IAM Fleet Service topic

[Dog Wonder]

Was the decertification effort you lead five years ago in the interest of Solidarity?

Or in the interest of Tim Nelson?

Carry on.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Was the decertification effort you lead five years ago in the interest of Solidarity?

Or in the interest of Tim Nelson?

Carry on.

I certainly did try to get rid of the IAM and was a member in bad standing for sure. I found it thoroughly insulting to have a collective bargaining agent that agreed to standards that were less than non-union standards. Canale's leadership was completely detestable with the establishment of pay seniority that forced longtime employees to go day one; class 2 stations; no snap backs, no profit sharing; no nothing. I'll give Delaney credit for convincing me to engage the democratic constitution to kick out the dead weight. Interestingly, if Delaney decides to run again for President, his opponent will be someone who he convinced to engage in the democratic process, and my opponents are folks who I helped save their jobs so that they could run against me.

Onward www.Occupyiam141.com

Tim

 

[bpsolo]

You don't call him because this is about you, not Fleet Service, and you want to be sure everyone knows it.

Carry on.

WOOOOOOOOO,thats cold DOG!

 

[Tim Nelson]

WOOOOOOOOO,thats cold DOG!

actually, dog was wrong again, I talked to CB for quite a while yesterday.

Onward www.Occupyiam141.com

Tim

 

[Dog Wonder]

actually, dog was wrong again, I talked to CB for quite a while yesterday.

Onward

Tim

My post was two days ago.

Followed by numerous Tim is great, everyone else isn't posts.

Carry on.

 

[Tim Nelson]

My post was two days ago.

Followed by numerous Tim is great, everyone else isn't posts.

Carry on.

Ha ha, That's silly Dog Wonder. Tim Nelson is not great. Over my last several post, I said the following about Tim Nelson
I admitted that Tim Nelson was a member in bad standing, probably an ####, probably considered arrogant, and definately not your hero and shouldn't be considered one.

Along the way, I'm pushing the Occupy141 platform which is the BUILDING block of solidarity. I'm going to incorporate the socialization process of solidarity as I did in organizing. It's a proven and convincing model and I already proved the success in it. The previsous leaders and current leaders that I have known in IAM 141 have no education on the tools that need to be used, the materials to be constructed, or the plans of the house. Building solidarity is not only a relentless 24/7 activity that is needed but also an academic one that is carefully calculated and measured out and requires EDUCATION in the discipline and experience to apply it to the culture that is intended to be built.

When we are done building, the solidarity house will be our house and no management team will be able to deny our strength. Solidarity will be internalized and then legitimated within this culture.

Onward www.occupyiam141.com

Tim

 

[lost luggage]

Whats going on in Fort Lauderdale , rumor has it - that you failed to board four jetway bags ( passengers carry-on ) so
the station manager could get the plane out on time. When does bonus come before service ?

 

[Dog Wonder]

Hurricane Camille would never accept a Manager telling her a delay was caused by loading all the bags.

 

[niblet]

Whats going on in Fort Lauderdale , rumor has it - that you failed to board four jetway bags ( passengers carry-on ) so
the station manager could get the plane out on time. When does bonus come before service ?

RUMOR MILL. check your source

 

[Tim Nelson]

It's essential for your negotiations committee to negotiate, above all, seniority protections that are at least equal with TWU at AMR. The IAM's seniority merger protections are terrible in all IAM contracts, unlike the TWU's at WN and AMR. The TWU at AMR 'currently' [maybe they lose it in BK, dunno] has 'adverse affected' clauses that protect those employees in relation to seniority integrations through mergers. The US fleet contract has no such protections other than the dinosauric LPP's of the last century.

Question to CB, are you and the negotiations team aware that the McCaskill Bond seniority integration protections will not apply in a presumed AMR/USAIRWAYS merger for fleet service? If you are unaware, then I'll make sure you and the other negotiators are aware. I know each of you and have talked to all of you over the past 12 months.

At any rate, the most important thing is seniority first, then making sure that the IAM doesn't screw you guys like it did at UA and walk into transition talks and piss on 3 years of talks.

BTW, out of 9800 AMR Fleet service, management just proposed cutting 4,200 to leave about 5,600 [presumably just in ORD, JFK, LAX,MIA, DFW]

Onward Occupy 141

www.Occupyiam141.com

Tim

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

It's essential for your negotiations committee to negotiate, above all, seniority protections that are at least equal with TWU at AMR. The IAM's seniority merger protections are terrible in all IAM contracts, unlike the TWU's at WN and AMR. The TWU at AMR 'currently' [maybe they lose it in BK, dunno] has 'adverse affected' clauses that protect those employees in relation to seniority integrations through mergers. The US fleet contract has no such protections other than the dinosauric LPP's of the last century.

Question to CB, are you and the negotiations team aware that the McCaskill Bond seniority integration protections will not apply in a presumed AMR/USAIRWAYS merger for fleet service? If you are unaware, then I'll make sure you and the other negotiators are aware. I know each of you and have talked to all of you over the past 12 months.

At any rate, the most important thing is seniority first, then making sure that the IAM doesn't screw you guys like it did at UA and walk into transition talks and piss on 3 years of talks.

BTW, out of 9800 AMR Fleet service, management just proposed cutting 4,200 to leave about 5,600 [presumably just in ORD, JFK, LAX,MIA, DFW]

Onward Occupy 141

www.Occupyiam141.com

Tim

A quick question Tim,

If both groups at AMR & USA are represented - TWU & IAM why wouldn't McCaskill Bond seniority integration protections apply?

It seems this is exactly the situation where it would, what am I missing?

 

[baggage engineer]

Tim since you seem to be in the know with negotiations can you give us an update on whats the top out rate there negotiating. And also I'm thinking it may all be a moot point since
I think the majority of US ramp would vote in the TWU if given the choice in a representation election

 

[Tim Nelson]

A quick question Tim,

If both groups at AMR & USA are represented - TWU & IAM why wouldn't McCaskill Bond seniority integration protections apply?

It seems this is exactly the situation where it would, what am I missing?

The MBA has exclusions for mergers like AA/US. Your missing the triggering of a representational dispute that will never invoke the MBA. The MBA was drafted for situations like AMR/TWA where there was no representational dispute due to the IAM having less than 35% support. Any AMR/US merger will definately trigger an election. Seniority items are determined after a representational dispute. Thus, the union's internal policy as it relates to the existing contracts will apply. Same is true for all unions, maybe with the exception of MX since USMX may not represent 35% of the total [including those who are laid off]

See UA/CO and then ask yourself why the MBA didn't apply over there. Same thing. Then ask why it could have applied over at Airtran/Southwest. The answer is that there was/is no representational dispute at Southwest since none of the AIrtran unions had a combined 35% to trigger one. AA/US = UA/CO. AA/US does not equal Airtran/WN.

I'm well versed in this and had to win two big organizing campaigns dealing with these issues. Management was blowing all kinds of smoke over at airtran about the MBA. Delaney was clueless about the law in this regards and in many regards and I had to school him bigtime with all of the NMB and MBA dealings.

Onward Occupy 141

www.occupyiam141.com

Tim

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim since you seem to be in the know with negotiations can you give us an update on whats the top out rate there negotiating. And also I'm thinking it may all be a moot point since
I think the majority of US ramp would vote in the TWU if given the choice in a representation election

I am not so sure that the TWU would get voted in, I think the IAM has some advantages over them.

At any rate, I have no idea what the negotiations team is contemplating to ask for. Not sure if they talked about wages yet. I think what is asked for will be conditioned on the profitability of the company. For instance, I'd say if they signed a deal last year that $24, and extension of job security and some other enhancements in between would have been fair. However, at this time, your company is making huge profits, even made profits in the 4th quarter and is kicking Southwest booty, so I would think a fair wage would be to obtain what Southwest agents receive, i.e., $26. That probably means you ask for about $28 or more. I heard the TWU at Southwest is asking for $32 since their contract is up also. I mean, your company is going to find $5 billion to at least make a bid for AMR so it's high time they take care of the workers. The biggest concern about current negotiations is that the history of the New Direction at Hawaiian negotiations and United negotiations spells good things for management, not the workers. The last thing any US AIRWAYS worker needs is for Delaney to dump two years of talks into transition talks and then have to redo surveys, etc. If I am president, I do the exact opposite of how Delaney handled United negotiations. And, to be sure, the negotiations team has no authority. Let's be clear on that. Did the negotiations team approve the dopey sellout when Delaney accelerated Canale's station closure schedule?


Onward www.occupyiam141.com

Tim

 

[ograc]

I am not so sure that the TWU would get voted in, I think the IAM has some advantages over them.

At any rate, I have no idea what the negotiations team is contemplating to ask for. Not sure if they talked about wages yet. I think what is asked for will be conditioned on the profitability of the company. For instance, I'd say if they signed a deal last year that $24, and extension of job security and some other enhancements in between would have been fair. However, at this time, your company is making huge profits, even made profits in the 4th quarter and is kicking Southwest booty, so I would think a fair wage would be to obtain what Southwest agents receive, i.e., $26. That probably means you ask for about $28 or more. I heard the TWU at Southwest is asking for $32 since their contract is up also. I mean, your company is going to find $5 billion to at least make a bid for AMR so it's high time they take care of the workers. The biggest concern about current negotiations is that the history of the New Direction at Hawaiian negotiations and United negotiations spells good things for management, not the workers. The last thing any US AIRWAYS worker needs is for Delaney to dump two years of talks into transition talks and then have to redo surveys, etc. If I am president, I do the exact opposite of how Delaney handled United negotiations. And, to be sure, the negotiations team has no authority. Let's be clear on that. Did the negotiations team approve the dopey sellout when Delaney accelerated Canale's station closure schedule?


Onward www.occupyiam141.com

Tim

Tim. Who was charged with proof reading the language in the printed/ bound contract vs. the tentative agreement ratified in May 2008? Lots of discrepencies between the two.