Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Randy Canale continues to agree with Hemenway on a refusal to section 6 bargaining. Section 6 bargaining would provide another 'chip' for Labor but Canale doesn't want to put the resources into it.How can we get rid of the helping hand agreement? And whats the plan for the future
We also recognize that it has to be within a rage of affordability for US Airways. We are not in the habit of negotiating contracts that kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.
The Company says they “put a full and reasonable offer on the negotiating table.†Our Committee tells me that the “offer†wasn’t nearly as generous as the Company offer that was rejected by the members [in many locations by overwhelming margins] last year. Obviously it’s not last year and circumstances have changed somewhat dramatically [CIC, the economy, price of oil, USA stock value, pending industry consolidation, and a whole lot of uncertainty] since we conducted that ratification. I don’t want to speculate about their motivations.
If you, or anyone else, think otherwise, I certainly haven’t heard anything to that effect. It appears the members support the positions taken by the Committee. I continue to monitor the negotiations and remain hopeful. I’ve never been involved in a negotiation that didn’t culminate in an agreement. As long as reasonable men are talking there is hope for an agreement.
I have feeling that labor’s experience at US Airways [pilots and flight attendants still don’t have agreements either] is causing many to doubt the wisdom of further industry consolidation.
In Solidarity,
Tom
Thank you moderator for refreshing the forums.
The question of Mr. Hemenways letter to fleet employees on the Hub on the companys proposal that was denied by the NC was posed to Mr. Brickner (IAM International airline Coordinator)for an opinion. Here is his response posted Friday February 29:
Perhaps the Company doesn’t trust the Committee to accurately portray their positions and proposals. I don’t want to speculate about their motivations. Whatever the reasoning behind the letter, the bargaining needs to take place at the bargaining table if we’re going to get an agreement.
If you, or anyone else, think otherwise, I certainly haven’t heard anything to that effect. It appears the members support the positions taken by the Committee. I continue to monitor the negotiations and remain hopeful. I’ve never been involved in a negotiation that didn’t culminate in an agreement. As long as reasonable men are talking there is hope for an agreement.
As always, thank you for your continued interest and support for the union.
In Solidarity,
Tom
(Are we going to be passing letters back and forth forever!)
Lith, thanks again for your email service.
I think Tom understands our resolve -------- --------- -------- so on and so forth
regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago
How can we get rid of the helping hand agreement? And whats the plan for the future
I completly agree. In fact what needs to happen is since there are now West metal and East metal flying around our system into the Hubs On the east in say CLT and PHL we should make it clear that
east guys should only work East metal A/C. In Phx the same but in reverse.