HeadHunters

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

I just wanted to get this off of my chest.

We had a supervisor (let's call her Jolly) storm into a room of employees and demanded of a UNION steward to get an employee in her office NOW like some kind of military Drill Sergeant.

Let's examine just how unprofessional this behavior is.

First, where is Jolly's respect toward the UNION steward (I guess the Value of Respect training we must endure only applies to employees)? Jolly talked to him like he was a military subordinate. He did not even have knowledge of what was going on.

Second, where is Jolly's discretion for the employees privacy? Does Jolly really need to announce in front of the whole crew that an employee is about to be reprimanded?

Third, where is all this anger coming from?

Jolly really needs to be fired for unprofessional, disrespectful, confrontational behavior if you ask this clerk. There must be a fool quota in management.

Let's move on to phase 2 of this circus act shall we?

We have a supervisor. I don't know his name but let's call him Alfred Hole (or A. Hole for short). This clown is a shared services supervisor. I only ever see A Hole in our shop at lunch time sniffing around our female supervisor (Jolly). A. Hole took part in this meeting and threatened the employee with an F29 meeting (I don't exactly know what this is but it does not sound good).

Let's examine this..... situation.
A. Hole does not take care of any of the supervisor responsibilities of our shop. He is a shared services supervisor but has no professional duties in our shop or any professional relationship with our employees. He has no history with any of our UNION side employees.

In my point of view it is absolutely ridiculous that A. Hole comes into our shop, does not know the employees history, does not know the shops day to day functions, never takes any part in supervisors responsibilities, and starts threatening our employees.

Is this what we can expect in the future?

Maybe the company needs to have an F29 meeting with Jolly and A. Hole for gross unprofessional conduct.

The end of the story

The training was done that day with time to spare until the end of shift. This is despite the time management burned from the employees scheduled shift. If the training were so important would it not have been better to use that time allotment for the employee to complete his training? Instead management engaged in embarrassment and harassment.

It would not surprise me if he still had several days until the actual training was due.

 

[BigMac]

Jolly is a shared service (a/c painters,fuelers,fsc's and a/c cleaners) supervisor. As is Leo, Andy, Malik and Steve. A 29F is an investigation. Most times 29Fs are not a serious problem or major event. I had 5 29Fs in one month that lead to no discipline. Was all scare tactics. You think it's bad now.. wait and see if the "yes" vote passes and you'll really see management going on power trips.

 

[Frank Szabo]

I just wanted to get this off of my chest.

We had a supervisor (let's call her Jolly) storm into a room of employees and demanded of a UNION steward to get an employee in her office NOW like some kind of military Drill Sergeant.

Let's examine just how unprofessional this behavior is.

First, where is Jolly's respect toward the UNION steward? Jolly talked to him like he was a military subordinate. He did not even have knowledge of what was going on.

Second, where is Jolly's discretion for the employees privacy? Does Jolly really need to announce in front of the whole crew that an employee is about to be reprimanded?

Third, where is all this anger coming from?

Jolly really needs to be fired for unprofessional, disrespectful, confrontational behavior if you ask this clerk. There must be a fool quota in management.

Let's move on to phase 2 of this circus act shall we?

We have a supervisor. I don't know his name but let's call him Alfred Hole (or A. Hole for short). This clown is a shared services supervisor. I only ever see A Hole in our shop at lunch time sniffing around our female supervisor (Jolly). A. Hole took part in this meeting and threatened the employee with an F29 meeting (I don't exactly know what this is but it does not sound good).

Let's examine this..... situation.
A. Hole does not take care of any of the supervisor responsibilities of our shop. He is a shared services supervisor but has no professional duties in our shop or any professional relationship with our employees. He has no history with any of our UNION side employees.

In my point of view it is absolutely ridiculous that A. Hole comes into our shop, does not know the employees history, does not know the shops day to day functions, never takes any part in supervisors responsibilities, and starts threatening our employees.

Is this what we can expect in the future?

Maybe the company needs to have an F29 meeting with Jolly and A. Hole for gross unprofessional conduct.

Why would the company do such a thing as require accountability of its staff? That's exactly what has landed us in the present situation and it's rather evident there's no intent to change the business as usual.

There are a few thousand stories like yours that could be told about the disorganization and lack of direction of AA/AMR. The installation of the most unqualified to lead is one of many problems that have eaten this company's lunch for many years but we have those who feel more employee sacrifice is the only solution.

 

[tom barry]

I just wanted to get this off of my chest.

We had a supervisor (let's call her Jolly) storm into a room of employees and demanded of a UNION steward to get an employee in her office NOW like some kind of military Drill Sergeant.

Let's examine just how unprofessional this behavior is.

First, where is Jolly's respect toward the UNION steward? Jolly talked to him like he was a military subordinate. He did not even have knowledge of what was going on.

Second, where is Jolly's discretion for the employees privacy? Does Jolly really need to announce in front of the whole crew that an employee is about to be reprimanded?

Third, where is all this anger coming from?

Jolly really needs to be fired for unprofessional, disrespectful, confrontational behavior if you ask this clerk. There must be a fool quota in management.

Let's move on to phase 2 of this circus act shall we?

We have a supervisor. I don't know his name but let's call him Alfred Hole (or A. Hole for short). This clown is a shared services supervisor. I only ever see A Hole in our shop at lunch time sniffing around our female supervisor (Jolly). A. Hole took part in this meeting and threatened the employee with an F29 meeting (I don't exactly know what this is but it does not sound good).

Let's examine this..... situation.
A. Hole does not take care of any of the supervisor responsibilities of our shop. He is a shared services supervisor but has no professional duties in our shop or any professional relationship with our employees. He has no history with any of our UNION side employees.

In my point of view it is absolutely ridiculous that A. Hole comes into our shop, does not know the employees history, does not know the shops day to day functions, never takes any part in supervisors responsibilities, and starts threatening our employees.

Is this what we can expect in the future?

Maybe the company needs to have an F29 meeting with Jolly and A. Hole for gross unprofessional conduct.

First off, if the Union steward had any BALLS, he would have said (JUST AS LOUDLY), "with respect........YOU DO ..N O T.. YELL at..M E !!!!! , or any employee, because thats NOT AA's way.
Secondly, with X # of witness's HERE, I'll have NO problem bringing a person acting in a similiar fashion UP ON CHARGES, with the FULL FORCE of the International in my corner" !!!

"NOW, lets have a one on one discussion to understand what you need from ME" !!

Then once ALONE I'd tell her.. "Who the XXXX do you think you are to be SCREAMING at ME huh ??? There are NO witness's here, so GO AHEAD and put ME out of service, cause' I'll be back without losing a DIME" !!!

Thats how it would be done in 501/507 !

HEL*, with witness's, that's an EASY one !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[BigMac]

The union is scarce in shared services and prefer not dealing with issues concerning these unlicensed shops. I've seen it first hand. And as far as having the International in anyones corner is a joke. Tom you have been around longer than I and should know this sir.

 

[Frank Szabo]

... snip

with the FULL FORCE of the International in my corner" !!!


[sharedmedia=core:attachments:9458]

... snip

 

[Hopeful]

with the FULL FORCE of the International in my corner" !!!

Tom, you were doing good until you threw this sentence in.
Unless this is an episode of Start Trek with a mirror planet of earth,

"FULL FORCE and INTERNATIONAL are words should that never be mixed.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

First off, if the Union steward had any BALLS, he would have said (JUST AS LOUDLY), "with respect........YOU DO ..N O T.. YELL at..M E !!!!! , or any employee, because thats NOT AA's way.
Secondly, with X # of witness's HERE, I'll have NO problem bringing a person acting in a similiar fashion UP ON CHARGES, with the FULL FORCE of the International in my corner" !!!

"NOW, lets have a one on one discussion to understand what you need from ME" !!

Then once ALONE I'd tell her.. "Who the XXXX do you think you are to be SCREAMING at ME huh ??? There are NO witness's here, so GO AHEAD and put ME out of service, cause' I'll be back without losing a DIME" !!!

Thats how it would be done in 501/507 !

HEL*, with witness's, that's an EASY one !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is one approach (the shark) I suppose. This particular steward feels it is better to keep a good relationship with the supervisors in the interest of smoothing things over for a UNION member that has done something that is not protected by contract (if that should arise in the future). It is hard to get a deal or have a supervisor look the other way for a mistake when you have a history of confrontation. Besides we have more than one UNION steward. The other is the shark. You need to decide before you go in there if your chances are better with a soft touch (when you know your screwed and are depending on good graces) or a shark (someone that is aggressive and confrontational for when you KNOW your right and want to send management a message).

I think it is a good thing to have two different choices.

Sometimes the shark method is the wrong one.

Confronting a supervisor and angering them is counter productive to the stewards tactics. Getting mad over personnel pride would be a disservice to the employee he is about to represent. I would not say him turning the other cheek would signify he has "no balls", only that he puts the employee he is about to represent above his personnel pride.

If your child was about to be expelled from school would you go in ranting and raving or would you go in with a smooth voice, calm demeanor, and smiles to try to smooth things over and possibly influence the outcome?

As a UNION steward your position should be to focus on representing employees, not confronting the supervisor because they put boo boos on your feelings.

I guess the 514 uses a bit more tact.

 

[tom barry]

Tom, you were doing good until you threw this sentence in.
Unless this is an episode of Start Trek with a mirror planet of earth,

"FULL FORCE and INTERNATIONAL are words should that never be mixed.

Yea hopeful, The ' Full Force " is somewhat a laugher '

But could you see Davey V. (501) standing there getting screamed at ?

NO F*****G WAY ! !


La Lo,
........a certain amount of tact ? Yes, but to a point !
Any Supervisor who comes on ' THAT STRONG ' KNOWS he/she CAN get away with it !!

THAT Manure doesn't FLY up here.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

I honestly hope that you never "over step" and get yourself in trouble.

I want good things for the employees of AMR. My family are third generation AMR employees (all UNION side) so my family has a lot to loose if American is not successful. I would like to point out that my WIFE and MYSELF both work for AMR in Tulsa so I feel your frustration wiith the current situation. We will both lose our jobs. That is an inevitability. I don't wish to come on here and read a horror story of a situation that escalated and cost someone their job because of aggressive, confrontational behavior.

Please do a risk vs. reward assessment before you confront someone at work. Often times you will find it is not worth it.

A situation is temporary, the anger from a situation can last a lifetime. Sometimes it is better to just let things die.

On another note I have made my decision about what I want to vote. I have talked with many high seniority people to try to get a consensus of what they feel would be the best outcome and their reasons why. My mentality is I will not be employed by AMR for much longer. I feel the contract will not affect me much for good or ill. I want to try to do the best I can for the people that are going to be left behind.

I feel the literature that I read about the end results of each decision (I do not know who distributed it company or UNION) was nothing more than a distributed scare tactic. My understanding is that AMR can NOT impose any of those items listed and MUST return to the negotiation table. I feel they are trying to rush us to settle before the pilots and flight attendants. I see no give from those two groups and believe we should follow suite. I believe there will be another Final Best Offer that may be more appealing (or at least less appalling) than this trash we are seeing now.

I choose to vote NO. Not for my own reasons (I will be gone) but because I feel this is truly the best thing to do. I feel if we give AMR what they want it will have future repercussions (just like we gave them what they wanted in 2003 and are having repercussions now). For good or ill they must be forced to take it if they can. We must show them that we have standards and will not be intimidated and manipulated by fear anymore. If we just give in that encourages repeat behavior (this is 2003 all over again). Let's not see another 2012 six years from now.

We must show AMR that we are tired of this privatized gains (Executives, The Board of Directors, Lawyers, Consultants a.k.a. the leaches) and socialized losses (Employees, Share Holders, Creditors, Customers a.k.a. the people that actually make the airline work) shtick.

 

[Buck]

I honestly hope that you never "over step" and get yourself in trouble.

I want good things for the employees of AMR. My family are third generation AMR employees (all UNION side) so my family has a lot to loose if American is not successful. I would like to point out that my WIFE and MYSELF both work for AMR in Tulsa so I feel your frustration wiith the current situation. We will both lose our jobs. That is an inevitability. I don't wish to come on here and read a horror story of a situation that escalated and cost someone their job because of aggressive, confrontational behavior.

Please do a risk vs. reward assessment before you confront someone at work. Often times you will find it is not worth it.

A situation is temporary, the anger from a situation can last a lifetime. Sometimes it is better to just let things die.

I too have had Flagship University lessons.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

I too have had Flagship University lessons.

I suppose you thought that was clever.

 

[Buck]

I suppose you thought that was clever.

Just a little.