MANAGEMENT Questions and Answers

[REACC1]

OOPs, My bad, misread. sorry.

 

[Prince of PAWOBs]

So here's your answer: Since GPUs were moved under previous Management I can't rightly know, but I'd bet 1. they went to PHL, and 2. you can expect more when the current inventory of 3 renders you incapable of doing your job efficiently, effectively, and safely, provided that problem is reported through the appropriate channels. Feel free to voice that concern in a Town Hall.

Here's some responses, in order of statement:

1) Current management was in place when the GPU's left. I'm pretty sure they ended up there (PHL), but I just wanted to see if you were of the same opinion as to destination.

2) We probably won't expect more, because the NEW GPU's were taken, not the older units. This might be because the new ones were capable of 400hz AC for CRJ's. PIT's jetways are now capable of handling the CRJ's power needs. Why PHL's cannot is a mystery.

3) I was at a Town Hall, and my impression of the answers from Senior Management was that NO ONE did their homework before coming to class. Why ask more specific questions if they can't answer the general ones?

So, not only was I fishing for how much knowledge you had on the subject, I was also griping about how stations that do well and receive new equipment to replace older, less capable equipment end up having it removed to stations that lack any decent equipment. I remember hearing the tales of tugs being driven into the river at said airport, and I don't see why my station should be punished for their abuses. You might also note that diesel beltloaders and tugs in very good condition were also removed from PIT.

Do I want PHL to have problems? No, but the problems already exist there, and by taking OUR equipment instead of getting their own disproves your statement about receiving new equipment when a station can no longer do their job adequately. Maybe I should revise that last statement: You get new equipment when we find another station with their backs turned while GSE loads equipment onto the flatbed trailer.

 

[EricLv2Fish]

Can anyone verify the company doesn't or does pay for relocation expenses or at least help offset the cost of relocating the average worker?

 

[kao]

Can anyone verify the company doesn't or does pay for relocation expenses or at least help offset the cost of relocating the average worker?

only for management

 

[AIRWOMAN]

only for management

What level of management?? There must be some cut off....by title perhaps??

 

[EricLv2Fish]

only for management

Please be more specific, and what is your basis for your comment?

 

[Barbell]

The company has traditionally paid relocation expenses based on need. I don't think there is necessarily a management-level cutoff per-se, although I'm sure that there would be some expectation. When HP closed the CMH hub I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong) those employees offered jobs in PHX and LAS were offered moving expenses. Albeit as a LCC the funds are low, I believe a management colleague was offered $2,000 to move back to PHX when his position was relocated back to CHQ. That figure could be incorrect.

As for base closure, my opinion would be that expenses should be offered. Since US was cash-strapped when the decision to shutter the PIT base was made, my guess would be that EO was the more cost-effective option.

Now that everything's on the table, may I suggest that union leadership work to get moving expenses into your contracts? It seems to me that 8 fully operational bases is not in the company's best interests long term.

 

[700UW]

In bankruptcy US wiped out all the relocating expenses from the CBAs.

And the PIT pilot and FA base is not closed.

 

[Snafu]

In bankruptcy US wiped out all the relocating expenses from the CBAs.

And the PIT pilot and FA base is not closed.

Yeah..........there's another reason to vote for the IAM and the IAM contract(s). NOT!! Time to get some NEW agreements and/or contracts and put the bankruptcy in the ground where it belongs.

 

[700UW]

Do you not understand if you change representation you do not change nor renegotiate the CBAs?

Why is that so hard for you and others to understand?

 

[Barbell]

There are plenty of other threads to have union discussions. Thanks.

 

[Snafu]

Do you not understand if you change representation you do not change nor renegotiate the CBAs?

Why is that so hard for you and others to understand?

It's not hard to understand.........it's NEVER been proven that it CAN'T happen. When it's proven that it CAN'T happen, then we'll believe it AND understand it. But until that happens.......

 

[700UW]

It has been proven

When AMFA beat the ibt at WN they did not get the right to renegotiate the CBA until the amendable date.

When AMFA beat the IAM at UAL and NWA they did not get to renegotiate the CBAs until the amendable dates.

When PFAA beat the ibt at NWA they did not get the right to renegotiate the CBA until the amendable date.

Don't let the facts get in your way!!!!!

 

[Snafu]

It has been proven

When AMFA beat the ibt at WN they did not get the right to renegotiate the CBA until the amendable date.

When AMFA beat the IAM at UAL and NWA they did not get to renegotiate the CBAs until the amendable dates.

When PFAA beat the ibt at NWA they did not get the right to renegotiate the CBA until the amendable date.

Don't let the facts get in your way!!!!!

Again, it's been proven that it can happen but it hasn't been proven that it CAN'T happen. IMO, this merger of the airlines and the contracts is a totally new and unique situation.

 

[700UW]

Wrong again a merger is a merger, there is nothing differant nor unique about it.

Having been through several of them all ready.

Show me the legal basis under the RLA or the NMB where a change in representation gives the union the right to renegotiate a CBA.