Iam Decision 2005

[usairways_vote_NO]

Keep in mind that authors Dan FitzPatrick, Mark Belko, Tom Belden, and Jane M. Von Bergen, the news papers Philadelphia Inquirer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, nor "experts" Peter Cappelli, and Kevin P. Mitchell are anyone whom USA320 Pilot would "listen to" or consider "informed."

"When reading a periodical the best sources are key analysts like Merrill’s Michael Linnenberg, S&P’s Phil Baggaley, and Lehman’s Gary Chase. The only news reporters who truly have a handle on the inside information are Susan Carey of the Wall Street Journal, Michelline Maynard of the New York Times, Lynn Marek of Bloomberg News, and Dan Roberts of the Financial Times. I do not listen to anybody else because they are not informed, but the people listed above can directly speak with every industry CEO, if desired."

-USA320Pilot, Jan 7, 2004

[post="238118"][/post]​

Very nice find on the way 320 uses any means available to sway you to helphim keep his job under the guise of helping you do the best for yourself.

 

[usjacket]

Nobody likes what has happened to the airline industry or US Airways, but when IAM-141 and IAM-142 members vote on the company's porposal, here are a few points to consider:

During last Thursday's hearing, Judge Mitchell said, "Which is worse - that half the mechanics lose their jobs or that all of the mechanics lose their jobs?"

See Story

Peter Cappelli, a management professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and an expert on airline labor relations, said that even though the economic result would be the same, a new deal would preserve other rights, such as seniority rules and grievance procedures. "It is certainly in the interest of the employees to retain whatever they can out of the contract," he said.

See Story

"I wish I could vote 'no,' said Frank Schifano, president of the IAM Lodge 1976 in Pittsburgh and a member of the union's negotiating group. "But the alternatives are so grave. Every member is going to have to evaluate his own position." The airline is offering a severance package and retiree medical coverage for people who retire before March 1. If members vote down the agreement, those incentives will be gone, Schifano said. "Vote 'yes,' lose your job and get severance," he said. "Vote 'no,' lose your job and get nothing."

The good news, Schifano said, is that the union was able to save lots of jobs during negotiations and keep some maintenance work in Charlotte, N.C., and Pittsburgh.

See Story

If the company proposal is not ratified the IAM contracts will immediately be terminated and the airline would be free to impose even deeper cuts.

If the proposal is ratified, for Mechanics & Related workgroup there would be the following benefits:

-- Pay rates for mechanics would be significantly better than the current pay that reflects a 21 percent temporary cut

-- Heavy maintenance on Airbus narrowbody aircraft will be brought in-house and certain Boeing 737 work will continue to be done in-house. Widebody heavy maintenance and other work to be specified, including some Boeing 737 inspection activity, will be done using outside maintenance vendors

-- Base maintenance will continue to be performed in Charlotte, N.C., and Pittsburgh

-- Line maintenance positions will increase with anticipated schedule changes in 2005

-- Utility classification and certain utility positions will be preserved at base maintenance facilities only, with other utility and cleaning services to be outsourced

-- IAM employees displaced by outsourcing will be offered existing and future fleet service positions

For the Fleet Service workgroup:

-- Pay rates for fleet service employees at hubs and major stations would be significantly better than the current pay that reflects a 21 percent temporary pay reduction

-- Most existing fleet service work will be preserved

-- A majority of scope provisions will remain unchanged except the right to outsource fleet work at the smaller cities and a second-tier pay scale for medium-sized cities

-- Continuation in the pre-existing IAM multi-employer national pension plan at unreduced levels

-- Even if an employee is furloughed as a result of the proposals being ratified, they're better off. Furloughed employees would have severance pay, COBRA, J4J (if available), and recall rights.

In conclusion, if the proposals are ratified and implemented the majority of IAM jobs will be preserved. However, if the company fails none of the items listed above would be available for any IAM member.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="238083"][/post]​

50% that comes out of this management team is a lie, mind your own contract not the IAMs! :angry:

 

[luvthe9]

How many mechanics do we have here? SWA has about 1500 I think for over 400 planes. I would imagine we should have 1000 to 1200 for 280 planes, is that about right?

 

[usfliboi]

Correct Bob! Amazing how some can twist things! Thats the bottom line like it or not!

 

[High Iron]

How many mechanics do we have here? SWA has about 1500 I think for over 400 planes. I would imagine we should have 1000 to 1200 for 280 planes, is that about right?

[post="238125"][/post]​

No, it's not about right. The US fleet has larger A/C and US performs a larger percent of their heavy maint. in-house ( for now...the curves may cross somewhere down the road though )

 

[Harry Callahan]

So the pilot is correct! The choice is 44% versus 100% job loss???? Helluva choice!

[post="238124"][/post]​

You & USsuckup also need to stay out of IAM business

 

[USA320Pilot]

The IAM contract has been terminated, but the company agreed to the IAM's request to permit the current agreement to remain in place because the union wanted the rank-and-file to vote on the company's proposal.

If the company proposal is not ratified by the membership, then the company is free to impose even deeper cuts, per the court order.

Furthermore, of the IAM is successful in getting the court to permit a strike, then not only would members lose their entire contract and items like severance pay, "buy outs", COBRA medical insurance, J4J, and recall rights, but those being laid off would lose unemployement too.

Do I like this? No, of course not.

However, today the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette commented the company maintains that "a majority" of IAM jobs would be preserved, and spokesman David Castelveter yesterday said that the total number of jobs cut could decline in the coming days, depending on the outcome of talks with the IAM.

The question, of course, is whether workers will be willing to approve an agreement that eliminates some jobs for the sake of perhaps preserving even more.

"I wish I could vote 'no,' said Frank Schifano, president of the IAM Lodge 1976 in Pittsburgh and a member of the union's negotiating group. "But the alternatives are so grave. Every member is going to have to evaluate his own position."

The airline is offering a severance package and retiree medical coverage for people who retire before March 1. If members vote down the agreement, those incentives will be gone, Schifano said.

"Vote 'yes,' lose your job and get severance," he said. "Vote 'no,' lose your job and get nothing."

See Story

Thus, a no vote only hurts every IAM member and there is no financial gain by doing so.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[Bob Owens]

Nobody likes what has happened to the airline industry or US Airways, but when IAM-141 and IAM-142 members vote on the company's porposal, here are a few points to consider:

During last Thursday's hearing, Judge Mitchell said, "Which is worse - that half the mechanics lose their jobs or that all of the mechanics lose their jobs?"

One of the favorite lines of businessmen and other anti-labor foreces was "Well isnt half pay better than no pay". This line is right along the same lines, the unions answer has always been "NO".

See Story

Peter Cappelli, a management professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and an expert on airline labor relations, said that even though the economic result would be the same, a new deal would preserve other rights, such as seniority rules and grievance procedures. "It is certainly in the interest of the employees to retain whatever they can out of the contract," he said.

Did you bother to ask him if he would do if Wharton offered him a simliar package?

See Story

"I wish I could vote 'no,' said Frank Schifano, president of the IAM Lodge 1976 in Pittsburgh and a member of the union's negotiating group. "But the alternatives are so grave. Every member is going to have to evaluate his own position."


Chickenshyte leader. When have you ever heard of a union leader basically saying "Every man for himself"?

If the company proposal is not ratified the IAM contracts will immediately be terminated and the airline would be free to impose even deeper cuts.

Yes, but if they leave BK you can strike to get it all back. If you agree you cant do anything till 2011.

If the proposal is ratified, for Mechanics & Related workgroup there would be the following benefits:

-- Pay rates for mechanics would be significantly better than the current pay that reflects a 21 percent temporary cut

But you would lose it all an more through inflation way before 2011.


-- Heavy maintenance on Airbus narrowbody aircraft will be brought in-house and certain Boeing 737 work will continue to be done in-house. Widebody heavy maintenance and other work to be specified, including some Boeing 737 inspection activity, will be done using outside maintenance vendors

-- Base maintenance will continue to be performed in Charlotte, N.C., and Pittsburgh

-- Line maintenance positions will increase with anticipated schedule changes in 2005

-- Utility classification and certain utility positions will be preserved at base maintenance facilities only, with other utility and cleaning services to be outsourced

And they will still be getting rid of half the mechanics.

-- IAM employees displaced by outsourcing will be offered existing and future fleet service positions

With no seniority and at Fleet Service pay rates.

For the Fleet Service workgroup:

-- Pay rates for fleet service employees at hubs and major stations would be significantly better than the current pay that reflects a 21 percent temporary pay reduction

But you would lose it all an more through inflation way before 2011

-- Most existing fleet service work will be preserved

-- A majority of scope provisions will remain unchanged except the right to outsource fleet work at the smaller cities and a second-tier pay scale for medium-sized cities

With half the amount of people?

-- Continuation in the pre-existing IAM multi-employer national pension plan at unreduced levels

Not really. Isnt your pay rate a component of your pension? Less pay =less pension. Maybe the "rates" are unchanged.

-- Even if an employee is furloughed as a result of the proposals being ratified, they're better off. Furloughed employees would have severance pay, COBRA, J4J (if available), and recall rights.

Not really, they are locked into these concessions till 2011.

In conclusion, if the proposals are ratified and implemented the majority of IAM jobs will be preserved. However, if the company fails none of the items listed above would be available for any IAM member.

Regards,

USA320Pilot


Isnt it funny how pilots like usa320pilot only have the time of day for lowly mechanics and other workers when he wants them to work for nothing to save his job?

 

[Harry Callahan]

You Capt. are a work of art. What is your real interest in the IAM ? Please tell us ?

 

[Bob Owens]

The IAM contract has been terminated, but the company agreed to the IAM's request to permit the current agreement to remain in place because the union wanted the rank-and-file to vote on the company's proposal.

If the company proposal is not ratified by the membership, then the company is free to impose even deeper cuts, per the court order.

Furthermore, of the IAM is successful in getting the court to permit a strike, then not only would members lose their entire contract and items like severance pay, "buy outs", COBRA medical insurance, J4J, and recall rights, but those being laid off would lose unemployement too.

Do I like this? No, of course not.

However, today the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette commented the company maintains that "a majority" of IAM jobs would be preserved, and spokesman David Castelveter yesterday said that the total number of jobs cut could decline in the coming days, depending on the outcome of talks with the IAM.

The question, of course, is whether workers will be willing to approve an agreement that eliminates some jobs for the sake of perhaps preserving even more.

"I wish I could vote 'no,' said Frank Schifano, president of the IAM Lodge 1976 in Pittsburgh and a member of the union's negotiating group. "But the alternatives are so grave. Every member is going to have to evaluate his own position."

The airline is offering a severance package and retiree medical coverage for people who retire before March 1. If members vote down the agreement, those incentives will be gone, Schifano said.

"Vote 'yes,' lose your job and get severance," he said. "Vote 'no,' lose your job and get nothing."

See Story

Thus, a no vote only hurts every IAM member and there is no financial gain by doing so.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="238154"][/post]​

Lets say the IAM votes NO and does not strike.

Lets say somebody told you that your hourly rate would be less in 2001 than it was in 1991. What would you think of such an offer?


Well compare your 2001 pay to what you will be making in 2011 if you accept this contract, then subtract all the other stuff you are losing.


2011 2011 2011


And lets not forget that if you give concessions prior to BK the company WILL NOT COME BACK FOR MORE!!!!!!!

Isnt that what they said in 2002?

Your IAM believed them but the mechanics knew better, however when the mechanics voted NO the IAM did the vote over.

 

[USA320Pilot]

Coachrowsey:

Coachrowsey asked: What is your real interest in the IAM? Please tell us?

USA320Pilot comments: My interest in the IAM is the same interest I have in all US Airways stakeholders: I want the best possible result for all concerned.

I believe union leader Frank Schifano said it well. "I wish I could vote 'no,' but the alternatives are so grave." The airline is offering a severance package and retiree medical coverage for people who retire before March 1. If members vote down the agreement, those incentives will be gone, Schifano said. "Vote 'yes,' lose your job and get severance," he said. "Vote 'no,' lose your job and get nothing."

Peter Cappelli made a good point too when he said that even though the economic result would be the same, a new deal would preserve other rights, such as seniority rules and grievance procedures. "It is certainly in the interest of the employees to retain whatever they can out of the contract," he said.

Coachrowsey, it's simply about getting the best deal for the members, who had their contract abrogated, another words it's gone.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[bandit1]

David Castelveter yesterday said that the total number of jobs cut could decline in the coming days, depending on the outcome of talks with the IAM.


So does this mean the IAM and the Company are still talking and its possible to get a a TA?

 

[planejane]

QUESTION?????

If the IAM votes "NO", will U legally be able to exit bk? Forget about what the company will impose. I believe all unions have to be on board for this to proceed. Is there not a more dire need for the YES vote? Wasn't financing also tied to these agreements?

 

[Bob Owens]

Coachrowsey:

Coachrowsey asked: What is your real interest in the IAM? Please tell us?

USA320Pilot comments: My interest in the IAM is the same interest I have in all US Airways stakeholders: I want the best possible result for all concerned.

I believe union leader Frank Schifano said it well. "I wish I could vote 'no,' but the alternatives are so grave." The airline is offering a severance package and retiree medical coverage for people who retire before March 1. If members vote down the agreement, those incentives will be gone, Schifano said. "Vote 'yes,' lose your job and get severance," he said. "Vote 'no,' lose your job and get nothing."

Peter Cappelli made a good point too when he  said that even though the economic result would be the same, a new deal would preserve other rights, such as seniority rules and grievance procedures. "It is certainly in the interest of the employees to retain whatever they can out of the contract," he said.

Coachrowsey, it's simply about getting the best deal for the members, who have had their contract abrogated, another words it's gone.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="238162"][/post]​

2011, 2011. 2011. A baby born the day the contract is ratified would be in the first grade before you can renegotiate for a better deal.

Your sixth grader would have been headed for college but since you didnt earn enough to save any money she has aleady started her career stocking shelves at Walmart. At least she is earning more than you!

 

[Harry Callahan]

I was going to answer that but it would just get me kicked off the board for good. So I will just say have a nice evening & thanks for flying USAIRWAYS.