JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA AMTS

[D7571987]

The above holiday info for a UAL mechanic is incorrect. At the new rate of 49.02 for a swing shift mechanic, working one shift on a holiday he gets the 49.02 for 8 hours holiday worked plus he gets 1.5 time for all hours worked on top so $122.50 hour for 8 hours.

If he works a double shift then he gets just the overtime for the second shift at $73.50 hr.

 

[Matt1200]

I also read that they will receive tens of thousands in signing bonus money. I sure hope what the IAM is telling us is true? " we are going to fight for signing bonus " will see!!!!!

 

[swamt]

Yes, we did inherit the IAM language, then during our first contract, we chose to continue to use it because most liked the system (and had been used to it).

Correct. It was the membership of NWA that decided to keep the existing system set up by the IAM. The membership did not want to change it as it would of caused great division and alot of changes and movement would have also happened. And the membership was able to make their own decision because they were AMFA where the membership rules to what the membership wants. Sorry for cutting in like that but when you first wrote that AMFA "adopted" that system, it soundede as if they (AMFA) approved of it which is not the case. I will now move on to Real tired and do my best to explain what I (we) mean by taking seniority away. Thx for the response.

This issue is a big one. That's why an arbitrator is deciding, but I like the fact that people from other companies give their opinions. After hearing from NWA and SWA, I'd like to hear from people from UAL and even DAL on how they decide their seniority issues.

In reference to your post, our methodology is nearly the same. Except in our case, you can't bump down to a Mechanic position just because you end up junior Lead with midnight and Tues. and Wens. off.

You can only BID down. If there is no bid, you're stuck. Even if you are bumped as a Lead, you have to exercise your seniority in that position, or bid another job in a position you hold seniority in.

But I don't see how SWAMT thinks that takes seniority away as stated in his post.

Real, I will do my best to give an example: Say you have a 30 year mechanic and never been a lead. You also have a 6 year mechanic, with 1 year in the lead mechanic position. The 30 year mechanic decides to bid as lead mechanic and is awarded lead mechanic. Now both mechanics are leads. A new premium lead mechanic position comes open, or at least an opening has opened with another lead leaving the position for whatever reason. Just focusing on these 2 leads, the 6 year mechanic with 1 year lead will get first choice over the 30 year mechanic with 1 day lead mechanic time because of the cat seniority way of doing it. So, when the 30 year mechanic's 30 years are not used or factored in for the new position, to a lot of us, that is taking seniority away from him for the purpose of bidding for better premium days off or lead positions. No he never loses his 30 years mechanic seniority, but when a 6 year man is able to out bid a 30 year man do to this category seniority BS, then to most all of us that is taking away his 30 years seniority against a 6 year man for a lead bid. That is just not right. The way it works here is, the 30 year mechanic, and the 6 year mechanic uses their mechanic seniority for all bids. When 30 year mechanics bid for the first time into the lead position he must, 1- have an opening to bid into, 2- take whatever is left over from all other leads bidding first, then, he can start bidding with his 30 years within the leads for better days off and positions. Once the new annual rolls around Jan 1st. the 30 year man will bid wherever his mechanic 30 years takes him. Hope this helps explain why I use the terms taking seniority from someone. I also just can't fathom a 30 mechanic having to start all over with day 1 seniority in his new lead position for the rest of his career being spent on mids with tue wed off. This is why I reference the "taking seniority away". If you have any other questions please feel free to ask.

 

[Vortilon]

Correct. It was the membership of NWA that decided to keep the existing system set up by the IAM. The membership did not want to change it as it would of caused great division and alot of changes and movement would have also happened. And the membership was able to make their own decision because they were AMFA where the membership rules to what the membership wants. Sorry for cutting in like that but when you first wrote that AMFA "adopted" that system, it soundede as if they (AMFA) approved of it which is not the case. I will now move on to Real tired and do my best to explain what I (we) mean by taking seniority away. Thx for the response.



Real, I will do my best to give an example: Say you have a 30 year mechanic and never been a lead. You also have a 6 year mechanic, with 1 year in the lead mechanic position. The 30 year mechanic decides to bid as lead mechanic and is awarded lead mechanic. Now both mechanics are leads. A new premium lead mechanic position comes open, or at least an opening has opened with another lead leaving the position for whatever reason. Just focusing on these 2 leads, the 6 year mechanic with 1 year lead will get first choice over the 30 year mechanic with 1 day lead mechanic time because of the cat seniority way of doing it. So, when the 30 year mechanic's 30 years are not used or factored in for the new position, to a lot of us, that is taking seniority away from him for the purpose of bidding for better premium days off or lead positions. No he never loses his 30 years mechanic seniority, but when a 6 year man is able to out bid a 30 year man do to this category seniority BS, then to most all of us that is taking away his 30 years seniority against a 6 year man for a lead bid. That is just not right. The way it works here is, the 30 year mechanic, and the 6 year mechanic uses their mechanic seniority for all bids. When 30 year mechanics bid for the first time into the lead position he must, 1- have an opening to bid into, 2- take whatever is left over from all other leads bidding first, then, he can start bidding with his 30 years within the leads for better days off and positions. Once the new annual rolls around Jan 1st. the 30 year man will bid wherever his mechanic 30 years takes him. Hope this helps explain why I use the terms taking seniority from someone. I also just can't fathom a 30 mechanic having to start all over with day 1 seniority in his new lead position for the rest of his career being spent on mids with tue wed off. This is why I reference the "taking seniority away". If you have any other questions please feel free to ask.

I agree, to have; for example' a 5 year seniority AMT with one year as a CC - outbid a 30 year AMT who decides later in his career to take a lead position is just wrong. As it stands right now, if the arbitrator rules in favor of the LUS method, it would give an unfair advantage to the LUS AMTs - as they had the knowledge from the start - to start accruing lead time ASAP - for this very reason.

 

[DallasConehead]

https://teamster.org/sites/teamster.org/files/ta_industry_comparison_.pdf

 

[D7571987]

The UA deal has a bonus retro whatever based on hours worked last 3 years. A topped out guy no overtime will get about $16k. or a guy who did about 15k of overtime each year would get about $20k supposedly. Top overtime guy at our station $28k. We will see what it actually ends up .

I also read that they will receive tens of thousands in signing bonus money. I sure hope what the IAM is telling us is true? " we are going to fight for signing bonus " will see!!!!!

 

[OldGuy@AA]

Looked over the UA contract and with the exception of the Vac, sick time and a couple of other things it is not a good deal. They actually will make less money than us at AA for the first year. That has never happened in my 31 plus years. Looks like they bought the yes vote with the early out package. We know what this is like don't we?

 

[AANOTOK]

Old guy, if that wan't sarcasm , and they were offered early out language, what are they getting?

 

[OldGuy@AA]

Old guy, if that wan't sarcasm , and they were offered early out language, what are they getting?

No sarcasm my friend. Their early out is $5K per year of service with a max of $100K. Use 11 hours of sick time per month for bridge medical. (They max out at 1600 hours of sick time) Their pay raise gives them about 40 cents an hour less than us (Comparing overhaul rates) and they get 1.5% raise after a year then 1% for every year left in the deal (6 yr deal). They say they'll give them 2% more than AA and Delta (Average) but it says Pay and Benefits so their extra weeks of vacation will be included and I would assume wipe out any bump. Also the AMTs lost aircraft movement and now any work group can move aircraft. Their 401K is the employee puts in 6% and UA will put in 3%. I'm not sure if they have a defined pension with the teamsters but if they do then that pension is severely under funded like the IAMNPF. Definitely bought yes votes with the buy out. We got sold out last time for a package not worth half that. I'd hate to be sold out again but it is a possibility. What was it that went around before??? BOHICA.

 

[D7571987]

The UA guys from continental have a pension from continental called CARP that is fully funded.

 

[Bloodhound]

Tulsa can still do single vacation days.At least for the time being. We are not allowed to CS. Thats the trade off. I would gladly trade the single vc day for a liberal cs policy that mirrors the lines ability to trade and give away days. I should say we can trade a shift. But no giving away hours or picking up additional hours.

A Liberal CS policy is the only way to go! I CS'd OFF 5 days last week and it was akin to another week of vacation, i.e. in conjunction with my 2 weekends, I had 9 days off and went to Europe.

To make up for it financially, one only needs to work a few hours of OT, and you're good to go!!

 

[Shafted]

Is there a link to the stores agreement?

 

[swamt]

I agree, to have; for example' a 5 year seniority AMT with one year as a CC - outbid a 30 year AMT who decides later in his career to take a lead position is just wrong. As it stands right now, if the arbitrator rules in favor of the LUS method, it would give an unfair advantage to the LUS AMTs - as they had the knowledge from the start - to start accruing lead time ASAP - for this very reason.

Correct. All seniority should be used in all bids. The reason for the US way of doing it is just as you stated. We all know that as we all get older in age and bodies get weaker ect., that the CC and Lead jobs are a great option when our bodies start getting tired, sore and less agile to be crawling around pits, floor structures, hell holes and EE's bays. But most guys like to work on the live planes for as long as possible as it becomes harder and harder to face the fact that we are just plain and simple getting "older" and then take a Lead (CC) position to stop beating up our bodies on the aircraft. When the older guys start going into the Lead (CC) positions and out bidding the younger guys that have been leads just pisses off the younger guys. Therefore the "classification" seniority was introduced by the IAM to help protect the current Leads (CC's) from all the older more senior mechanics from flooding these positions and it's just not right. The only seniority that I agree with overruling mechanic seniority is Company seniority for vac bidding as vac is built up by co. time not just mechanic time. I do understand that the IAM has been doing it this way from the get go, but so has the TWU at AA. When this decision comes down and it ends up being either US way or AA way without mods or grandfathered language there will be great displeasure for the rest of their careers. My opinion is the union should have worked this out with some kind of modifications to help offset the rather large distent from both sides. The IAM pushing it so quickly to an outside arbitrator is just pathetic and a move solely why the IAM was in charge at the time to try and get it to go their way since they were at the "controls" at the time and they knew they were going to have to hand it off to the control of the TWU in August so they threw it to the arbitrator with only input from the IAM side. However, with all that said, I think it should have been the membership to decide the final outcome by a voting system and, of course, the majority would win and that is what the IAM was completely preventing by throwing to the arbitrator, just to prevent a vote by the membership as they know the AA mechanics way outway the US mechanics. So once again just like the association vote that did not happen by control of the IAM, this seniority issue also will not be voted on by the membership as controled by the IAM just prior to losing control at the helm of the association. When you have 2 different unions "sharing" control of the union like this, the back and forth crap will be crippling to the membership for years to come.

 

[FLYNFISH]

A Liberal CS policy is the only way to go! I CS'd OFF 5 days last week and it was akin to another week of vacation, i.e. in conjunction with my 2 weekends, I had 9 days off and went to Europe.

To make up for it financially, one only needs to work a few hours of OT, and you're good to go!!

That's what I'm talking about! I've worked three line stations over the years and it is a nice benefit to have. I personally believe if one has some flexibility in their work schedule it makes for a better employee! I know I certainly was. Bring us back a leading edge contract with all benefits restored and a liberal cs policy that is allowed for all employees no matter what station or base you work at. Only then will we turn the corner and leave this ugly decade behind us. Its not really to hard to understand. Take care of your employees and they will take care of you!

 

[OldGuy@AA]

That's what I'm talking about! I've worked three line stations over the years and it is a nice benefit to have. I personally believe if one has some flexibility in their work schedule it makes for a better employee! I know I certainly was. Bring us back a leading edge contract with all benefits restored and a liberal cs policy that is allowed for all employees no matter what station or base you work at. Only then will we turn the corner and leave this ugly decade behind us. Its not really to hard to understand. Take care of your employees and they will take care of you!

In Tulsa we still have the same management as before so they love not letting us have any flexibility. Where I work they "Allow" you to take vacation an hour at a time to be able to make Dr appointments. No changing start/stop times at all. They consider this flexibility. Until the new CEO sends these people packing it won't change. A line style CS policy won't work in Tulsa. No way they would allow double shifts because they really enjoy limiting your time off. My manager has told us that we will go by the IAM CS policy in their contract. I asked him if he realized we were TWU and he said yes. So I asked if I could pick one thing from the IAM contract since he picked one and of course he said no. These guys go out of their way to figure out new policies to make us miserable.