JCBA Negotiations and updates for AA AMTS

[Buck]

The point is that the CC job is not management and we should not lose AMT time while a CC.  

Exactly, I have 20 years as a crew chief and 12 as an LAA mechanic. how should my seniority be handled?

 

[Real tired]

Exactly, I have 20 years as a crew chief and 12 as an LAA mechanic. how should my seniority be handled?

 
You should have 32 years as an AMT and be able to bid anywhere, to any shop that AMT seniority will take you.  That includes Plant Maintenance and Auto Shop, Line and Overhaul, Sheetmetal or Engine shop, Seat shop or Hydraulic shop, you get my drift.
 
You should have 20 years as a Lead/CC and be able to bid and hold any Lead position 20 years will take you.  If it's midnights in BUF in the winter, so be it.  Or downgrade to a AMT and bid any shop, shift, location that your seniority takes you.

 

[swamt]

Crew Chief seniority is BS, title one is title one.  If an AMT wants to take a CC job in his later years with the firm for whatever reason, he shouldn't lose his seniority.  I have heard both sides of the argument.  Tired of seeing AMTs always being limited; if not by mangement, then by their own union,  Same goes for maintenance control jobs.  The other issue is AA has title one AMTs & title two mechanics - auto and facilities. On the other hand, US Air has Mechanics who do different jobs based on whatever they bid and hold with the proper credentials.  The idea to rectify that - was give the A&P licensed mechanics a period of time to decide if they want to be aircraft mechanics or stay doing whatever they are currently doing.  The AFL/CIO rocket scientists saddled us with this mess of an association.  

I agree. Nobody should lose any seniority when bidding lead positions and or any mechanics position, or even inspection positions. Your seniority is your seniority-period. Nobody should ever lose their seniority. This category seniority crap is just that, crap. When a 30 year mechanic is brought down to day one when he bids into lead, CC, or inspection is complete B.S. to me. Your seniority should follow you "EVERYWHERE" you go, except for management positions.  A mechanic is a mechanic...

 

[iluvaa]

LAA is the best way I implore anyone to tell me other wise. A&P works on airplanes if you want to fix autos or work on facilities than so be it but you gotta choose. And crew chief shouldn't lose seniority because they bid a job after someone else. I mean really a 30 year amt shouldn't be lower than a crew chief with 10 years because he choose to bid at a later date

 

[DallasConehead]

Bottom line is they've hired a neutral to decide so they can wash their hands of it just like they did with Kasher and TWA

 

[skinvalve]

The LUS mentality has always focused on premium job start time, award date,  be it as a lead or inspector. Back in the day amt's would bid a lead job to get a start award date them bid back to their old amt slot and never work a day as a lead yet would accumulate lead time from the lead award date onward. Same for inspection jobs. Today many LUS amt's are accumulating lead or insp seniority even though they work in an amt slot. LUS will scream bloody heck but the LAA rules are the way to go at this point.

 

[MetalMover]

The LUS mentality has always focused on premium job start time, award date,  be it as a lead or inspector. Back in the day amt's would bid a lead job to get a start award date them bid back to their old amt slot and never work a day as a lead yet would accumulate lead time from the lead award date onward. Same for inspection jobs. Today many LUS amt's are accumulating lead or insp seniority even though they work in an amt slot. LUS will scream bloody heck but the LAA rules are the way to go at this point.

And LAA will scream bloody hell if LUS rules are adopted.
LAA TWU members need to understand that they are way bigger number wise than LUS and any contract unfavorable to LAAers should be and will be voted down. And I would hope that everyone understands that even though a substantial raise is probable and long overdue, it is these other monetary issues that will screw us in the end.
 
But yet, there are those willing to STILL support the TWU, let alone the ASSociation with hopes that maybe we will get something good because the IAM is involved.
News flash.......The IAM Lead seniority way is what we DON'T want.... And for those who are NOT crew chiefs or leads and simply do not care, keep this in mind......The day may come when you are older and physically cannot do the job as mechanic as easily as you once did, or you just want the job,,,,your 30, 35 and maybe 40 years will mean NOTHING...You will start at the bottom and then it's back to midnights with that choice  Tuesday, Wednesday off just like you had when you hired on.......

 

[swamt]

And LAA will scream bloody hell if LUS rules are adopted.
LAA TWU members need to understand that they are way bigger number wise than LUS and any contract unfavorable to LAAers should be and will be voted down. And I would hope that everyone understands that even though a substantial raise is probable and long overdue, it is these other monetary issues that will screw us in the end.
 
But yet, there are those willing to STILL support the TWU, let alone the ASSociation with hopes that maybe we will get something good because the IAM is involved.
News flash.......The IAM Lead seniority way is what we DON'T want.... And for those who are NOT crew chiefs or leads and simply do not care, keep this in mind......The day may come when you are older and physically cannot do the job as mechanic as easily as you once did, or you just want the job,,,,your 30, 35 and maybe 40 years will mean NOTHING...You will start at the bottom and then it's back to midnights with that choice  Tuesday, Wednesday off just like you had when you hired on.......

MM, I will throw this your way.  Are any of you guys thinking of a way to meet in the middle of the two ways they are using?  Or are your guys strictly only wanting just how they TWU has been doing it?  Just curious if anyone has thought about some kinda grandfather clause for the current leads and inspectors and then move on forward with the way the TWU has always done it?
 
You are 100% correct. We are all getting older and our bodies will take greater beatings as we keep aging and a lead job is the exact job to fall into when our bodies just won't keep up with our jobs.  I just couldn't see a 30 plus year man bidding lead and getting stuck on graves or some kinda split shift for the next 10 years or longer in some cases. I hate to use this as leverage but you are correct, the AA guys out weigh the US guys by what? 8-10K plus?  You know the IAM is at the controls currently, maybe when the TWU takes over nego's (this Aug I believe) the issue may get put into an offer being made? I'm just thinking out loud here. But it seems to me that the IAM made a dire move here for their members at US before the TWU side steps in and takes over.  They saw the deadline of the transitioning over to the TWU being in charge, therefore they quickly thru the lead/insp seniority integration issue to an outside arbitrator in hopes of getting something different or at least better than the way the TWU is doing it.  Possibly a very smart move on his behalf for his US members. Question going forward is; can the TWU reverse this issue going to the arbitrator, pull it back into their control at the nego table when they take over in August?  Or did the IAM just screw the entire AA side by throwing it out to an outsider arbitrator and now are they stuck in stone that the outside arbitrator makes the decision?  I guess we will all see what goes down after the transition over to TWU in control for 2 years.  Also, think about this, how many articles will get revisited by the TWU, that the IAM side have already agreed to with the company that leans severely towards the IAM folks?  This will get very interesting indeed after TWU steps in. It will possibly dictate how long your nego's will continue on since this stupid a$$ asso. agreed to change who's in charge every 2 years. This could get very ugly and long.  My opinion.

 

[chilokie1]

That's what scares me to death. An expedited arbitration (someone having to quickly come up with a remedy) being decided by an outsider=====not a good outcome in my opinion...

 
I agree 100%, don't blame the negotiators for not finding a solution they are only 
protecting their memberships!!! It all comes down to the the fact ASS was forced 
upon us and does not have the support of the membership (I cannot speak for the IAM
membership). But, by allowing a third party to decide they are enabling the ASS to
move on with much bigger issues ahead. I for one do not want these issues negotiated
by a split negotiating team up against the company on issues of retirement and scope.
To all you fools who did not sign an AMFA card ........"YOU ALLOWED THIS TO HAPPEN"
The sad thing is the ASS might have been a good idea if it were a grassroots plan, it could
have had the support of both memberships if it was based on what was best for the memberships
and not what was best for the AFL-CIO, TWU international, IAM international & the IAMPF.

 

[Docker]

LAA is the best way I implore anyone to tell me other wise. A&P works on airplanes if you want to fix autos or work on facilities than so be it but you gotta choose. And crew chief shouldn't lose seniority because they bid a job after someone else. I mean really a 30 year amt shouldn't be lower than a crew chief with 10 years because he choose to bid at a later date

Since you implore me, here goes. I prefer the US way, you do not lose any time when you bid a premium job (Lead or Inspection), your mechanic time still continues. If you was to bid Auto Shop (GSE) or Plant Maintenance then so be it, you just give up your license premium while there. There is one change I would like to see and that is Leads or Inspectors should stop accruing premium time if they are not working in a premium position due to their own choosing.
On another note, lets get something to vote on, I would much rather a 20+% raise this September rather than our scheduled 1 1/2 %.

 

[chilokie1]

It seems to me we are not far apart, if you incorporate the LAA way all Inspector &
Lead are all tittle one just like an A&P so nobody will lose any time.
As far as a guy who went from an A&P to an auto mech, he would have
make a desicion to stay title Two or move back to an A&P and have his
title one senority grandfathered in on a one time basis. Let me know
If I'am wrong on my way of thinking

 

[Real tired]

Exactly, I have 20 years as a crew chief and 12 as an LAA mechanic. how should my seniority be handled?

 
Ok then, back to this scenario.
 
If we went strictly the AA way, this is one junior AMT.  If this is the way I am to understand how your seniority works.
 
With only 12 years AMT time, he could only hold the most junior of stations.  Maybe PHL or PHX or CLT on midnights.
 
And with that seniority, with 20 years as a Lead, he could not hold any position in PIT.  Maybe midnight GSE (auto).  Combine his Lead time with the Mechanic time, the way we do it, and in PIT, he could hold any shift in Overhaul (junior on daylight).  And with 32 years, he could only hold midnight Line.
 
But the way AA seems to do it, with an employee on the job for 32 years but with only 12 years AMT time, good luck when the bumping comes.  And if they close PIT, which I bet they do, there's going to be some senior dudes looking for a new home.

 

[Real tired]

Since you implore me, here goes. I prefer the US way, you do not lose any time when you bid a premium job (Lead or Inspection), your mechanic time still continues. If you was to bid Auto Shop (GSE) or Plant Maintenance then so be it, you just give up your license premium while there. There is one change I would like to see and that is Leads or Inspectors should stop accruing premium time if they are not working in a premium position due to their own choosing.
On another note, lets get something to vote on, I would much rather a 20+% raise this September rather than our scheduled 1 1/2 %.

 
This is an idea.  
 
Maybe they could use only the time actually served in the premium position and give that credit to the LUS Mechanic for his position on the CC/Lead senority list.
 
But how are they going to work a LAA Crew Chief that only has 12 years in the position as a Mechanic but 32 years in the company?  Give him super seniority and credit by adding both his CC time and AMT time?
 
This might get nasty and a few people might have their panties in a bunch.

 

[Real tired]

It seems to me we are not far apart, if you incorporate the LAA way all Inspector &
Lead are all tittle one just like an A&P so nobody will lose any time.
As far as a guy who went from an A&P to an auto mech, he would have
make a desicion to stay title Two or move back to an A&P and have his
title one senority grandfathered in on a one time basis. Let me know
If I'am wrong on my way of thinking

I'm not really understanding the concept of title I and II.
 
Is it only a pay group difference?  Because a GSE guy doesn't get License pay?
 
Or is title I and II different bid areas, or do you need different training?
 
Can't a person with an A&P bid back and forth between title I and II as their seniority can take them?

 

[blue collar]

They could mix the aa/us way of doing it. Remove the premium seniority for lead/insp and just use mechanic time like AA does, but also let mechanic time carry over to gse, like how US does. This might be the most palatable outcome.