So very very sorry I'm not as refined a person you're used to dealing with, but really, who cares? Point being the decision to screw us was part of the purchasing agreement of TWA. And this isn't crying brother, though you may desire to depict it as such. If one would cry here at American, it would be to cry for union members, and you're correct, that isn't your group. Your group, now there's a laugh. You are actually so ignorant to think that a simple change of the name on the door will produce such a fine union, one that the company fears...HAHAHA!..so far I haven't seen any of the 8 companies fearing anything but bankruptcy....next time ya talk to Delle, tell him the boys at AFW say thanks for the work! all 38% of it...now that's funny...HAHAHA!
******major Announcement*******
- Thread starter Hopeful
- Start date
Nightwatch,Nov 23 2004, 12:57 AM]
So by your AA native statements I can only presume that had the roles been reversed then we'd live in harmony.
And Bob, I'm still at a loss at what you are referring to with EAL. TWA did not buy/merge/sponsor/adopt anyone from EAL. Did some mechanics leave EAL and hire , "AS NEW HIRES/EMPLOYEES" with TWA, sure did, but so did many others from FBO's, other airlines, and the armed service...so what's your point or agenda on this?
Were the EAL guys your "union brothers" or not? Should you base your treatment of your brother upon the decisions of the company? Seniority is a union issue. It is the property of the member, unions should make that seniority portable under the control of the member, not the company.
The fact is that AA offered to hire all of the TWA guys. Notice the words "to hire". So you guys were hired by AA on 4/10/01 under special conditions where you were granted credit for time worked as far as vacation and had your probations waived, which are company controlled issues.
If you feel they should be hired, or for that fact, anyone be hired at any airline with your seniority then you need to go have another dinner with Delle, if you can locate him, and ask him to change the ways the 8 airlines he represents.
When we get there, I will.
We at MCI bent over backwards for EAL members here locally, up to and including paying rent and utilitues for some members...let me ask you this...anyone collecting $$$ for any furloughed employees anywhere?
Well you guys are the ones with all the exta money.
I see a bunch of members in here needing to feel better about their non union look on life. It's no wonder the comnpanies can roll over on you guys with your "for me" attitude.
Yea like the way you guys voted for massive concessions because you live in a low cost area of the country and said the hell with everyone else right? The fact is NW I and most of my coworkers would have been willing to fight to keep the work, to keep you employed and keep our wages at a livable rate. You guys didnt want to fight, so they destroyed our financial well-being, and now they are coming after you, something that we warned you would happen. All of a sudden you are the only victim. According to you, we are the ones who are selfish because we are no longer willing to do anything to help those who would not help us.
So by your AA native statements I can only presume that had the roles been reversed then we'd live in harmony.
And Bob, I'm still at a loss at what you are referring to with EAL. TWA did not buy/merge/sponsor/adopt anyone from EAL. Did some mechanics leave EAL and hire , "AS NEW HIRES/EMPLOYEES" with TWA, sure did, but so did many others from FBO's, other airlines, and the armed service...so what's your point or agenda on this?
Were the EAL guys your "union brothers" or not? Should you base your treatment of your brother upon the decisions of the company? Seniority is a union issue. It is the property of the member, unions should make that seniority portable under the control of the member, not the company.
The fact is that AA offered to hire all of the TWA guys. Notice the words "to hire". So you guys were hired by AA on 4/10/01 under special conditions where you were granted credit for time worked as far as vacation and had your probations waived, which are company controlled issues.
If you feel they should be hired, or for that fact, anyone be hired at any airline with your seniority then you need to go have another dinner with Delle, if you can locate him, and ask him to change the ways the 8 airlines he represents.
When we get there, I will.
We at MCI bent over backwards for EAL members here locally, up to and including paying rent and utilitues for some members...let me ask you this...anyone collecting $$$ for any furloughed employees anywhere?
Well you guys are the ones with all the exta money.
I see a bunch of members in here needing to feel better about their non union look on life. It's no wonder the comnpanies can roll over on you guys with your "for me" attitude.
Yea like the way you guys voted for massive concessions because you live in a low cost area of the country and said the hell with everyone else right? The fact is NW I and most of my coworkers would have been willing to fight to keep the work, to keep you employed and keep our wages at a livable rate. You guys didnt want to fight, so they destroyed our financial well-being, and now they are coming after you, something that we warned you would happen. All of a sudden you are the only victim. According to you, we are the ones who are selfish because we are no longer willing to do anything to help those who would not help us.
Nightwatch
Veteran
- Jun 8, 2004
- 888
- 2
Let me see if I understand you correctly. You lay blame to EAL's hiring at TWA as a new hire because the TWAers did not make their seniority portable. Portable, could you give me a "for instance" here Bob? Like name me another airline that does, or is TWA at fault for not making that breakthrough for true union brothers. May I quote Drippy here and state "you suck". Your logic is that of a child.
And let's examine your poor state of the economy by living in NY. Your houses are more expensive, fuel, food, can we say all things except BS are costly there. So by that statement a reasonable person could assume that if you sell that house, say for 250K, and move to KC, buy one similar for 145K, well Bob, you are indeed a rich man, you have invested well. I, on the other hand, would sell my farm for 350K, move to NY and have to pay upwards of what, 500K for 80 acres and a 3000sqft home, 3 barns, 3 ponds. I could not live as I am accustomed, thusly, I am the neglected one here Bob, not you.
After all Bob, you were able to laugh at giving up 28k/yr, that's some serious change here.
And let's examine your poor state of the economy by living in NY. Your houses are more expensive, fuel, food, can we say all things except BS are costly there. So by that statement a reasonable person could assume that if you sell that house, say for 250K, and move to KC, buy one similar for 145K, well Bob, you are indeed a rich man, you have invested well. I, on the other hand, would sell my farm for 350K, move to NY and have to pay upwards of what, 500K for 80 acres and a 3000sqft home, 3 barns, 3 ponds. I could not live as I am accustomed, thusly, I am the neglected one here Bob, not you.
After all Bob, you were able to laugh at giving up 28k/yr, that's some serious change here.
Nightwatch,Nov 23 2004, 11:57 AM]
Let me see if I understand you correctly. You lay blame to EAL's hiring at TWA as a new hire because the TWAers did not make their seniority portable. Portable, could you give me a "for instance" here Bob? Like name me another airline that does, or is TWA at fault for not making that breakthrough for true union brothers. May I quote Drippy here and state "you suck". Your logic is that of a child.
Again you do not understand correctly. You are the one who is complaining of being treated unfairly. I use the EAL example to illustrate your narrow self interested point of view. I didnt say that anyone in this industry has portable seniority, my point is that its overdue and those of us that have more than a few years left before retiring need to consider new tactics. You seem to feel that rules and practices that favor the company are perfectly acceptable just because they have been in place. Childish logic? You expect workers from another company to step aside for you. Why do you feel that we owe you? We did not want the company to buy TWA.
And let's examine your poor state of the economy by living in NY. Your houses are more expensive, fuel, food, can we say all things except BS are costly there.
I would wager that even BS is more costly here, after all supply and demand sets price and we know that there is no shortage of that where you are since there are so many sources.
So by that statement a reasonable person could assume that if you sell that house, say for 250K, and move to KC, buy one similar for 145K, well Bob, you are indeed a rich man, you have invested well.
Yes, but as you stated there are the issues of "family, friends and lives here". Besides why would I move to an area where jobs are dissappearing?
I, on the other hand, would sell my farm for 350K, move to NY and have to pay upwards of what, 500K for 80 acres and a 3000sqft home, 3 barns, 3 ponds. I could not live as I am accustomed, thusly, I am the neglected one here Bob, not you.
Well actually for your $350,000 you could not even buy my home. My neighbor down the block recently sold for $410,000, boggles the mind! I consider myself fortunate for buying when I did. No 80 acres, no 3000sqft home, no ponds and no barns. For that you would have to add a few more zeros. If I had not bought when I did I would not be able to afford a home here, a prospect that several of my "brothers ans sisters" here in NY face.
Rich? Thats relative now isnt it? You are rich compared to the workers in Singapore and Mexico that you seem to think are waiting for your jobs. Why dont you sell your ranch and buy one there? Even if you did, the company would still need people here in NY, even if there was nobody in MCI anymore.
Again you miss the point. Your station is there for the convenience of the company, an optional part of the business plan that is remote from where the company generates its income. Workers are needed in the high cost areas because that is where the revenue is generated. However, with maintenance, a large part of the work can be moved to a low cost area which can then be used to supress the wages in high cost areas. Having a union should foil such a scheme, but that has not been the case.
All your hootin and hollarin about how you can bang out the work dont mean squat, the work will get done whether its in MCi, or TUL or AFW. I'm not trying to toot our horn or say that as individual workers we are any more important than you, our location is what makes our situations different. But the facts are the facts. The service provided here generates the revenue that provides the money to pay you. The fact is that you guys as a group chose to ignore this fact and failed to consider how your decisions would impact those who work here. AA is spending over $1billion on a new terminal here. They plan on making that money back here. AA is reducing operations wherever it can, they are not reducing operations here. They have three bases. Tulsa, which is huge, Alliance, which is state of the art, and MCI, which has been patched together for the last twenty years by a company that was shrinking. You did however provide the company with the yes votes needed to force concessions down our throats, I'm sure the TWU and the company are greatful for that, however what is happening to you now is "just business" in their eyes. You helped screw us now you sob about how you are being treated. What did you expect?
After all Bob, you were able to laugh at giving up 28k/yr, that's some serious change here.
How do you figure that? The union pay added around $10k, not $28K, you forgot about the fact that the company was not paying me when I was not at work and doing union business.
After the 2001 contract I was considering giving up the Treasurers position and going for E-bd or Sect Chairman because the Treasurers job was too tediuos, time consuming and boring. The Presidents job required too much travel, I'd rather go home at night. I was not doing it for just the money, when I took the position I had to shut down my side business and I no longer worked OT. So my yearly earnings were about the same as they would have been if I had not taken the position. Frank DeMarinis, my running mate, asked me to remain in that position. I have no regrets about how I performed my job and am thankful for the honor that my coworkers gave to me by allowing me to represent them. Thats the problem with the TWU International, they hold the membership in contempt, they call having a union postion a "thankless job" as they lavish themselves with six figure salaries and other perks. They do this because many of them are ex-local officers that the members rejected like Gless, Gordon etc. Most would not get elected by the members and they know it, thats why they always say what they do about the members and the job.
Let me see if I understand you correctly. You lay blame to EAL's hiring at TWA as a new hire because the TWAers did not make their seniority portable. Portable, could you give me a "for instance" here Bob? Like name me another airline that does, or is TWA at fault for not making that breakthrough for true union brothers. May I quote Drippy here and state "you suck". Your logic is that of a child.
Again you do not understand correctly. You are the one who is complaining of being treated unfairly. I use the EAL example to illustrate your narrow self interested point of view. I didnt say that anyone in this industry has portable seniority, my point is that its overdue and those of us that have more than a few years left before retiring need to consider new tactics. You seem to feel that rules and practices that favor the company are perfectly acceptable just because they have been in place. Childish logic? You expect workers from another company to step aside for you. Why do you feel that we owe you? We did not want the company to buy TWA.
And let's examine your poor state of the economy by living in NY. Your houses are more expensive, fuel, food, can we say all things except BS are costly there.
I would wager that even BS is more costly here, after all supply and demand sets price and we know that there is no shortage of that where you are since there are so many sources.
So by that statement a reasonable person could assume that if you sell that house, say for 250K, and move to KC, buy one similar for 145K, well Bob, you are indeed a rich man, you have invested well.
Yes, but as you stated there are the issues of "family, friends and lives here". Besides why would I move to an area where jobs are dissappearing?
I, on the other hand, would sell my farm for 350K, move to NY and have to pay upwards of what, 500K for 80 acres and a 3000sqft home, 3 barns, 3 ponds. I could not live as I am accustomed, thusly, I am the neglected one here Bob, not you.
Well actually for your $350,000 you could not even buy my home. My neighbor down the block recently sold for $410,000, boggles the mind! I consider myself fortunate for buying when I did. No 80 acres, no 3000sqft home, no ponds and no barns. For that you would have to add a few more zeros. If I had not bought when I did I would not be able to afford a home here, a prospect that several of my "brothers ans sisters" here in NY face.
Rich? Thats relative now isnt it? You are rich compared to the workers in Singapore and Mexico that you seem to think are waiting for your jobs. Why dont you sell your ranch and buy one there? Even if you did, the company would still need people here in NY, even if there was nobody in MCI anymore.
Again you miss the point. Your station is there for the convenience of the company, an optional part of the business plan that is remote from where the company generates its income. Workers are needed in the high cost areas because that is where the revenue is generated. However, with maintenance, a large part of the work can be moved to a low cost area which can then be used to supress the wages in high cost areas. Having a union should foil such a scheme, but that has not been the case.
All your hootin and hollarin about how you can bang out the work dont mean squat, the work will get done whether its in MCi, or TUL or AFW. I'm not trying to toot our horn or say that as individual workers we are any more important than you, our location is what makes our situations different. But the facts are the facts. The service provided here generates the revenue that provides the money to pay you. The fact is that you guys as a group chose to ignore this fact and failed to consider how your decisions would impact those who work here. AA is spending over $1billion on a new terminal here. They plan on making that money back here. AA is reducing operations wherever it can, they are not reducing operations here. They have three bases. Tulsa, which is huge, Alliance, which is state of the art, and MCI, which has been patched together for the last twenty years by a company that was shrinking. You did however provide the company with the yes votes needed to force concessions down our throats, I'm sure the TWU and the company are greatful for that, however what is happening to you now is "just business" in their eyes. You helped screw us now you sob about how you are being treated. What did you expect?
After all Bob, you were able to laugh at giving up 28k/yr, that's some serious change here.
How do you figure that? The union pay added around $10k, not $28K, you forgot about the fact that the company was not paying me when I was not at work and doing union business.
After the 2001 contract I was considering giving up the Treasurers position and going for E-bd or Sect Chairman because the Treasurers job was too tediuos, time consuming and boring. The Presidents job required too much travel, I'd rather go home at night. I was not doing it for just the money, when I took the position I had to shut down my side business and I no longer worked OT. So my yearly earnings were about the same as they would have been if I had not taken the position. Frank DeMarinis, my running mate, asked me to remain in that position. I have no regrets about how I performed my job and am thankful for the honor that my coworkers gave to me by allowing me to represent them. Thats the problem with the TWU International, they hold the membership in contempt, they call having a union postion a "thankless job" as they lavish themselves with six figure salaries and other perks. They do this because many of them are ex-local officers that the members rejected like Gless, Gordon etc. Most would not get elected by the members and they know it, thats why they always say what they do about the members and the job.
Ok Bob, for the sake of not having to read anymore of your BS ..."YOU WIN BOOBY!"...I'm actually sorry I ever engaged such a noble, learned, hard working, "I'm doing it for you", type of honest ,picture perfect, true form of a man....now, excuse me while I go hurl...HAHAHA!!!
