IAM Fleet Service topic 11/26-

[charlie Brown]

Everyone can blame the misunderstanding in Las on the union if they so choose, and while I feel for everyone there and their families, this is a perfect example of why people need to educate theirselfs with our contract. Jester is a advocate of education, but I think anyone with half a education can read art 9, par b, sec 2, pages 46 and 47, and at least know enough to ask questions when you feel you are being mislead. I think the key sentence here that everyone needs to pay attention to is page 47 lines 4-9. If there are INSUFFICIENT available full time positions, employees may displace the most junior full time employees on the system. In many of cases there are sufficient openings, so much of displacing junior agents wont happen. It may be gray, which a lot of our contract is, but it is clear enough to read and educate yourself so you can ask many questions. Its hard for me to believe people will just put their whole future on what other people tell them, without educating theirselfs a little bit.

 

[charlie Brown]

Kinda changing gears, does anyone know if we get points & how many if you call out sick Christmas day on FMLA ?

Callahan, why do you think you get points for calling in on FMLA? Its the same as always, dosent matter if its a holiday or not, FMLA dosent count against you whenever you use it. If you dont have fmla then you do get a point, but its the same as any other day as far as the points go.

 

[The Janitor]

Everyone can blame the misunderstanding in Las on the union if they so choose, and while I feel for everyone there and their families, this is a perfect example of why people need to educate theirselfs with our contract. Jester is a advocate of education, but I think anyone with half a education can read art 9, par b, sec 2, pages 46 and 47, and at least know enough to ask questions when you feel you are being mislead. I think the key sentence here that everyone needs to pay attention to is page 47 lines 4-9. If there are INSUFFICIENT available full time positions, employees may displace the most junior full time employees on the system. In many of cases there are sufficient openings, so much of displacing junior agents wont happen. It may be gray, which a lot of our contract is, but it is clear enough to read and educate yourself so you can ask many questions. Its hard for me to believe people will just put their whole future on what other people tell them, without educating theirselfs a little bit.

While I do believe that Jester has some good points along other lines, his insistence that the union reps are to blame is nonsense unless they didn't effectively communicate themself in the LAS breakroom. If there was any miscommunication or non-effective communication then the witnesses to that would be any LAS rampers who were in the room. But there is NO bumping in this contract, provided there are available positions.

Charlie Brown, you are right, the contract is actually quite black and white along these lines and if someone didn't put in a bid for all available positions then he has himself to blame for being furloughed if he wanted to keep his job. Therefore, it's not that the AGC"s are uneducated about the process but rather there are hundreds of members who don't think for themself, even when their job is on the line. Or, they listen to their manager. From what I heard, LAS management screwed the thing all up but Jester's biases don't allow him to say so.

That said, there have been many workers over the years who purposely chose furlough to pick up both severance pay and unemployment, etc., and then resubmit open bids for available positions at a later date. This has occured alot here in PHL since we always have openings. If anyone on furlough wants to come back then the best case scenerio is to put in an open bid to all stations. Usually, openings come up in alot of stations during a year.

 

[Jester]

Everyone can blame the misunderstanding in Las on the union if they so choose, and while I feel for everyone there and their families, this is a perfect example of why people need to educate theirselfs with our contract. Jester is a advocate of education, but I think anyone with half a education can read art 9, par b, sec 2, pages 46 and 47, and at least know enough to ask questions when you feel you are being mislead. I think the key sentence here that everyone needs to pay attention to is page 47 lines 4-9. If there are INSUFFICIENT available full time positions, employees may displace the most junior full time employees on the system. In many of cases there are sufficient openings, so much of displacing junior agents wont happen. It may be gray, which a lot of our contract is, but it is clear enough to read and educate yourself so you can ask many questions. Its hard for me to believe people will just put their whole future on what other people tell them, without educating theirselfs a little bit.

Mr. Brown,

As I have said before, you appear to be a reasonable person, so let's review:

System Displacements - Full-Time Employees
Article 9, Paragraph B.2 (a) (1)
(1) Be permitted to bid, in Classification Seniority order, available full-time Agents positions in other stations. If there are insufficient available full-time positions, employees may displace, in Classification Seniority order, the most junior full-time employees on the system;


Here is the key phrase "insufficient available full-time positions" which given there were 260 furloughs and 80 openings, that would appear to be "insufficient" numbers, thus "employees may displace" those junior full-time employees. Nowhere does it say that open positions must be first filled before displacing other employees. I believe this is a reasonable interpretation, especially as there is absolutely no mention of filling open positions first.

Now, I understand the counter argument which is "sufficient" numbers being available if only 80 or less employees are willing to transfer there are 80 open positions, thus no bumping. This would appear to be the interpretation of you and the IAM. However, it is predicated on one simple assumption for which it is not stated in the CBA, namely, open positions must be filled first and there is NO statement to that effect anywhere within the CBA as it relates to furloughs. People may assume, of course, open positions must be filled first, but the CBA is written as a tipping-point once there is "insufficient" numbers (260 furloughs and 80 openings) it causes those bottom 160 employees to be at-risk of being bumped.

Once again, another fine example of our IAM representation in allowing this type of vague language into the CBA. My understanding is that the issue of "juniority" was never provided in prior CBAs, thus its precedence was unestablished and particular attention should have been given to this section to avoid heartache and confusion later.

Mr. Brown, here's what chaffs my butt... First, you blame the victims (the LAS furloughs), as I understand it, were asking questions and were given bad information. Second, you gloss over and excuse the lousy representation without a peep I assume under the banner of "Solidarity". Third, you call for people to "educate theirselfs" but fail to grasp as to the reason why employees pay union dues in order to get expert advice. Fourth, you are not the only person on this board who is guilty of all the aforementioned transgressions.

If you and others are going to continue to excuse the IAM leaders, then I suggest in the spirit of "Truth in Advertising" to rename our union as "Ignorant Ass Muthers" or "Inane Associate Members". Do I hear a second to the motion?

So Suggests Jester.

 

[pjirish317]

Mr. Brown,

As I have said before, you appear to be a reasonable person, so let's review:

System Displacements - Full-Time Employees
Article 9, Paragraph B.2 (a) (1)
(1) Be permitted to bid, in Classification Seniority order, available full-time Agents positions in other stations. If there are insufficient available full-time positions, employees may displace, in Classification Seniority order, the most junior full-time employees on the system;


Here is the key phrase "insufficient available full-time positions" which given there were 260 furloughs and 80 openings, that would appear to be "insufficient" numbers, thus "employees may displace" those junior full-time employees.

So Suggests Jester.

Jester,

Where did you get "80" open positions? There are significantly more openings than that. Furthermore, the language in our CBA was negotiated by Canoli himself. Not the current leadership. So if there is blame, place it where it belongs, with Canoli & his crew. And since you are unwilling to help out with your vast intelligenge, and negotiating skills, let it go. You are nothing but a backseat driver that wants nothing to do with the actual driving.

 

[Jester]

Jester,

Where did you get "80" open positions? There are significantly more openings than that. Furthermore, the language in our CBA was negotiated by Canoli himself. Not the current leadership. So if there is blame, place it where it belongs, with Canoli & his crew. And since you are unwilling to help out with your vast intelligenge, and negotiating skills, let it go. You are nothing but a backseat driver that wants nothing to do with the actual driving.

Ahhh... how refreshing... let's blame Boss Canale again for what IAM leadership did last month in terms of bad advice, even though Boss Canale has been out of office for about a year. Yes, of course, Boss Canale was the one in charge at the time the CBAs ratification, but where was the Executive Board rubber stamping this CBA? You know, the same Executive Board we have now? I will say it again... the problem with the IAM is the systemic ineptitude from the top to bottom, from the past to the present. However, instead you will focus on your convenient scapegoat of Boss Canale who hasn't been office for a year?

Yes, 80 open positions... I believe someone from a prior thread even posted the numbers. From what I recall, it was something like PHL 40, DCA 25, and 1 or 2 open positions in several other stations, which approximates 80 open positions. I am sure someone else could confirm this total?

In terms of my desire to be in charge of this IAM circus, there are bigger clowns (or Jesters) than I. To quote Lyndon Johnson, "If nominated, I will not accept. If elected, I will not serve." I only demand to be properly represented, and I do not think that is asking too much, do you?

So Declines Jester.

 

[pjirish317]

Ahhh... how refreshing... let's blame Boss Canale again for what IAM leadership did last month in terms of bad advice, even though Boss Canale has been out of office for about a year. Yes, of course, Boss Canale was the one in charge at the time the CBAs ratification, but where was the Executive Board rubber stamping this CBA? You know, the same Executive Board we have now? I will say it again... the problem with the IAM is the systemic ineptitude from the top to bottom, from the past to the present. However, instead you will focus on your convenient scapegoat of Boss Canale who hasn't been office for a year?

Yes, 80 open positions... I believe someone from a prior thread even posted the numbers. From what I recall, it was something like PHL 40, DCA 25, and 1 or 2 open positions in several other stations, which approximates 80 open positions. I am sure someone else could confirm this total?

In terms of my desire to be in charge of this IAM circus, there are bigger clowns (or Jesters) than I. To quote Lyndon Johnson, "If nominated, I will not accept. If elected, I will not serve." I only demand to be properly represented, and I do not think that is asking too much, do you?

So Declines Jester.

Boss canoli's EB rubber stamped this CBA, not the current EB. What about the 35 lead agent openings in PHX, yes I know about them, were they figured into "your numbers"? I have spoke with the GC Chair in LAS as to your stories, you were not there, he was, who am I to believe. You, a person who was not there, or the actual grievance committee chair, who actually was? So in short, your numbers only reflect what you want, and how you want to bash the union leadership, not what they actually are. Go ask an AGC, oh thats right, you hate everybody don't you. Nevermind, you do not have the courage to stand up and fight. You only have enough courage to talk big behind a screen name.

 

[Jester]

Boss canoli's EB rubber stamped this CBA, not the current EB. What about the 35 lead agent openings in PHX, yes I know about them, were they figured into "your numbers"? I have spoke with the GC Chair in LAS as to your stories, you were not there, he was, who am I to believe. You, a person who was not there, or the actual grievance committee chair, who actually was? So in short, your numbers only reflect what you want, and how you want to bash the union leadership, not what they actually are. Go ask an AGC, oh thats right, you hate everybody don't you. Nevermind, you do not have the courage to stand up and fight. You only have enough courage to talk big behind a screen name.

PJ,

Several questions:

Who is different on the Executive Board than last year? I doubt the entire Board is different given there are nearly a dozen of them. Besides replacing one inexperienced sysophant with another inexperienced sycophant isn't much of an improvement. As you made the statement as being fact, maybe you could provide proof?

If there is this phantom list of 35 unfilled, full-time lead positions in PHX, are you saying that the furlough people should have a right to those positions, even though PHX was not listed on the openings? Hypothetically, if the highest displaced employee was to bid PHX and did not get PHX, how would you correct this situation as it is not listed as an open position station, as according to you and the IAM all those listed vancancies must be filled first?

You are willing to believe an AGC in LAS who was lucky to escape unscathed after the IAM appeared in the breakroom, even though he was one of the screw-ups which provided the bad information? I have presented my source for LAS information to this board, do I need to ask him again to return? CreamHornPastry doesn't have a computer, so he needs to take the bus to the library, but he is angry enough about the IAM stupidity, that I am sure with little prodding he could be convinced. Would you believe him, even if he provided names of other people who were present during that meeting?

Finally, do you think goading me to expose myself will somehow provoke me enough to react? I'll answer that one... not happening... I read you like a primer.

So Questions Jester.

 

[charlie Brown]

Mr. Brown,

As I have said before, you appear to be a reasonable person, so let's review:

System Displacements - Full-Time Employees
Article 9, Paragraph B.2 (a) (1)
(1) Be permitted to bid, in Classification Seniority order, available full-time Agents positions in other stations. If there are insufficient available full-time positions, employees may displace, in Classification Seniority order, the most junior full-time employees on the system;


Here is the key phrase "insufficient available full-time positions" which given there were 260 furloughs and 80 openings, that would appear to be "insufficient" numbers, thus "employees may displace" those junior full-time employees. Nowhere does it say that open positions must be first filled before displacing other employees. I believe this is a reasonable interpretation, especially as there is absolutely no mention of filling open positions first.

Now, I understand the counter argument which is "sufficient" numbers being available if only 80 or less employees are willing to transfer there are 80 open positions, thus no bumping. This would appear to be the interpretation of you and the IAM. However, it is predicated on one simple assumption for which it is not stated in the CBA, namely, open positions must be filled first and there is NO statement to that effect anywhere within the CBA as it relates to furloughs. People may assume, of course, open positions must be filled first, but the CBA is written as a tipping-point once there is "insufficient" numbers (260 furloughs and 80 openings) it causes those bottom 160 employees to be at-risk of being bumped.

Once again, another fine example of our IAM representation in allowing this type of vague language into the CBA. My understanding is that the issue of "juniority" was never provided in prior CBAs, thus its precedence was unestablished and particular attention should have been given to this section to avoid heartache and confusion later.

Mr. Brown, here's what chaffs my butt... First, you blame the victims (the LAS furloughs), as I understand it, were asking questions and were given bad information. Second, you gloss over and excuse the lousy representation without a peep I assume under the banner of "Solidarity". Third, you call for people to "educate theirselfs" but fail to grasp as to the reason why employees pay union dues in order to get expert advice. Fourth, you are not the only person on this board who is guilty of all the aforementioned transgressions.

If you and others are going to continue to excuse the IAM leaders, then I suggest in the spirit of "Truth in Advertising" to rename our union as "Ignorant Ass Muthers" or "Inane Associate Members". Do I hear a second to the motion?

So Suggests Jester.

Jester, first of all let me say, I dont excuse anyone for poor leadership. Secondly the people in this Union, in my opinion pay union dues to elect the people that represent them at every level. I wonder how many of the workers in phx even voted when the district elections were held? If my memory serves me correctly it was a very small percentage of the work force. As far as the article above goes, I guess we will just have to disagree, because I think the way it reads is pretty clear. As far as blaming anyone, not doing that. Just stating facts that seems to be true, I personaly dont think it takes to much to understand the article. If our leaders do a sorry job believe me, I would be one of the first to say, but I have talked to several of them about these furloughs taking place, and I think they are doing a pretty good job handling it. As far as this CBA, I agree with you, it is very gray in many areas. However the people in place now as you know had nothing to do with this thing we call a contract, but yes, they are the ones that have to administer it until we get something better.

 

[P. REZ]

PJ,

Several questions:

Who is different on the Executive Board than last year? I doubt the entire Board is different given there are nearly a dozen of them. Besides replacing one inexperienced sysophant with another inexperienced sycophant isn't much of an improvement. As you made the statement as being fact, maybe you could provide proof?

If there is this phantom list of 35 unfilled, full-time lead positions in PHX, are you saying that the furlough people should have a right to those positions, even though PHX was not listed on the openings? Hypothetically, if the highest displaced employee was to bid PHX and did not get PHX, how would you correct this situation as it is not listed as an open position station, as according to you and the IAM all those listed vancancies must be filled first?

You are willing to believe an AGC in LAS who was lucky to escape unscathed after the IAM appeared in the breakroom, even though he was one of the screw-ups which provided the bad information? I have presented my source for LAS information to this board, do I need to ask him again to return? CreamHornPastry doesn't have a computer, so he needs to take the bus to the library, but he is angry enough about the IAM stupidity, that I am sure with little prodding he could be convinced. Would you believe him, even if he provided names of other people who were present during that meeting?

Finally, do you think goading me to expose myself will somehow provoke me enough to react? I'll answer that one... not happening... I read you like a primer.

So Questions Jester.

There are roughly 35 open TL spots in PHX but we are roughly 50-60 over on the ramp. The company pulls TL's from the ramp every day. We are working on this situation right now but initial discussions haven't been good. The company says that if the TL spots in PHX were filled they would have to furlough in PHX. Unfortunately, no furloughs can come in as a TL anyway so this wouldn't help the furloughs from LAS or anywhere else.

P. Rez

 

[28L_or_10R?]

I believe that there will be some very disappointed people at LAS on Dec 16. There will be great wailing, beating of chests, gnashing of teeth and the rending of garments.

 

[orioleman]

Once again, another fine example of our IAM representation in allowing this type of vague language into the CBA. My understanding is that the issue of "juniority" was never provided in prior CBAs, thus its precedence was unestablished and particular attention should have been given to this section to avoid heartache and confusion later.

You Can't blame the New regime for that. They didn't put it there and they DIDN'T Negotiate the last T/A
not to sound like a broken record but it needs to be repeated. YOU chased after the pieces of silver and this
is what we have. SO live with it. AGAIN . Language and Scope much more valuable than a couple bucks that
alot of people will never enjoy.

 

[orioleman]

There are roughly 35 open TL spots in PHX but we are roughly 50-60 over on the ramp. The company pulls TL's from the ramp every day. We are working on this situation right now but initial discussions haven't been good. The company says that if the TL spots in PHX were filled they would have to furlough in PHX. Unfortunately, no furloughs can come in as a TL anyway so this wouldn't help the furloughs from LAS or anywhere else.

P. Rez

Can you educate us on the East as to what a Team Lead actually is . My ? being , when I was there
they seemed to more of a cross between a Lead Agent and a Shift Manager. I'm wondering why we don't just
have Leads in PHX like we do elsewhere. Maybe you can clear this up cause if its truly a lead position then
yes the folks being affected should be able to bid according to their seniority.

 

[ChockJockey]

Can you educate us on the East as to what a Team Lead actually is . My ? being , when I was there
they seemed to more of a cross between a Lead Agent and a Shift Manager. I'm wondering why we don't just
have Leads in PHX like we do elsewhere. Maybe you can clear this up cause if its truly a lead position then
yes the folks being affected should be able to bid according to their seniority.

One team lead and at least two assists are assigned to each gate (generally speaking). In PHX, only team leads and lead-qualified agents can access DECS/Sabre to retrieve inbound loads and load plans. Ultimately, a team lead is responsible for all the goings on at his gate while he is there working flights. The TL makes sure he's got all his equipment for the shift and that his gate is in order to service flights. He pulls the load plan, coordinates the upload, enters it in the computer and finalizes it. In PHX, the TL traditionally performs the push as well. There are also, per shift, two team leads in the bag room and three in the CONX(ABR) department coordinating dispatch.

In PHX, there are five "ramps". Ramps 1-4 have about seven gates each, and Ramp 5 has about 14 gates including the international concourse. Each ramp is assigned a Unit Lead who is primarily concerned with getting each of his gates any of the resources they need to operate as well as making sure things are moving along correctly, i.e., making sure sweeps get done, herding/goading agents to be at their flights on time, getting crews extra help on quickturns/heavies, getting and operating air starts, moving crews around for uncovered flights/break relief and things of this nature. As such and generally speaking, unit leads have more of an operational control of the ramp while the ramp manager over the concourse has more or less administrative control (Ramps 1+2 are on concourse N1; 3+4 on N2; 5 on N3 and N4), however the manager has the final say over who goes where and what happens when it comes down to it.

Some ramp managers are "hands-off" and let the UL run the show, while others coordinate closely with the UL to make sure everything's going as it should. This normally depends on the ramp in question, the night, and the personalities involved.

Unit leads are simply team leads assigned to be a unit lead for any given shift, it is not a biddable position and pays the same. No TL can be made or "forced" to UL involuntarily, and so the TL's are a group of usual suspects. Unit leads have no authority to discipline team leads or agents. In fact, a decent number of them are shop stewards.

I hope this brings some clarification.

 

[P. REZ]

Can you educate us on the East as to what a Team Lead actually is . My ? being , when I was there
they seemed to more of a cross between a Lead Agent and a Shift Manager. I'm wondering why we don't just
have Leads in PHX like we do elsewhere. Maybe you can clear this up cause if its truly a lead position then
yes the folks being affected should be able to bid according to their seniority.

Oman,

System displacements(furloughs) are done by full-time and part-time, not TL, 9. B. p. 46. So, TL's being furloughed can bid an open city, or bump full or part time Fleet Service agents, not TL's.

P. Rez