IAM Fleet Service Topic

[Ramp Rogue]

RR
Are you a US employee? the terms and date were in US today.............

Thanks Mike,

We lowly ramp agents don't have a computer that we can get US today on.

Rogue

 

[Ramp Rogue]

RR
Are you a US employee? the terms and date were in US today.............

Mike,

Would you put the link to US Today on here I can't find it.

Thanks,

Rogue

 

[Ramp Rogue]

Why I am voting TEAM 2008

Team 2008 has the leadership, experience and vision to guide our union into the future

1. Leadership: Canale has vigorously pursued his education in union leadership. He graduated from the Penn State Labor Leadership Academy and has taken courses incuding: law, collective bargaining, organizing, political education, training and arbitration

2. Experience: Industry leading agreements 2000. President Canale's primary focus has always been the membership of District Lodge 141. His steady leadership and tough negotiating practices held the line against relentless attacks by the airline companies during the waves of bankruptcies that followed 9-11

3. Vision: Team 2008 represents the best and most qualified union members from the most diverse sectors of our industry. This diversity ensures that the voices and concerns of every sector of our membership are heard.

Why I am NOT Voting New Direction 08

1. Leadership: Rich is seeking your support in the office of President and General Chairman. “I believe I can help bring our members back to the IAM in a positive way. I have seen and heard the frustration of members across our system. They think the union doesn’t listen to them or focus on their concerns.†Rich believes in the importance of communication and is a firm believer that there is never enough communication for our membership

a) Rich, the members never left the IAM. B) Yes, we are frustrated the airline industry is not the good ole days of regulation. c) Importance of communication? If your canaleunplugged website is any indication of your communication, believe me that the juvenile antics displayed there are not needed.

2. Experience: He has served the membership from the time his probation ended in August of 1974. Rich started as a steward and moved steadily forward in his union career. Rich was elected by District 141 membership five times to the position of AGC.

a) And? I’m waiting to hear more. B) Do you have any degrees (besides sunburn)? Any life experiences to go head to head with CEO’s and the like?

3. Vision: “Rich has found that all success comes from a well-represented membership. If members know their issues and concerns are being addressed they are more likely to have faith in the union’s involvement in politics and more accepting of the union’s recommendations for political support in elections. Likewise, a well-represented membership is the best organizing tool a union can have. It encourages participation in organizing drives and is the best advertisement for a union. Rich added, “The members of the New Direction team have all proven their ability to represent their members and I am convinced together we will make a difference in our members’ futures.

a) Well represented membership? Let’s see what well represented means to the new direction slate. Out of 14 AGC’s, there is 1 woman, PCE reservations, 0 PCE airport, 4 US air (2 of which are 2-year tokens that will be gone in 2 years) 9 UA ramp. Looks to me as UA ramp rules. B) membership is roughly 8000 UA ramp, 9000 UA pce, 7700 US ramp, and possibly several thousand in other classifications. c) you do the math.

Yes Rich, this member does have concerns. My concern is that the new direction slate is all about UA ramp. That is the meaning of taking their union back. Their history with mechanics is their root problem. Once the mechanics left, they were freed from the rhetoric of riding on their backs. Enter the PCE. Through the IAM leadership, the PCE group was recognized. The ramp resented this. Guess what? I agreed with the ramp. The ramp had much more experience and I, as PCE, appreciated them and their knowledge. That was almost 10 years ago. PCE has gained through their ramp brothers and sisters the knowledge and experience, as the ramp did previously with the mechanics. This is the vision of the future. The US air members will need to guide their US west counterparts also. I’m hoping 10 years down the road the west will be embraced by the US air IAM and not discarded like the new direction slate intends to do to the PCE.

VOTE TEAM 2008 REAL DIVERSITY

GO BARK UP ANOTHER TREE!

 

[robbedagain]

any furlough that occurs after the ratification of that POS TA the stupid 60 day becomes effective for those member and it will happen and I believe that given the oil rising, it wont wait til 2011 i be betting that furloughs start either later this year or early next yr. but hey, those out west who voted for the contract simply for the 3 buck raise wont get any sympathies from me when their cities are gone, doors closed forever. they didnt want to listen

 

[The Bagfather]

Shocker: I appreaciate your post because of the added info. However
I do have a couple of concerns. I don't think you want to say that UA
has a good reason to vote NDT so they will gain influence do you?
Or I guess you want to limit it to the negative factor for US.

But I don't see where whats good for UA is bad for US. They have the
better contract (by far). I hope they are not stupid enough to try to
put a TA together before their amendable date. Nobody from Randy's
squad has entertained, at least publicly, that we may be stuck with
our contract until the end of the one they will start negotiations on in
2009. (Merger assumed here).

I think the potential for Randy' insided information influencing his actions
cannot be overstated. Randy goes to PHX and says a merger would
be bad. What's going on here? Does he know more that we do about
a merger? Is he just giving a heartfelt speech to prospective victims of
a merger? Maybe the speech was a little late. I suppose it's possible
for him to be for the TA and against a merger. But such a speech has
little or nothing to do with whether a merger goes through, and there
are good reasons why Randy would like a merger to happen.

Then there's the old question did the TA facilitate a merger of not. I think
that common wisdom on both sides is that it did.

Now what if there isn't a merger. How would the "heavily lopsided" UA NDT
hurt US? Just to be plain I don't think it does. It could be ALL UA and still
be more representative than Canale's team. I don't like his autocratic style.
And I don't trust him. It's possible that he has our interests in mind.
but he has a funny way of showing it. Stiffling or ignoring dissent, Plotting
strategy based of half truths and misleading statements seem abound. From
my perspecive the worst offence was his strategey to confuse voters about
the "west into the east contract" thing.

So IMO the point about his qualifications is well taken, however, I think integrity
trumps qualifications.

So Now I'm going over to the UA website and reiterating your complaint about
the unequal representation in hopes that the UA electorate will save us.
Thanks BF

 

[700UW]

The amount of AGCs per airline is determined by the amount of membership, since UAL is way larger, their will always be more from UA than US.

Same goes for 142, CO has more GCs than US because the membership at CO is great than at US.

US for 4,000 (approx) M&R is only three GCs, GCs from the other properties help out due to logistics, where COs and ExpressJet have five GCs for the FA group.

 

[Save708AW]

any furlough that occurs after the ratification of that POS TA the stupid 60 day becomes effective for those member and it will happen and I believe that given the oil rising, it wont wait til 2011 i be betting that furloughs start either later this year or early next yr. but hey, those out west who voted for the contract simply for the 3 buck raise wont get any sympathies from me when their cities are gone, doors closed forever. they didnt want to listen

You sound like the management with your threat. Just two months ago you no voters had every argument in the world of why the oil prices rising wouldn't affect the outcome of fleet jobs. Everyone said it was just another bs scare tactic. If you don't believe me look through the posts. Now that you lost and things didn't go your way, who's passing out the bs? Or god forbid the company and union were right in their initial statement and you now agree with them. Either way, your statement chalks up the same as theirs. "interpret that however you like." the vote speaks for itself and before you point west for blame, you better take a look around, 2/3 of your coworkers voted yes for this too. East coast had more than enough to squash this thing and it didn't turn out that way. You need to recognize that, for whatever reason it was, majority voted yes. While I respect that you played your part, its over and will not change. Your premeditated intent to celebrate when you get to say, I told you so, is the same as being grateful that someone loses their job so you can think you were right. I doubtyou will be happy until that day comes. God forbid if everyone keeps their job and you never get that day of gratification. I'll bet for some in here, they would rather see others lose their jobs than actually recieve a bit of humility and accept that they were wrong. In my opinion, people were going to lose jobs either way. There was never going to be a way to stop that. Nothing to do with this ta, its just the nature of this business. My vote may not have saved those that were to be lost anyway but I think I bought a few people some extra time. I can sleep well knowing that.

 

[Jester]

You guys out west wanted this pos t/a...now you have to live with the outcome..which does'nt look good for you.....oh well...I hate to use the old phrase I TOLD YA SO...Good Luck To YA...

I am STILL waiting for an explantion of these "protections" of the West contract? I'll ask again... CMH closed its hub operations in 2003 and yet, the West TWU contract did not prevent this from happening. Now fast forward to 2009 with another merger and the downsizing or de-hubbing of PHX and LAS and I want to know what would have been different given the CMH experience? Anyone?

I would much rather be earning as much as I can until that day comes of me being laid-off versus holding an empty bag of future pay raise promises for which I would never collect. The West contract would not have prevented any compelling mergers, nor any lay-offs or closures in either PHX or LAS. It would have given marginal protections in smaller stations that handle even a single mainline jet a week (but Management could eliminate those few mainline flights in favor of Mesa flights and the problem would be solved). Am I not correct to understand that there are some West stations that use West FSA's, but handle only Mesa planes? Where's the protection there as the TWU contract required, at least, one mainline flight per week. Furthermore, the T.A. has set such a low standard of only 14 mainline flights per week (that's two per day), in order to avoid being "Swissported" out of a job. Does anyone believe that SAN will be down to 2 mainline flights per day given the existing transcon flights and the CASM of flying RJs from either PHX or LAS? The CASM alone (not to mention the questionable financial picture of Mesa) will preclude a large increase in RJ flying to many of those 18 cities, especially as oil prices edge ever higher. (Think economies of scale on this one.)

I know the Easties are not-so-secretly desiring West to feel "great pain" (to use a Nelsonian phrase) for supporting this contract. Just as a reminder, looking for the West guys to support your candidate slate while hoping for a schadenfreude moment will lead to neither support or unity.

So Interjects Jester.

 

[libertybell]

Was looking at the New Direction website and looked at this page and its most impressive

Looks real good to me look here to see the Supporters Gallery

 

[cltrat]

[ quote Shockeroach
Yes Rich, this member does have concerns. My concern is that the new direction slate is all about UA ramp. That is the meaning of taking their union back. Their history with mechanics is their root problem. Once the mechanics left, they were freed from the rhetoric of riding on their backs. Enter the PCE. Through the IAM leadership, the PCE group was recognized. The ramp resented this. Guess what? I agreed with the ramp. The ramp had much more experience and I, as PCE, appreciated them and their knowledge. That was almost 10 years ago. PCE has gained through their ramp brothers and sisters the knowledge and experience, as the ramp did previously with the mechanics. This is the vision of the future. The US air members will need to guide their US west counterparts also. I’m hoping 10 years down the road the west will be embraced by the US air IAM and not discarded like the new direction slate intends to do to the PCE.

VOTE TEAM 2008 REAL DIVERSITY
[/quote]
this is some really funny stuff here,
did you forget or just chose to leave out the degree in scamming or the one in fleecing the general membership? or perhaps the under degree in being a company yes man or in general dishonesty?

The UA COMMENTS are pretty funny too seeing how the UA board member Canale served US fleet up on a platter to further his own selfish gains. I think our UA brethren are smart enough to see through that.

Speaking of integrity what about you when you have a different ID every day,why should we believe anything you post???

I kind of understand though if I was looking at an income cut from 120k to 40k and going back on the ramp who knows?

Brush off your knee pads Mr AGC the ramp awaits soon


the only choice is RICH DELANEY and the NEWDIRECTION08 team

 

[robbedagain]

You sound like the management with your threat. Just two months ago you no voters had every argument in the world of why the oil prices rising wouldn't affect the outcome of fleet jobs. Everyone said it was just another bs scare tactic. If you don't believe me look through the posts. Now that you lost and things didn't go your way, who's passing out the bs? Or god forbid the company and union were right in their initial statement and you now agree with them. Either way, your statement chalks up the same as theirs. "interpret that however you like." the vote speaks for itself and before you point west for blame, you better take a look around, 2/3 of your coworkers voted yes for this too. East coast had more than enough to squash this thing and it didn't turn out that way. You need to recognize that, for whatever reason it was, majority voted yes. While I respect that you played your part, its over and will not change. Your premeditated intent to celebrate when you get to say, I told you so, is the same as being grateful that someone loses their job so you can think you were right. I doubtyou will be happy until that day comes. God forbid if everyone keeps their job and you never get that day of gratification. I'll bet for some in here, they would rather see others lose their jobs than actually recieve a bit of humility and accept that they were wrong. In my opinion, people were going to lose jobs either way. There was never going to be a way to stop that. Nothing to do with this ta, its just the nature of this business. My vote may not have saved those that were to be lost anyway but I think I bought a few people some extra time. I can sleep well knowing that.

first, its not a threat, its what is going to happen. second, im not mgmt, I am a very strong support of union and the need of a union is very much I was in the union from 98 to 05 and working with out a union for the last 3 yrs i truly see what kind arrogance mgmt at piedmont is and believe me us mgmt is the same way if not worse. That POS TA that got ratified is going to cause a lot of pain for the West. There is no doubt about it. It is just a matter of time. and even a union rep in phl told my friend there that this contrac SHOULD HAVE NEVER PASSED

 

[28L_or_10R?]

Same here Bagchucker. I voted no too. But since West makes up 1/3rd of the eligable voters we're at fault regardless.

Here in east/west field station Siberia, the east guys were the ones beating everyone with a stick to vote YES! But hey, the west is to blame for everything... Roswell, JFK, Jimmy Hoffa... <_<

 

[The Bagfather]

I am STILL waiting for an explantion of these "protections" of the West contract? I'll ask again... CMH closed its hub operations in 2003 and yet, the West TWU contract did not prevent this from happening. Now fast forward to 2009 with another merger and the downsizing or de-hubbing of PHX and LAS and I want to know what would have been different given the CMH experience? Anyone?

I would much rather be earning as much as I can until that day comes of me being laid-off versus holding an empty bag of future pay raise promises for which I would never collect. The West contract would not have prevented any compelling mergers, nor any lay-offs or closures in either PHX or LAS. It would have given marginal protections in smaller stations that handle even a single mainline jet a week (but Management could eliminate those few mainline flights in favor of Mesa flights and the problem would be solved). Am I not correct to understand that there are some West stations that use West FSA's, but handle only Mesa planes? Where's the protection there as the TWU contract required, at least, one mainline flight per week. Furthermore, the T.A. has set such a low standard of only 14 mainline flights per week (that's two per day), in order to avoid being "Swissported" out of a job. Does anyone believe that SAN will be down to 2 mainline flights per day given the existing transcon flights and the CASM of flying RJs from either PHX or LAS? The CASM alone (not to mention the questionable financial picture of Mesa) will preclude a large increase in RJ flying to many of those 18 cities, especially as oil prices edge ever higher. (Think economies of scale on this one.)

I know the Easties are not-so-secretly desiring West to feel "great pain" (to use a Nelsonian phrase) for supporting this contract. Just as a reminder, looking for the West guys to support your candidate slate while hoping for a schadenfreude moment will lead to neither support or unity.

So Interjects Jester.

Jester: The west scope lanquage was the best lanquage in the industry. My understanding
is a station had to be completely closed before they could begin outsoursing. UA has
19 or so protected field stations. Almost all of the west field stations are protected.

You are making the practical arguement by saying who cares about any of this because
the company can always cut back whenever they want which is very true but now they
will be able to outsource any station which falls below the mark.

But the main problem with the lanquage is that a precident or principle has now entered
into the next round of bargaining. It's a slippery slope. P. Rez has stated that we
(TWU members) got that deal in 1999 at the last minute as a consession from the company
partly in return for the low pay.

With SAN being a protected UA station I can't see any problems over the next 5-10
years or more if there is a merger. But if no merger and a something
catosrphic happens a reemerging SAN would be outdsourced whereas it would alomost
certainly remain under the TWU contract.

But there are many stations which are less protected than SAN. The recent vote
has obviously . Maybe you could do a little more research and come up with
figures on how many possitions will be lost over the next 5 years due to outsourcing compared
to layoffs merger or no merger. So you would have four categories. I don't have
the pateince for that kind of thing but my guess is two things will come to bear. About
10 small stations will be history within a year or so and during the next round of bargaining this new language
will be used for further consessions from FS.

I'm very happy for those who gained something without experiencing too much loss
in this TA. IMO this has produced more active membership which I hope can
start to make a difference. Thanks BF

 

[mike33]

Mike,
Would you put the link to US Today on here I can't find it.
Thanks,
Rogue

OEI BULLETIN NO: 1

DATE: MAY 16, 2008

SUBJECT: TRANSITION OVERVIEW

FROM: JAN VAIL

This will begin a series of communications regarding the IAM Fleet Transition and Operational Employee Integration (OEI). These communications will be numbered so that, when combined, you will have a reference document to be used as we progress through the integration process.

The IAM Fleet Final Transition Agreement provided four key dates for transition of West Fleet Service employees to the IAM Fleet contract. These dates are:

Ratification Date: May 8, 2008 – the date of the successful ratification of the IAM Fleet Final Transition Agreement
First Pay Transition Date: May 17, 2008
West Fleet employees, PHX and LAS tower employees, and PHX weight and balance employees will receive 50% of the difference between their current pay rate and the pay rate at the appropriate step of the pay scale (Attachment B to the Final Transition Agreement).
East Fleet employees who were furloughed and are now working as a West Fleet employee in a location covered under the Interim Transition Agreement will be placed on the pay scale consistent with their US Airways pay seniority on date of furlough.
Second Pay Transition Date: May 19, 2008
Fleet employees in East Class I cities will move to the longevity step pay rate outlined in Attachment B based on their current pay seniority.
East Fleet employees in East Class II cities will receive 50% of the difference between their current pay rate and the pay rate at the appropriate step of the pay scale (Attachment B).
East Fleet employees who are currently working at any station under the 60-day rule or any station covered under the Interim Transition Agreement will be placed on the pay scale consistent with their US Airways pay seniority on date of furlough.
Transition Date: Specified in the IAM Fleet Final Transition Agreement to be within 30 days of ratification. This date has been established as May 31, 2008.
Operational Employee Integration (OEI): The date when the East and West employees are combined into a single fleet service workforce. This date has been established as November 3, 2008
Third Pay Transition Date: November 17, 2008
West Fleet employees, PHX and LAS tower employees, PHX weight and balance employees and East Fleet employees in Class II cities will receive 100% of the difference between their current pay rate and the pay rate at the appropriate step of the pay scale (Attachment B).
January 1, 2009: Implementation of sick leave, vacation, insurance and pension contract provisions.


OEI BULLETIN NO: 2

DATE: MAY 16, 2008

SUBJECT: ARTICLE 14 - HOLIDAYS

FROM: JAN VAIL

The IAM Fleet Final Transition Agreement provides that:

Article 14 – Holidays – will be effective on the date of ratification for West employees.
Memorial Day holiday is added.
CHANGES FOR WEST EMPLOYEES

Implementation of Article 14 - Holidays – will be effective beginning with the Memorial Day holiday (5/26/08) for:

All West Fleet Service employees
Non-contract employees in PHX and LAX who are performing normal and customary tower work.
Non-contract employees in PHX who are performing normal and customary weight and balance work.
Contract provisions that are changes from current procedures are detailed below. Text in italics provides further clarification.

Article 14A

The following days are designated as holidays: New Year’s Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day.

 

[mike33]

Mike,
Would you put the link to US Today on here I can't find it.
thanks,
Rogue

The IAM Fleet Final Transition Agreement provided four key dates for transition of West Fleet Service employees to the IAM Fleet contract. These dates are:

Ratification Date: May 8, 2008 – the date of the successful ratification of the IAM Fleet Final Transition Agreement
First Pay Transition Date: May 17, 2008

West Fleet employees, PHX and LAS tower employees, and PHX weight and balance employees will receive 50% of the difference between their current pay rate and the pay rate at the appropriate step of the pay scale (Attachment B to the Final Transition Agreement).
East Fleet employees who were furloughed and are now working as a West Fleet employee in a location covered under the Interim Transition Agreement will be placed on the pay scale consistent with their US Airways pay seniority on date of furlough.

Second Pay Transition Date: May 19, 2008

Fleet employees in East Class I cities will move to the longevity step pay rate outlined in Attachment B based on their current pay seniority.
East Fleet employees in East Class II cities will receive 50% of the difference between their current pay rate and the pay rate at the appropriate step of the pay scale (Attachment B).
East Fleet employees who are currently working at any station under the 60-day rule or any station covered under the Interim Transition Agreement will be placed on the pay scale consistent with their US Airways pay seniority on date of furlough.

Transition Date: Specified in the IAM Fleet Final Transition Agreement to be within 30 days of ratification. This date has been established as May 31, 2008.

Operational Employee Integration (OEI): The date when the East and West employees are combined into a single fleet service workforce. This date has been established as November 3, 2008

Third Pay Transition Date: November 17, 2008
West Fleet employees, PHX and LAS tower employees, PHX weight and balance employees and East Fleet employees in Class II cities will receive 100% of the difference between their current pay rate and the pay rate at the appropriate step of the pay scale (Attachment B).

January 1, 2009: Implementation of sick leave, vacation, insurance and pension contract provisions.