IAM Fleet Service topic

[JoeDirt]

GF
That is one of the problems with this T/A. There are too many gray areas that are open to interpretation. You may see something one way and someone else see it another. The question becomes how does the company see it and chose to implement it.

 

[giantfan]

GF
That is one of the problems with this T/A. There are too many gray areas that are open to interpretation. You may see something one way and someone else see it another. The question becomes how does the company see it and chose to implement it.

On this issue....doubletime....I agree with you 100%

 

[Tim Nelson]

Baggy Sweetheart, I'd hate to see you throw yourself in front of a freight train racing down the tracks thinking you could stop it. That's the same as thinking, fleet could stop this merger racing down on us. COC/CIC didn't work. Dougie's legal team is too smart to let that work in the future. We need to move on. Why Honey, there's nothing we can do as a group to stop it. It's just silly to think we could. We need to jump on the TA train and protect as many of our darling brothers and sisters as we can. If we slide right into that ugly east contract it will be mayhem. Honey, people will be out of work left and right. We west siders would be giving up vacation, holidays, double time, job protection, jobs, Darling, should I even go on? Jobs right there is enough to say yes to this. There is more, but I'm enjoying my coffee too much to get up and find my contract, it's too early to go looking for it right now. Everyone is gaining something with this TA, both sides. If we just accept that nasty east contract, we will never get any of that back! We both know that. Sugar Dumpling, why would we sacrifice these precious things we can all gain something? It all goes back to P.REZ, who by the way, I have to wonder...is his name on here short for his name, or his old title to which he desires to hang on to so dearly and remind himself that at one time he was someone of importance? Anyway Sugar, back to my point, are all these people on here only out to gain something for themselves, or are they truly good union members looking out for the group as a whole? I worry about that Honey. How many of these guys are really just trying to promote their political agenda in a thinly veiled fashion?

Baggy, If that freight train where to pop off your head when it hit you,

LMFAO! I happen to know Bagfather and I find this post absolutely hilarious, a compliment to your humor. "Baggie Sweetheart", Sugar Dumpling. Damn funny since I know Bagfather is probably wondering if you are a woman or man. Hey Goodfellas, I'm not going to interpret what kind of funny I think this is. Just funny.

Your name isn't Sol Rosenburg from the jerky boys is it? Look, you are one yes voter who I don't mind reading. Entertaining indeed. Maybe you can get with Bagfather and exchange pics if you are a chick....keep up the good humor because I know most of these posters and I know some of them are probably wondering what the hell.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[JoeDirt]

GF
There are other issues as well where the T/A contradicts the current CBA language. Which ones of these are going to apply? If I am not mistaken if the T/A does not address a specific article in the CBA then the language in the CBA is what will be applied.

Tim can you address this?

 

[redeye]

GF
That is one of the problems with this T/A. There are too many gray areas that are open to interpretation. You may see something one way and someone else see it another. The question becomes how does the company see it and chose to implement it.

Joe you couldn't be more correct.

As a matter of fact I will open up a can of worms with this one.

Open up page 8 of the T/A.

30. Article 30 (Compensation) West Employees will transition to the pay scale under the CBA as outlined below. Pay date seniority for West employees will be the existing pay seniority date. All premiums not applicable under the CBA will be eliminated on the Transition date.

In no case will a West employee suffer a reduction in current pay rate as a result of moving to the East pay scale.

Example:
A West Employee whose hourly pay rate (including geographic premium but not including lead premium) is above the appropriate step of the CBA scale will be “Red Circled†at the higher pay rate until such time as the Employee’s pay seniority entitles the Employee to a higher hourly pay rate.

Effective on Transition Date amend CBA as follows:
• Eliminate “in Class I stations†in Paragraph A and add CLP.
• Eliminate Class II pay scale in the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
• Eliminate Paragraph B
• Eliminate Paragraph C
• Eliminate Paragraph D
• Eliminate Paragraph H Effective 1/1/2008
• The longevity steps and pay scale as found in Attachment B will become effective the first day of the first pay period following ratification of this Agreement.
• Add to paragraph F: 1/1/2010 a 2 % wage increase and 1/1/2011 a 2 % wage increase.
• The IAM agrees that it irrevocably waives and thus will not be eligible for any future profit sharing payments. It also agrees that such future monies that would otherwise have been due to the IAM under the profit sharing program will not be paid to IAM and instead will be retained by the Company and will not be available for distribution for profit sharing to any other employee groups.


For those Sh!t house lawyers who know something about Contract amending,
tell me if I am incorrect but if you make the amendments as stated in the T/A
which is a legal binding document, CLP will be under a B Scale.

Here is the modified document as amended:

View attachment Compensation.pdf

The scale that CLP was added to was not deleted and modified with Attachment B.

Bagfather? Jester? Districtforce?

 

[Tim Nelson]

rat,

I have both my 05 contract in front of me and the new T/A.....

Giantfan, you're actually wrong on this one. I'm not busting on ya, I've been wrong before also.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[brownie]

Yes, Too much gray ! That is why we need to vote No, and wait it out. Wait for the newdirection. We are all broke anyways, we are use to it.
what is another year or so?



uote name='JoeDirt' date='May 4 2008, 04:42 PM' post='602134']
GF
That is one of the problems with this T/A. There are too many gray areas that are open to interpretation. You may see something one way and someone else see it another. The question becomes how does the company see it and chose to implement it.
[/quote]

 

[Tim Nelson]

GF
There are other issues as well where the T/A contradicts the current CBA language. Which ones of these are going to apply? If I am not mistaken if the T/A does not address a specific article in the CBA then the language in the CBA is what will be applied.

Tim can you address this?

JoeDirt,
Joe, after searching out "Top People" [just joking] I've come to the conclusion that the only way to interpret your question and everyone's question in regards to this contract that is as soft as 'baby doo doo' [ I know yuck but it fits], isn't to analyze, proofread, compare, etc, but to simply render the question with the following expression of the english language.

This contract blows bad. Every yes voter to this day has even admitted this.

My interest in voting no has shifted to the merger. As far as the contract goes, I'm not sure why we are all even talking about it right now. it doesn't matter if the contract paid out $22hr in light of no merger protections and no scope protections. Everyone is compelled to vote No, some just don't know it. I'll be coming out with 'good info'....soon enough.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[perserverance]

Bagfather? Jester? Districtforce?

''BF'' whats' the deal ??? .........I know a mistake....🙂

 

[freedom]

you see IF we vote this IN , the SIXTY DAY RULE , it goes AWAY ! no more of your east coast brothers and sisters can be harmed by it , AND with an upcoming MERGER , what do you think is going to happen ? The people who have fallen to it are already SOL , why don't you work on protecting the ones you have left .

If this POS TA goes thru the 60 day rule doesnt go away. IT APPLIES to the west folks whose stations are on the Chopping block. And if you think LAS will be tossed from its hub position, think again because that is what the outfit said about PIT a few yrs ago. And then there are more members out the door. That 60 day rule in short term DOESNT GO AWAY Instead, it is intended on ensuring that more members are kicked out. There is ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE that FLEET HAS TO HAVE IT WHEN OTHER LABOR GROUPS DO NOT HAVE IT.

no robbed , it does NOT apply to any west workers , and if this TA is passed it never will , in fact it would cease to exist for all of the east workers (currently employed ) if the TA is voted in ...

from the TA

· Effective on date of ratification, the 60 day rule will be eliminated for any furloughs that occur after that date

What that means robbed , is that on the day we ratifiy the contract , which means vote YES on it .. the sixty day rule will go away for any furloughs after that time period .. so after may 8th 2008 ... no more sixty day rule for anyone ....

 

[freedom]

Agreed ''cltrat''.(urbff)
I have been reading through all the posts and it becomes so repetitive

{So on and so forth}

I'm voting NO not to screw the West or anyone else but because of how I read this TA and things
that it lacks. The wage package is not enough, for me. Benifits, what benifits. The sick time is not
acceptable at all as its' not acceptable now. To all who say we make top pay here, your right, as
far as US is concerned but I still need to work 20 to 30 hours of overtime every pay to make ends
meet and I haven't called out in over 2 years not because I'm in great health 100% of the time but
because, even I(top pay), can't afford to go without. So for my family not yours I'm voting NO and
I'm sorry if you feel I'm screwing someone over.........that has never been my intent nor will be.

Thanks

Eh the only one you'll be screwing is yourself out of a raise for a good long time ...

yeah the hardliners in the new direction team will get you a contract right fast , and a year and a half from now the us ecomony is going to be just stellar!!! Here's to the future mate!

 

[P. REZ]

urbff,

Hey now former Prez, Is that any way to talk to me? You said I'm a hater, why Honey, you seem to just be full of it. Don't act like that Darlin'. It's just not healthy! It's just silly to lash out like that. I don't hate you, Honey! I don't want to fight with you , you big, tall, hunk of man. Try to keep that nasty temper of yours under control. Have you had your blood pressure checked lately? I'm worried about you Sugar! I did talk to you before. I know who you are. I hate to dissappoint you but no, I will not be ur best f**k friend. Very crude of you to ask. I prefere to keep that part of my life away from work, and sorry away from you. I have something a lot better going on, thanks though. Let's try to keep this on track and away from that nasty talk!

We are all in this together Sweetie! I just want to do the right thing That's why we are both voting yes!


Sorry, I was just guessing at what urbff stood for. I didn't mean to offend you. And don't flatter yourself with me wanting that from you. Oh, and don't cast anymore stones.

Respectfully,

P. REZ

 

[Districtforce]

Joe you couldn't be more correct.

As a matter of fact I will open up a can of worms with this one.

Open up page 8 of the T/A.

30. Article 30 (Compensation) West Employees will transition to the pay scale under the CBA as outlined below. Pay date seniority for West employees will be the existing pay seniority date. All premiums not applicable under the CBA will be eliminated on the Transition date.

In no case will a West employee suffer a reduction in current pay rate as a result of moving to the East pay scale.

Example:
A West Employee whose hourly pay rate (including geographic premium but not including lead premium) is above the appropriate step of the CBA scale will be “Red Circled†at the higher pay rate until such time as the Employee’s pay seniority entitles the Employee to a higher hourly pay rate.

Effective on Transition Date amend CBA as follows:
• Eliminate “in Class I stations†in Paragraph A and add CLP.
• Eliminate Class II pay scale in the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
• Eliminate Paragraph B
• Eliminate Paragraph C
• Eliminate Paragraph D
• Eliminate Paragraph H Effective 1/1/2008
• The longevity steps and pay scale as found in Attachment B will become effective the first day of the first pay period following ratification of this Agreement.
• Add to paragraph F: 1/1/2010 a 2 % wage increase and 1/1/2011 a 2 % wage increase.
• The IAM agrees that it irrevocably waives and thus will not be eligible for any future profit sharing payments. It also agrees that such future monies that would otherwise have been due to the IAM under the profit sharing program will not be paid to IAM and instead will be retained by the Company and will not be available for distribution for profit sharing to any other employee groups.


For those Sh!t house lawyers who know something about Contract amending,
tell me if I am incorrect but if you make the amendments as stated in the T/A
which is a legal binding document, CLP will be under a B Scale.

Here is the modified document as amended:

View attachment 7500

The scale that CLP was added to was not deleted and modified with Attachment B.

Bagfather? Jester? Districtforce?

A quick read and I see what your saying. I don't believe Randy's intention was to have CLP under a B scale. If there was a language oversight, then a LOA should take care of it. Randy will be contacted.

 

[mike33]

A quick read and I see what your saying. I don't believe Randy's intention was to have CLP under a B scale. If there was a language oversight, then a LOA should take care of it. Randy will be contacted.

At $8,000 or so a month, you would think you'd have your S**T together.....Letter of agreement.....right...RC might have gotten taken!

 

[Districtforce]

JoeDirt,
Joe, after searching out "Top People" [just joking] I've come to the conclusion that the only way to interpret your question and everyone's question in regards to this contract that is as soft as 'baby doo doo' [ I know yuck but it fits], isn't to analyze, proofread, compare, etc, but to simply render the question with the following expression of the english language.

This contract blows bad. Every yes voter to this day has even admitted this.

My interest in voting no has shifted to the merger. As far as the contract goes, I'm not sure why we are all even talking about it right now. it doesn't matter if the contract paid out $22hr in light of no merger protections and no scope protections. Everyone is compelled to vote No, some just don't know it. I'll be coming out with 'good info'....soon enough.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

I agree that the focus should be on a merger. But I think that is a reason to vote yes. You must ask yourself if US AIRWAYS is a stand alone carrier. Oil at record highs? Stock so low? Economy in disarray? Hundreds of millions in losses? Now isn't the time, have some patience and wait till 2011 when the economy might bounce back and we can go in to traditional negotiations and bargain for the contract everyone deserves.

Without a ratification, you may be without a merger partner. United Airlines is not impressed with keeping the west side scope and the Change in Control. It wouldn't surprise me if they walked away because of it. A big risk for no voters to take for 8,000 households. Without United, many might be without a job.