear and counters all this rubble and nonsense you are spreading?

For Canale to merge west into east, there would have to be a ratification vote for the west only. I can't possibly see that ever passing your west members.

There has been alot of Bull $h** the last few days and I plan on flushing it all out for the masses. I also asked the Local President of Randy's local to schedule a debate between me and Randy and taped so Randy can't run his mouth like he's been doing these last few days. The contract sux and it has the worst of everything in it. Highlight sheet of Contract

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago
email: appearances1@aol.com
website: www.joeypage.com/voteno

 

[The Bagfather]

Please point out the lies. Some of it's opinion and some of
its reprint from the TA so the lies should be easy to spot. Please,
I know it can be frustrating at times, but I for one would appreciate
that you take a little more time and care and speak more directly
to what you find offensive.

Off the subject a little. Here in SAN we have a ramper who came to
work a little over a year ago. About for months ago realizing that
his work in the navy had qualified him to be a MX. There was an
opening, He got the job and quickly became a lead. With his
extra certificate and the new contract he'll be getting $22.00 hr.

If the TA passes, one of our full time operations agent with 30+
years will get $20.24 four years from now.

I'll leave it up to you to decide if that adequately adresses the
qualification and skill difference. Thanks BF

 

[AluminumEnemaTime]

TIM,

On your joeypages website I found some LIES about the old TA and the new TA. The comparisons between the old and new are not correct.

Especially in regards to the sick pay and holiday amounts. Do you not have any defense to these LIES.

Why are you LIEing to the fleet members?? Can't you allow them to make their choice based on the truth.

This site that your pushing destroys any credibality you ever had. :down:

 

[john john]

Off the subject a little. Here in SAN we have a ramper who came to
work a little over a year ago. About for months ago realizing that
his work in the navy had qualified him to be a MX. There was an
opening, He got the job and quickly became a lead. With his
extra certificate and the new contract he'll be getting $22.00 hr.

If the TA passes, one of our full time operations agent with 30+
years will get $20.24 four years from now.

I'll leave it up to you to decide if that adequately adresses the
qualification and skill difference. Thanks BF

You can get a A&P in the navy?

 

[700UW]

Yes you can, their are many AMTs in the armed services, who do you think fixes their planes?

Enlisted Aircraft Mechanics Eligible for A&P License
From Navy News Service

Feb 23 2004
By Lt. j.g. Doug Johnson
PENSACOLA, FL -- The Department of Defense (DoD) partnered with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to give enlisted mechanics in the military the same credentials as their civilian counterparts. For Sailors and Marines, the Navy and Marine Corps Airframes and Powerplant Program (NMCAPP) has been established at the Center for Naval Aviation Technical Training (CNATT), to ensure all aviation technicians are given the opportunity to earn the federal agency’s industry standard certification.

In the past, military experience was not widely recognized by the FAA, significantly decreasing Sailor and Marine marketability in the civilian sector.

“Trying to get a civilian job without an A&P License is similar to trying to gain access to a military base without the proper credentials--almost impossible,” said CNATT NMCAPP Officer, Lt.

Cmdr. Gabe Castro. “Well, that time is gone. There are now certifications in place for Sailors and Marines which allow our mechanics to enroll in the A&P [airframes and power plants] licensing program.”
In order to enroll, participants must meet basic eligibility requirements, being 18 years of age, an E-4, and having 36 months or more in service. It will take about 30 months to complete the entire program, which includes completing a Qualification Training Package and passing a series of written and oral exams, as well as passing a practical test. After successful completion of the program and required exams, each participant will receive the airframes and powerplants certification from the FAA.

The benefits to Sailors and Marines include no out-of-pocket expenses, as well as the ability to use their military experience and on-the-job training toward certification. Many non-military universities and vocational technical schools offer FAA-approved classes, but the cost associated with these courses can be overwhelming, even with tuition assistance and assistance from the GI Bill.

“Its one of the great new ways we are taking care of our Sailors and Marines,” said CNATT Gunnery Sergeant, Gunnery Sgt. Anthony Sosa. “It shows young Sailors and Marines that we are interested in their future as they continue their careers in the Navy and Marine Corps, but also after they leave their service and embark upon a civilian career.”

For more info on the A&P Licensing Program, visit the USMAP Web site at https://www.cnet.navy.mil/usmap or visit the Center for Naval Aviation Technical Training page on Navy Knowledge Online at www.nko.navy.mil.

 

[john john]

Yes you can, their are many AMTs in the armed services, who do you think fixes their planes?

You better check your facts
New program. Sounds like a good program it was along time coming its about time for our military personal

 

[Tim Nelson]

TIM,

On your joeypages website I found some LIES about the old TA and the new TA. The comparisons between the old and new are not correct.

Especially in regards to the sick pay and holiday amounts. Do you not have any defense to these LIES.

Why are you LIEing to the fleet members?? Can't you allow them to make their choice based on the truth.

This site that your pushing destroys any credibality you ever had. :down:

What lies? I'm not following your opinion? Please clarify. Have at it, the page is public so please enlighten us on my lies and back up your rambling? I pointed out all the differences between the contracts and all the information is objective.

OTOH, I have hard copied deceit from an intercepted email that I am going to post that has to do with a negotiations team member running at the mouth and not backing it up with anything. The west is being lied to in a MIGHT way and it won't be hard to 'root out' the lies as I fully intend to smash down the lies, fear, and deceit that the Canale team is trying to stir.


Here, knock your socks off, visit www.joeypage.com/voteno and when you can't point out the lies, please accept the truth.

regards,

Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, chicago

 

[AluminumEnemaTime]

What lies? I'm not following your opinion? Please clarify. Have at it, the page is public so please enlighten us on my lies and back up your rambling? I pointed out all the differences between the contracts and all the information is objective.

OTOH, I have hard copied deceit from an intercepted email that I am going to post that has to do with a negotiations team member running at the mouth and not backing it up with anything. The west is being lied to in a MIGHT way and it won't be hard to 'root out' the lies as I fully intend to smash down the lies, fear, and deceit that the Canale team is trying to stir.


Here, knock your socks off, visit www.joeypage.com/voteno and when you can't point out the lies, please accept the truth.

regards,

Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, chicago

OK, under the Sept TA that was voted down to the current TA tab, you state that the holidays on the last TA were 10 compared to only 7 now.

The last TA was to keep the holidays at the current 5. Thats LIE #1

Also you state the last TA afforded 100 % sick pay when it clearly did NOT. Thats LIE #2

Im sure there are many more. :down:

 

[AluminumEnemaTime]

Click here for a copy of the rejected TA http://www.iam141.org/PDF/US%20Airways/IAM....FINAL.1145.pdf

Read articles 13 and 14 from the rejected TA , then go read Tims fake website and you can see the LIES for yourself.

Your like the wikepedia of aviation.

 

[Dissent Equals Patriotism]

OK, under the Sept TA that was voted down to the current TA tab, you state that the holidays on the last TA were 10 compared to only 7 now.

The last TA was to keep the holidays at the current 5. Thats LIE #1

Also you state the last TA afforded 100 % sick pay when it clearly did NOT. Thats LIE #2

Im sure there are many more. :down:

I believe (from memory) in the last TA, all the holidays and sick days were to be given back at the end of the contract. I don’t have the old TA to check it though. So for the two holidays we get up front, we completely lose the other three in this TA.

Agent “Vâ€￾

 

[AluminumEnemaTime]

LIES from tims wikepedia website:

Tentative Agreement Compared to the TA in September

1. Holidays ARTICLE 14
Last TA allowed 10 holidays with Holiday pay [time plus 1/2 for hours worked on a Holiday]]. This TA restricts holidays up to 7 with no holiday pay.

3. Sick Pay ARTICLE 13
The rejected TA allowed full sick pay. This TA restricts sick pay to only 50% pay and no snapback.

Truth from the rejected TA is here: http://www.iam141.org/PDF/US%20Airways/IAM....FINAL.1145.pdf

Read articles 13 and 14 for the LIES. :down: :blink:

The rejected TA only had 5 paid holidays and the sick pay was at 50%.

You are busted!!!