IAM Fleet Service topic

[Black Magic]

Just remember everyone..this contract would have NEVER passed had the PHX ramp not been able to vote ON-SITE in their own airport terminal. The phx membership was very weak and had they had to vote at a local lodge only 30% of them would have actually even voted. IAM leadership and Managment worked hand in hand together to make sure it got done with the outcome they wanted! Shady dealings to say the least....

Being a business the IAM doesn't care about outsourcing as long it stil gets the majority of union dues at a small expense of sweeping away other stations. It's a shame the IAM agreed to this contract in the first place, but its easy to see why as just like anything else it all came down to money.

 

[bagchucker]

Why doesn't the New Direction website link work?

Better yet, why doesn't the New Direction work?

No different from the RC days! S.S.D.D.

 

[pjirish317]

Why doesn't the New Direction website link work?

It was from 2008.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Better yet, why doesn't the New Direction work?

No different from the RC days! S.S.D.D.

The new direction's representation record ended up screwing up Aloha, Hawaiian, and United in big ways. And doesn't seem to have any respect with US AIRWAYS management [see BUF]. That said, I disagree with you, IMO, the New Direction was and is better than Canale and the previous folks. Admittedly, barley though. I still can't believe that Canale would sign off on whacking 60 stations, class 2 pay, no profit sharing, no snapbacks, complete loss of pay seniority, etc. How many workers were hurt by the pay seniority losses that were exclusive to only the IAM fleet contract? The only thing that was suppose to be good, and I preached against it due to my concerns of controlability, was the IAM pension. Unfortunately, my concerns were realized and the IAM pension trustees, themselves, whacked that benefit.


Onward Occupy 141!

Tim

 

[no more cuts]

The BUF USairways AGC is (Drum roll please) Nicholas Handlow
Cell: 724 709-9330..Sounds like he is earning every penny of his 100k

how so ?

 

[Kev3188]

Pretty sure that was sarcasm...

 

[john john]

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=In%20NCCO%2020111220662.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR
On 12 July 2000, plaintiff XXXX XXXXX worked as a fleet-services worker for defendant US Airways. While lifting a piece of luggage from a baggage carousel, XXXX suffered an injury to his lower back.
Defendants argue that plaintiff's claim for death benefits is barred by the statute of limitations. XXXX XXXX died on 25 September 2008. Defendants note, and we agree, that this occurred more than six years after the date of XXXX XXXX 12 July 2000 injury. However, defendants argue that more than two years passed after entry of Deputy Commissioner Holmes' opinion and award making the uncontested finding that defendants paid XXXX XXXX $550.36 each week for temporary total disability. Defendants contend that this uncontested finding amounts to a final determination of disability and, as a result, XXXX XXXX 8 April 2009 claim for death benefits was untimely and barred by the statute of limitations under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-38. We disagree.

 

[Jester]

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=In%20NCCO%2020111220662.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR
On 12 July 2000, plaintiff XXXX XXXXX worked as a fleet-services worker for defendant US Airways. While lifting a piece of luggage from a baggage carousel, XXXX suffered an injury to his lower back.
Defendants argue that plaintiff's claim for death benefits is barred by the statute of limitations. XXXX XXXX died on 25 September 2008. Defendants note, and we agree, that this occurred more than six years after the date of XXXX XXXX 12 July 2000 injury. However, defendants argue that more than two years passed after entry of Deputy Commissioner Holmes' opinion and award making the uncontested finding that defendants paid XXXX XXXX $550.36 each week for temporary total disability. Defendants contend that this uncontested finding amounts to a final determination of disability and, as a result, XXXX XXXX 8 April 2009 claim for death benefits was untimely and barred by the statute of limitations under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-38. We disagree.

Sad case in many ways... moved one bag in the wrong way, which lead to the (prescribed, medically instructed and lawful) use of methadone, and indirectly his eventual death nearly five years later. Basically, the defendents were trying to argue a statue of limitations, and that the death was the result of a fatty liver which was unable to process the methadone leading to high levels of toxicity and that the fatty liver condition was unrelated to the worker's occupation. It would appear to me that the claim should be more against the medical provider who failed to identify the potential toxicity from years of methadone use in the patient in terms of a claim from some financial compensation in the death of injured worker. The Company and workers comp insurance provider would have not been privy to the detailed medical treatment and diagnostics, in particular, a liver panel tests and urine/blood work, but yet, they are being held responsible financially for the death of this individual many years after the intial event. It just appears to me that the Company and insurance provider to be too far removed to be liable for the events as they unfolded.

I found it odd that the Commission cited the M.E.'s testimony shortly before its final ruling, where the expert testified, "If he was prescribed methadone to treat back pain, then the back pain would have to be an indirect cause of death." However, the Commission findings stated, "direct relationship between the compensable injury XXXX XXXX sustained on 12 July 2000 and his death..." It strikes me as contorted logic to say that the work was the "direct relationship" to the injury, but the 3rd party treatment was "an indirect cause of death" holding the Company and workers comp insurance provider financially responsible for the death. Where does the "indirectness" eventually end in terms of Defendent liability?

I am not sure I could agree with the Commission's findings on the matter.

So Rules Jester.

 

[necigrad]

I found it odd that the Commission cited the M.E.'s testimony shortly before its final ruling, where the expert testified, "If he was prescribed methadone to treat back pain, then the back pain would have to be an indirect cause of death." However, the Commission findings stated, "direct relationship between the compensable injury XXXX XXXX sustained on 12 July 2000 and his death..." It strikes me as contorted logic to say that the work was the "direct relationship" to the injury, but the 3rd party treatment was "an indirect cause of death" holding the Company and workers comp insurance provider financially responsible for the death. Where does the "indirectness" eventually end in terms of Defendent liability?

It does sound kind of weird, but look at the two different terms:

The back pain was an "indirect cause of death". Because the medication caused the death, not the injury itself, it's indirect.

The work had a "direct relationship" to the injury. The injury happened at work, thus work was directly related to the injury.

It's a causal situation. Work caused the injury, the injury resulted in methadone treatment, the methadone caused death. If you pay the fuel pump attendant to fill your car up with gas, are you directly providing the fuel for the engine? No, but you are indirectly causing it to happen through a direct action with an intermediary.

 

[baggage engineer]

anyone know when the ramp is going back in to negotiations and was wondering if the stunt the company pulled in Buffalo will
be addressed by the union or not and does anyone know of anything that has actually been agreed upon so far . I think being in talks for 6months should yield something
so if anyones in the know could you please share to us below wing dwellers

 

[Harry Callahan]

What do you think ?

 

[necigrad]

From what I've heard when these things happen they come up in negotiations. Apparently when the recent furloughs were announced Labor Relations didn't mention it at all until it was public and that changed the tenor of discussions. What needs to be remembered is that anything that comes up MAY be corrected in negotiations. Just because it came up, even if the entire membership agrees that it's wrong, it's not guaranteed to be addressed. These are NEGOTIATIONS, not demands. Personally I have a feeling that the companys recent actions will be resulting in some changes or clarifications.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Occupy 141 Platform & Ticket Update

Item 1: THere are 4 separate tickets of members that have decided to exercise their democratic rights and become candidates for District office. Mostly UA members.

Item 2: Occupy 141 Ticket
a. The ticket is now complete on the US AIRWAYS side of the ticket. And is more than half full with the UA members. Some elements of the ticket [and competing tickets] will be unknown until after the UA Ticket counter members decide if they want to keep the IAM or not. The UA PCE campaign should have been a rather winnable campaign but the organizing plan is almost non existent and may put these 9,000 members at risk of going non union. Remember, in mergers, if there are non union folks [continental ticket agents] and union folks [united ticket agents], then there must be a vote. Sorta like when Piedmont merged with USair.
If the District loses that campaign, then some of those PCE sisters and brothers will have to be removed from the Occupy 141 ticket since they will no longer be members. That would reduce this district down to only US AIRWAYS ramp and United ramp, and Hawaiian. The vote is February 21 and it would be essential, no matter what ticket wins, to solidarity on the United property.

a. The occupy 141 ticket is the only ticket that explicitly endorses close to twice the amount of AGC's for US AIRWAYS in an effort to put the US AIRWAYS membership more in line with the United per capita. If successful, US AIRWAYS will be on equal footing and not second best as far as the resources allowed for representation. Unfortunately, increasing AGC's at US AIRWAYS to better support the US AIRWAYS members was something that Delaney promised but never delivered. Now it will be delivered, no thanks to him.

b. The Occupy 141 website should be up soon with updates, flyers, platform, etc. The platform has 'sharp contrasts' to all other tickets, and also sharp contrasts with the paternal and non cerebral structures of the current and previous regimes. Never mind that all the candidates that Occupy 141 will endorse will have to sign on to a much lower compensation plan. A truncated platform is posted below and since the New Direction ticket doesn't support any of the platform points below, there are sharp contrasts indeed.

1. AGC compensation reduce from $100,000+ salaries down to $85,000 through monthly pledges which will be posted on District website
2. Prez compensation reduced from $125,000 down to $75,000. Occupy 141 believes one leads by serving and being least, thus, the Prez will make less than the AGC's.
3. Hire an In house attorney and fire outside law firm. In house attorney will reduce your cost and also be responsible for being in EVERY nengotiations session. and EVERY arbitration.
4. Contract with a stenographer for ALL arbitrations. IAM 141 is the only union on the property at United that refuses to record arbitrations with anything other than penned notes. It's time to do the membership right and be professional and place stenographers at ALL arbitrations instead of none.
5. Diversity. Gone will be the days of the 'good ole boys' controlling the masses.
6. Negotiations. Diversity also means that negotiations must necessarily have a part time agent as a member of the team, along with CLP and a Tower person. All voices must be included on the main negotiations committee. Only one AGC will be in negotiations, all other AGC's will be removed from negotiations and will be able to focus on grievances 100% of their time. Remember, when AGC's have to go to negotiations, all grievance handling effectively stops. Better utilization of AGC's is to have them focusing more on grievances and arbitrations. Plus, AGC"s never see themselves having to actually work under the contract so to keep more accountability measures in place for the masses, it is essential to have members from the masses who make $20 buck an hour and will have to work under any contract. Presently on United, that means eliminating several AGC's from their negotiations and bringing in more Local Chairman. At US AIRWAYS it means eliminating one AGC from negotiations and bringing in two new Local Chairman. There will also be a rotation of member observers who watch and see the entire negotiations process. Member observers have no authority and only observe to watch their union in motion. That technique is a transparent technique that other unions use to help give knowledge to the masses and build solidarity.

7. No signing of confidentiality papers. All proposals will be posted, i.e., company and union, so the masses will be informed every step of the way.
8. The letters of agreement will be signed that affect the wages, benefits, working conditions of the masses. At United, the New Direction signed a letter of agreement branding the UA masses with a terrible attendance policy WITHOUT a vote. If, we need to sign a letter of agreement, then the masses will have to approve it. Bottom line.
9. Each hub will have their OWN AGC. Presently, hub AGC's also have another half dozen stations and are gone from the hub half the time. That makes no sense. A better accountable, proficient, and cost effective system is to Hubize an AGC in PHX, CLT and PHL, and then regionalize the others. It makes absolutely no sense for MF to have ORD, BOS, CLT, BDL, and it makes no sense to have FO have DFW, PHL, MSY, etc. The flying around the system is killing time. At US AIRWAYS this will mean that there will be 3 Hub AGC's and then the remaining AGC's will be regionalized to better serve the masses and to reduce your cost.
10. $400,000+ from the District back to the Locals in scholarship/educational monies from the salary savings. Some locals can't even send any delegates to conventions or to PH. The time has come for the District to stop taking and start giving back to our bankrupt locals. Without education and knowledge on the floor, the lack of solidarity will continue. Remember, solidarity is ONLY built with a recipe that includes transparency, knowledge, and activism. To date, as an IAM member, I have seen no evidence ever that any leadership understood the academics of how to culture solidarity. Leading a union isn't about "I got big balls", it's an academic and cerebral exercise and it's high time that we start using our brains and surrounding ourselves with other professionals.

Onward Occupy 141

Tim

 

[700UW]

How do you intend to negotiate when per SEC regulations that certain financial data is confidential? And the company's business plan is confidential also?

Tim I do like some of your ideas, but some wont work in the realm of negotiations. ÁMFA tried this at NW and they were not successful.

 

[Tim Nelson]

How do you intend to negotiate when per SEC regulations that certain financial data is confidential? And the company's business plan is confidential also?

Tim I do like some of your ideas, but some wont work in the realm of negotiations. ÁMFA tried this at NW and they were not successful.

Well, I don't think the IAM was too successful at NW because after they saw the company information they whacked the employee wages and benefits to levels lower than non union folks and were eventually shown the door. Never mind that the company left out one important detail that a merger was in the works.

Listen, there are boatloads of public financial information to make fair assessments, more than enough to negotiate with. Over the past 20 years, actually since the second stock market crash in the 80's, the SEC has forced companies to reveal enough present information and future projections so that any negotiations team will be equipped to rightfully assess the health of a company. I believe, if we have to compromise transparency by seeking any additional information then we would lose the transparancy that would net us the greatest available solidarity. Besides, I am not convinced 'at all' that any additional information from a company will produce anything other than a 'gloom and doom' scenerio. Companies will ONLY want to share information that shows it is 'broke' or 'bleeding'. Further, what a company can afford is also measured by what it gives its CEO's and other groups. Therefore, even without looking at financials, I know that the company can afford other groups to be in profit sharing plans and to be working in BUF and to be enjoying snapbacks and the return of shared sacrifices, thus I know it is also attainable for fleet service. The reason why fleet service doesn't participate in such things is because fleet service has intentionally been kept ignorant as our current and past leaders practice such divisive paternal 'daddy knows best' techniques. Even if the oxen are strong, keeping a blindfold on them along with a muzzle and a fence around them renders them neutered. Cripes, even if you take the fence away and the blindfold stays on, they are still neutered. At any rate, something gotta give because I'm not having any more of 'stupid'.

Going back to confidentiality papers, I seriously doubt that any company will provide and share forward looking information that suggest that they are going to beat their future projections and have millions of more dollars available for the masses. All company information will 100% be slanted in such a way to manufacture it to reveal less monies is available for the masses. Confdientiality clauses would have to be signed if we engaged into any stock ownership plans but I, and presumably the masses, have no interest in negotiating shady employee stock deals. I'm not even going to bother sitting on any Board of Directors. A complete waste accept to fancy union thugs with a few nice luxuries and plane rides.

IMO, unions rely too much on the company laptop boys coming in and showing all of their fancy 'the sky is falling' charts and graphs and it pollutes the minds of the labor reps. OTOH, if the company is begging us to show us how much more profit they are now going to make in the next 5 years and wants to share that profit with us then maybe I can sign a letter of agreement and have the membership vote on it to allow me to see such wonderful and great information. I remember USair made $250 million dollars in one year but it came back to the Teamsters and asked for concessions because it said it was projected to make $350 million, thus it lost $100 million. Bottom line is that we ought to expect that management is going to do what management does.....SERVE GREED. But a union has to get back to doing what it is suppose to do, and that doesn't involve 'cant tell ya' negotiations. A founding principle of Solidarity is transparency and it must not be compromised. After all, we already know what happens when it does.

Onward Occupy 141