IAM Fleet Service topic

[Tim Nelson]

This is exactly what many here are just not seeing.....but the non-posters here are getting it and that's why they are voting yes.
This contract does not have the worst vacation, sick, scope, pay...etc........the bk contract the east is under and the old twu contract the west is under .....now , those are the worst.

The truth remains. If this contract gets voted in then it will be the worst contract in the industry, mostly in everyway. Bottom line. This contract is not worthy for anyone on stpes 1-9 in class 1 stations. All they will get is .20 cent raise. Not worth anything to the west who will experience 'great pain' as United starts 'reducing capaicity'. Throwing scope and merger protections under the bus as you see the merger bus coming is asinine and the equivalent of career suicide.

Further, a yes vote will unfortunately 'lock in' fleet service for the next decade as United will have no interest in losing this contract [ask the west if US AIRWAYS was aggressive in negotiating their contract that was due up in 2005]. United will be the equivalent of US EAST, and the US AIRWAYS workers will be the equivalent of US West, as United will make much more and enjoy greater benefits for the next decade.

The worst thing a No vote can do is enter section 6 negotiations with United next year and aim for the best contract in the industry. There is no convincing reason to continue this agony of a contract that is a $114 million concession to our 2003 bankruptcy contract.

At best, and I think this is extremely reasonable, if we keep things open, we will not be silenced and will have a position at the transition table at US AIRWAYS or the transition table at United. Given the west scope and strong CIC language I'd say our transition will come with US AIRWAYS but I'd be fine if it was with United too. Anything other than throwing our voice under the bus for the worst contract and 10 years of famine.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[giantfan]

Further, a yes vote will unfortunately 'lock in' fleet service for the next decade



regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

With all due respect Tim....but where do YOU get this stuff?

 

[giantfan]

Given the west scope and strong CIC language I'd say our transition will come with US AIRWAYS but I'd be fine if it was with United too. Anything other than throwing our voice under the bus for the worst contract and 10 years of famine.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

Again with all due rspect I am LOL!!! ...that was the best laugh I had all day!

 

[usairwayy]

New poster and have been reading it all......after seperating the facts from the fiction then only a yes votes makes sense here......and that's how I'm voting

 

[Tim Nelson]

With all due respect Tim....but where do YOU get this stuff?

There is no alternative. The best and worse case scenerios of a yes vote are the same. If this contract is voted in, United will sit on this for a decade and you will be stuck with the worse. There is no other option unless you think United is a 'nice fella'.

You don't have to look far to realize this inevitability. Just look to the US West and ask them how quick US AIRWAYS wanted to change their 2005 contract.

I'm curious to hear your alternative gaintsfan

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[Tim Nelson]

Again with all due rspect I am LOL!!! ...that was the best laugh I had all day!

Glad you got a chuckle out of it. But I think you should show more respect and more reason than to close your ears to the worth of the CIC. Obviously, Hemenway wasn't laughing when he made it a 'must have'.

The CIC is crucial leverage in this merger as it was even in a losing case last September. There is not fair opinion contrary to this fact. Your opinion will have to answer why Hemenway made this a 'must have'. So let's hear it Giants fan, why are you laughing but not me or Hemenway? I think it is fair to say that Al knows a bit more about what's coming down the pipe than you so it's difficult for me to laugh over such an important item, especially since we already know a merger is anticipated.

District Negotiator Speaks out Against this contract

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[giantfan]

Glad you got a chuckle out of it. But I think you should show more respect and more reason than to close your ears to the worth of the CIC. Obviously, Hemenway wasn't laughing when he made it a 'must have'.

The CIC is crucial leverage in this merger as it was even in a losing case last September. There is not fair opinion contrary to this fact. Your opinion will have to answer why Hemenway made this a 'must have'. So let's hear it Giants fan, why are you laughing but not me or Hemenway? I think it is fair to say that Al knows a bit more about what's coming down the pipe than you so it's difficult for me to laugh over such an important item, especially since we already know a merger is anticipated.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

Tim,

I don't think the CIC is worthless, my objection is when you used it to make a point and refered to it as our "strong CIC language"...it is not that strong. Most ppl agree with that.

Here's my take on the CIC (again), does it buy us some leverage....maybe. Does it help us in negotiations with the co.....again maybe.

But here's the deal....the co.'s corporate attorneys have the ability to slice it up six ways till Sunday and serve it up filleted on a platter. One could argue that we only lost the last CIC due to the "investor theory" but you don't think they would try that again? Maybe I'm just an ol' hardened soul but these corporate attorneys have been slicing up my paycheck up since the Gulf War (1990).

Yea...that's about 18 out of my 30 years now. Even before we were IAM they bestowed upon to us a "pay differal"(translation "paycut"), something like 5.3% (not sure of the exact amt, but in that ballpark) during the Gulf War so that the co. could navigate a steady course thru those turbulent times.

Then the slick attorneys carved me & my family up a real nice bk contract not once but twice with IAM protection.

Then they filleted it up again real nice on our last CIC arbitration.

I view the whole thing at this point as a delay tactic to getting us a fair contract.

So why do you think I (or anybody) for that matter should put any value on the CIC....?

I have learned over the years the co. gets what the co. wants....

 

[mike33]

1. Even before we were IAM they bestowed upon to us a "pay differal"(translation "paycut"), something like 5.3% -----NON-UNION

2. Then the slick attorneys carved me & my family up a real nice bk contract not once but twice with IAM protection.----BANKRUPTCY /BANKRUPTCY

3. Then they filleted it up again real nice on our last CIC arbitration.-----------BANKRUPTCY ( 0 stock value )

4. So why do you think I (or anybody) for that matter should put any value on the CIC....?-----SEE BELOW>>>>


" US Airways has a market capitalization of $802 million, based on Friday's closing share price of $8.72 on the New York Stock Exchange. UAL is valued at $1.92 billion, based on Friday's closing price of $15.89 on the Nasdaq Stock Market. This means United shareholders would end up owning a significant percentage of the combined entity.The two also have $5.3 billion in unrestricted cash between them, some of which presumably would go toward funding the one-time integration expenses."

By SUSAN CAREY- (Wall Street Journal)
May 4, 2008 2:15 p.m.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Earlier Monday, The Wall Street Journal reported that United and U.S. Airways had targeted about $1.5 billion in cost savings in the event of a merger
All this points to the COC having undeniable value...........

 

[freedom]

The truth remains. If this contract gets voted in then it will be the worst contract in the industry, mostly in everyway. Bottom line. This contract is not worthy for anyone on stpes 1-9 in class 1 stations. All they will get is .20 cent raise. Not worth anything to the west who will experience 'great pain' as United starts 'reducing capaicity'. Throwing scope and merger protections under the bus as you see the merger bus coming is asinine and the equivalent of career suicide.

Further, a yes vote will unfortunately 'lock in' fleet service for the next decade as United will have no interest in losing this contract [ask the west if US AIRWAYS was aggressive in negotiating their contract that was due up in 2005]. United will be the equivalent of US EAST, and the US AIRWAYS workers will be the equivalent of US West, as United will make much more and enjoy greater benefits for the next decade.

The worst thing a No vote can do is enter section 6 negotiations with United next year and aim for the best contract in the industry. There is no convincing reason to continue this agony of a contract that is a $114 million concession to our 2003 bankruptcy contract.

At best, and I think this is extremely reasonable, if we keep things open, we will not be silenced and will have a position at the transition table at US AIRWAYS or the transition table at United. Given the west scope and strong CIC language I'd say our transition will come with US AIRWAYS but I'd be fine if it was with United too. Anything other than throwing our voice under the bus for the worst contract and 10 years of famine.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

you know i was going to respond to this , i wrote a whole post out... but it's not worth it .. your sooooo far out there , so out of touch with reality, with our airline , with our country ... good luck at the table with views like this

and aim for the best contract in the industry ah hahahahahaha you don't know what company you work for do you ?

man i can't wait till you get that contract in 2020 ..

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim,

So why do you think I (or anybody) for that matter should put any value on the CIC....?

I have learned over the years the co. gets what the co. wants....

Item 1: The evidence for the leverage of the CIC is overwhelming and convincing, that's why.
Just take what we know. With the last merger, the company did not feel threatened with the CIC. Am I right or wrong? Parker himself said he didn't think it was worth much. But even in a losing case the CIC was used as leverage for a september contract that would have got us 10 holidays and holiday pay, full sick pay, pension increase, double time, etc.
That's what we know. Further, we also know that Hemenway sees the CIC as a threat this time. Now it may be true that it may force a different type of transaction but nonethless it does produce leverage for the workers and complications for corporate greed. The company doesn't want to deal with the CIC this time. Bottom line. It's a 'must have'.

Item 2: I agree that the company has always got what it wants from fleet service due to the fact that fleet service has never finished the fight for justice. That's the attitude Hemenway is counting on this time and who can blame him. I think he cut it close enough this time to screw us over more than he should have, and it gives us the opportunity for enough No votes.

One thing is clear, Hemenway and the company want this to pass 100%. Ask PHX why the company agreed to have it in the breakroom there. To say otherwise is nonsensical.

At any rate, the company definately gets what it wants and wins if fleet lays an egg knowing a merger is coming within 10 days accourding to today's 'marketwatch'. They will have themselves to blame for the next 10 years.

District Negotiator Speaks Out Against This Contract

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

 

[JoeDirt]

Tim,

I don't think the CIC is worthless, my objection is when you used it to make a point and refered to it as our "strong CIC language"...it is not that strong. Most ppl agree with that.

Here's my take on the CIC (again), does it buy us some leverage....maybe. Does it help us in negotiations with the co.....again maybe.

But here's the deal....the co.'s corporate attorneys have the ability to slice it up six ways till Sunday and serve it up filleted on a platter. One could argue that we only lost the last CIC due to the "investor theory" but you don't think they would try that again? Maybe I'm just an ol' hardened soul but these corporate attorneys have been slicing up my paycheck up since the Gulf War (1990).

Yea...that's about 18 out of my 30 years now. Even before we were IAM they bestowed upon to us a "pay differal"(translation "paycut"), something like 5.3% (not sure of the exact amt, but in that ballpark) during the Gulf War so that the co. could navigate a steady course thru those turbulent times.

Then the slick attorneys carved me & my family up a real nice bk contract not once but twice with IAM protection.

Then they filleted it up again real nice on our last CIC arbitration.

I view the whole thing at this point as a delay tactic to getting us a fair contract.

So why do you think I (or anybody) for that matter should put any value on the CIC....?

I have learned over the years the co. gets what the co. wants....

So GF why are you so willing and give them what they want this time?

 

[mike33]

"In addition to cutting back operations in Washington D.C., the merged carrier also has opportunities to trim its business in Phoenix, Ariz., or Las

Vegas because of United's hubs in Los Angeles and Denver, Neidl said."

Christopher Hinton is a reporter for MarketWatch based in New York.

 

[freedom]

Item 1: The evidence for the leverage of the CIC is overwhelming and convincing, .

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago

So is the evidence against it ... why don't you start telling our workers about the snap backs , and start getting their hopes up about those "shinny " new hitches they will be able to affoard soon ...

Don't forget to tell the guys who fall to the sixty day rule where they can find a new career ....

OH and if the COC is lost , woops look like you'll just be wrong again , in the mean time , our workers will have forgone another raise ... and SCOPE

 

[giantfan]

So GF why are you so willing and give them what they want this time?

Because although, not a great contract, I don't feel they will even come back to the table to offer us something better. And as I just stated they will fight tooth & nail any CIC litigation.

 

[freedom]

"In addition to cutting back operations in Washington D.C., the merged carrier also has opportunities to trim its business in Phoenix, Ariz., or Las

Vegas because of United's hubs in Los Angeles and Denver, Neidl said."

Christopher Hinton is a reporter for MarketWatch based in New York.

That’s great mike , did I mention that CHQ is here in PHX … I think we have a better beat on the grapevine ….


Word on the street is PHL will be suffering cuts along with CLT , I can’t say how great they will be , but that’s what I hear .. Of course most of you will have to discount this as a scare tactic , but that’s what I heard and I’m letting you know now .