Mechanic''s and UAL not talking ?

[spacewaitress]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/15/2002 11:06:47 AM wts54 wrote:

From what I have heard the company
still wants R+D,...
----------------
[/blockquote]
What does this R&D stand for? The only thing I can think of is Research and Development, but I can't imagine how that applies to the IAM.

Also, is anyone getting nervous among the IAM represented employees. Besides mastermechanic, who seems willing to sacrifice his and other's careers for the sake of principle, I'm really wondering what the mind set is of other members, and also some rationale that explains it.

Mine is simple. The company seems to be reasonably fair on the current proposal, so I'm willing to swallow the bitter pill and support it. The past is past and I'm hopeful and willing to work towards a future. We all deserve that.

 

[UAL777flyer]

spacewaitress,

R & D stands for receipt and dispatch. In other words, the guys who wave the wands and guide in the aircraft and push them back.

We were told this morning that the tone and tenor of Tilton's weekly Friday conference call seems to indicate a deal with the IAM is within sight, and could come within the next few days. I hope that's accurate. We were also told that the management/salaried employees ERP package will be out on Monday.

 

[GGpillow]

[/blockquote]
What does this R&D stand for? The only thing I can think of is Research and Development, but I can't imagine how that applies to the IAM.

Also, is anyone getting nervous among the IAM represented employees. Besides mastermechanic, who seems willing to sacrifice his and other's careers for the sake of "principle", I'm really wondering what the mind set is of other members, and also some rationale that explains it.

Mine is simple. The company seems to be reasonably fair on the current proposal, so I'm willing to swallow the bitter pill and support it. The past is past and I'm hopeful and willing to work towards a future. We all deserve that.
----------------
[/blockquote]


I'm a DL141 member, as opposed to 141M and, I'm not to nervous. I am more angry then anything. Show mw some numbers! Give me an idea of what is being asked/fought for between WHQ and the IAM. At this point, I really would just like some information. I figure, just like every other employee group, I'm gonna get bent over on this deal, I guess I just wanna know how much it's gonna hurt. However, Their is reason to believe TM. that is will be worse if the judge get's his hands on us .
Unlike the majority of folks on this board, I usually try to have some information to base my opinion on before I spout off a whole lot. I'll reserve judgement untill I see some facts.

 

[atabuy]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/14/2002 5:13:11 PM UAL777flyer wrote:

Ahhhhhhhhhh, kcabpilot, once againg you're short on details. Why don't you share with all of us what is so "unacceptable" about what you've seen so far from the company. Maybe at some point, you folks will be smart enough to realize that if you don't have a deal in place and this company is forced to file for Ch.11, guess who's contract they will come after first? And when you consider that you're pretty much at "industry leading", what do you think a judge is going to decide. It's basically the devil you know vs. the devil you don't. Either way, it's a losing situation. But in bankruptcy, you lose bigger!
----------------
[/blockquote]
UAL777flyer,
I like your attitude and logic in what you write here. You got a little defensive about my post of too many management people. Your job would be safe with me. Of course, that won't help too much. I am just a grunt who wants to see the company become something better than it was and eventually bring back all the people who have been laid off.

A lot of the concessions the company suggested would be in place of giving back wages, or a portion of them.
Some of these had to do with work rules. Some had to do with benefits. Although if the employee pays more of the health benefit, it reduces their wage and could be a tax issue.
Here are some:
If the employee works less than an hour of overtime, he would be paid what he worked instead of a full hour.
No irregular lunches.
Pay a percentage of medical and dental.
Reduce holidays.
Reduce vacations to 5 weeks max.
Combine Injury and Sick time together and reduce total number of hours.
Pay 75% of wage if sick.
License pay
R&D

We will have to see what are the real issues when the information is finally given to us.
This should have all been done months ago and the reason it was not is because of not having a leader in place to get things going. Tilton seems to be heading us in the right direction and I hope this continues.
If mechanics can see that this is a new management team who will do the right things to get Ual going and not waste the concessions when things seem better, I think they will accept it. I think they do want to see a lot of cost savings from management wages, or the elimination of redundant positions.

Supervisory personel are counter productive to productivity. We need to empower the leads to make decisions and stop this excessive chain of command that is not necessary, and costly.

IMHO Once we can get Ual streamlined and wages fair and in line with each group, we can then tie wages to revenue. Until then, we will always have this roller coaster effect of profits to BK.
Unions would not like this idea because it takes power away from them. It would have to be suggested to the membership to vote on and bypass the union officials. Once in place, Ual would become the airline to own.

 

[wts54]

atabuy

A lot of the concessions the company suggested would be in place of giving back wages, or a portion of them.
Some of these had to do with work rules. Some had to do with benefits. Although if the employee pays more of the health benefit, it reduces their wage and could be a tax issue.
Here are some:
If the employee works less than an hour of overtime, he would be paid what he worked instead of a full hour.
No irregular lunches.
Pay a percentage of medical and dental.
Reduce holidays.
Reduce vacations to 5 weeks max.
Combine Injury and Sick time together and reduce total number of hours.
Pay 75% of wage if sick.
License pay
R&D

Dont forget unlimited farmouts of maintenance work,selling off any and all
of our maintenance bases,and laying off as many people as they wish below
1994 esop contract provision.This is totally unacceptable and I doubt
many will vote for it.Like I have said before if it was just money,a weeks
vacation etc. people may vote for it.The company took millions of dollars
from employees paychecks during the esop and now that the stock is practically worthless they want to throw all these people on the street.
Yea right I'm sure if UAL looks hard enough they might find a couple of people who after all that is considered might find it a GREAT DEAL !!

 

[wts54]

Are you a UAL mech?? Read the scope language then pull out your contract
book and see what it means for yourself.Nobody would vote for this crap.
I didnt mention paying for your health insurance too.Also there is no snap back provision to restore you back to where you would have been at if their
had been no ERP.You cant trust UAL to share in the fruits of any profits with the employees.You have to have it all spelled out ahead of time because
thats the kind of people you are working for.Know what you are voting for.
Read anything presented to you because UAL and the IAM are totally untrustworthy.


the page is here:

http://www.iam141m.org/united18.htm

08/28/02 1:35 PM



Recovery Program Term Sheet And Menu List

IAM D1STR1CT 14 1-M

The following Company proposal is made in the context of a consensual financial recovery program in order to facilitate the Company's loan guarantee application before the Air Transportation Stabilization Board and potentially avoid the need for the Company to seek the protection of the bankruptcy laws. It is essential that we reach a resolution on the terms of the recovery program prior to September 16, 2002. However, nothing in this term sheet or any related negotiations or discussions should be construed to limit in any way the Company's ability to seek additional or different modifications to the 2000-2005 Mechanics' and Maintenance Instructors and 2000-2004 Fleet Technical Instructors' collective bargaining agreements (collectively referred to as the 141M Agreements) between United Air Lines, Inc. (the Company) and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM or Union) that may be appropriate in the event of bankruptcy proceedings.

In order to achieve the level of cost reduction needed to qualify for ATSB approval, the Company must reduce its labor costs. The Company has identified that the average annual costs attributable to our 141M-represented employees must be reduced by $185 million in order to meet this objective. While the cost reduction number may be achieved in a variety of ways, the cost reduction number itself is firm.

This Recovery Program Term Sheet identifies the wage rate reductions and employee contributions to Medical and Dental insurance that would be necessary if we were to agree that the entire $185 million for 14 1 M-represented employees' cost reduction should be realized through wage reductions and employee insurance contributions. However, this Recovery Program Term Sheet also sets forth a menu of modifications to the 141-M Agreements that, if selected, would reduce the level of wage rate reductions. The IAM may select any or all of these modifications to reduce wage rate reductions so long as the combined total savings achieves the $185 million required for 141M-represented employee participation in the Recovery Program1.

_____________________________

1 Please note that the value of labor cost reductions of the various modifications will depend in part on their interdependency.

TERM SHEET REQUIREMENTS2

Effective Subject to the conditions described below, the effective date of the
Date Union’s participation in the Recovery Program will be [ ]3



Contract
Extension The amendable dates of the 141M Agreements will be extended to [ ]4 The provisions in the 141M Agreements concerning opening of negotiations, completion of negotiations and request for release will likewise be extended for [ ].

Revisions to
All Pay Factors The hourly pay rates and premiums contained in the 141 M Agreements will be revised as follows:

For all classifications, the base hourly pay rates, premium pay rates and all other pay factors (including but not limited to skill, license, line, shift, longevity pay and the Hawaii Differential) in effect on May 14, 2002 will be reduced by 10.4%.
Cancel the hourly pay rate increases scheduled for March 14, 2003 and May 1, 2004.
The base hourly pay rates will be increased by 1.5% percent each year effective on the anniversary of the Effective Date until[ ]1.
Medical and
Dental
Coverage
Contribution Modify the Medical and Dental Plans to provide that employees shall
contribute 20% of the cost of the coverage. For an employee who
chooses the HMO or Dental HMO option, if the cost of the HMO or
DHMO exceeds the cost of the PPO, the employee share of the cost
for the HMO or DHMO shall be equal to the employee share of the
cost of the PPO option plus 100% of the additional cost.

Success Sharing

Open for discussion


2The parties agree to amend the Agreements and execute such other agreements or documents as may be necessary to achieve the final terms of this Term Sheet.

3The Effective Date will be the first calendar day of the calendar month following the closing of an ATSB loan facility.

4The amendable date of the 141 M Agreements will be extended [to the date immediately before the end of the term of the ATSB loan facility.]

Scope/Job
Security

Delete Article II, Paragraphs D, E, F and G of the Mechanics'
Agreement and modify all cross-references to these provisions.
Delete Article II Paragraph E and F of the Maintenance Instructors’
and Article II, Paragraph E of the Fleet Technical Instructors'
Agreements and modify all cross-references to these provisions.
Modify Letter 94-5 of the Mechanics' Agreement
• Modify Letter 00-141 of the Maintenance Instructors Agreement.
• Modify Article W.G. of the Fleet Technical Instructors' Agreement
to eliminate the requirement for at least one Specialist where FTIs,
EPIs or PSCs are employed.
Settlement of
Grievances The Union will withdraw with prejudice all grievances challenging
reduction in force and outsourcing.

Documentation
and Approvals The Union's and the Company's participation in the Recovery
Program will be contingent on (i) full and complete documentation of
this Term Sheet in a manner acceptable to the Company and the Union
not later than _, 2002, (ii) approval by the Union, (iii) membership
ratification, (iv) such approvals by the UAL Board of Directors and
Board Committees as the Company deems necessary, and (v) a
commitment for a substantial loan facility for the Company
guaranteed in substantial part by the Air Transportation Stabilization
Board reasonably acceptable to the Company. The Company's
participation will terminate in the event the Company invokes the
protections of the Bankruptcy Code prior to the fulfillment of the
foregoing contingencies.

MENU ITEMS THAT MAY OFFSET WAGE REDUCTIONS

Holidays

The 14 1 M Agreements may be modified to provide for eight designated paid holidays, eliminating Birthday Holiday and Date of Employment Holiday (Presidents' Day for Fleet Technical Instructors' Agreement).

Benefits Retirement Benefits

Letter 02-01M, 00- 1T and 00-041 of the 141M Agreements may be modified to provide that the Defined Benefit Pension Plan participation and final average pay, if applicable, will be frozen as of January 1, 2003 through [TBD] consistent with Attachment A.
The employee contribution to the cost of retiree medical for pre and post Medicare retiree medical benefits may be modified consistent with Attachment A.
Sick Leave

All relevant Articles of the 141M Agreements may be modified as follows:

To provide that sick leave accrual shall be consistent with Attachment A.
To provide that pay during an employee's sick leave shall be consistent with Attachment A.
Occupational Sick Leave

All relevant Articles of the 141 M Agreements that provide for occupational sick or injury pay may be deleted. Sick leave would be available for occupational leave consistent with Attachment A.
All relevant Articles of the 141M Agreements may be modified to provide that pay during an employee's Occupational Sick Leave shall be consistent with Attachment A.
Vacation Modify all relevant Articles of the 14 1 M Agreements to reflect a new
accrual schedule to be capped at 5 weeks (200 hours) consistent with
Attachment A.

Productivity
and Efficiency The provisions of the 14 1 M Agreements may be modified to provide
the following improvements in productivity and efficiency:



Eliminate the payment of license and skill pay to the same employee.
Pay license pay only for required licenses.
Delete the language requiring that when there are three mechanics working together, one must be a Lead.
Eliminate the 11:1 ratio for Leads.
Delete Letter 75-1M of the Mechanics' Agreement that requires mechanics be kept at certain stations for the performance of receipt and dispatch of aircraft and further requires that mechanics be sent on field service for routine maintenance on ground equipment.
Modify the Fleet Technical Instructors' Agreement to permit the use of SAFAs for training peaks without the requirement to exhaust overtime/TDY.
Modify the Fleet Technical Instructors' Agreement to revise the Instructor/student ratio to 15:1 for hands on training.
Modify the Fleet Technical Instructors' Agreement to revise days off to be the same as management days off per year.
Modify Article V of the Fleet Technical Instructors' Agreement to permit scheduling 10-hour work days for FTIs and EPIs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[atabuy]

[

Dont forget unlimited farmouts of maintenance work,selling off any and all
of our maintenance bases,and laying off as many people as they wish below
1994 esop contract provision.This is totally unacceptable and I doubt
many will vote for it.Like I have said before if it was just money,a weeks
vacation etc. people may vote for it.The company took millions of dollars
from employees paychecks during the esop and now that the stock is practically worthless they want to throw all these people on the street.
Yea right I'm sure if UAL looks hard enough they might find a couple of people who after all that is considered might find it a GREAT DEAL !!

----------------
[/blockquote]
I did not see any information like that. Where did you see all of this and could you post a link on it.
Thanks,

 

[wts54]

You said:
This was all part of the first offer from management back in August(?). It was rejected by the union and it was not even brought to the membership for consideration. There has been no information concerning the current round of talks. Only rumors that run the full range from possible to ridiculous.

Timothy M. Thorpe
All the significant thing outlined in scope language such as those in the first ERP UAL IS STILL ASKING FOR.Dont think their not.My AGC already told
us this was why things are taking so long.Be prepared for the days to come
because I cant find one person who is ready to give UAL those language
changes to our job scope provisions.

 

[Tim Thorpe]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/17/2002 6:52:40 AM atabuy wrote:

[

Dont forget unlimited farmouts of maintenance work,selling off any and all
of our maintenance bases,and laying off as many people as they wish below
1994 esop contract provision.This is totally unacceptable and I doubt
many will vote for it.Like I have said before if it was just money,a weeks
vacation etc. people may vote for it.The company took millions of dollars
from employees paychecks during the esop and now that the stock is practically worthless they want to throw all these people on the street.
Yea right I'm sure if UAL looks hard enough they might find a couple of people who after all that is considered might find it a GREAT DEAL !!

----------------
[/blockquote]
I did not see any information like that. Where did you see all of this and could you post a link on it.
Thanks,
----------------
[/blockquote]
This was all part of the first offer from management back in August(?). It was rejected by the union and it was not even brought to the membership for consideration. There has been no information concerning the current round of talks. Only rumors that run the full range from possible to ridiculous.

 

[wts54]

spacewaitress you said:
Also, is anyone getting nervous among the IAM represented employees. Besides mastermechanic, who seems willing to sacrifice his and other's careers for the sake of principle, I'm really wondering what the mind set is of other members, and also some rationale that explains it.

Mine is simple. The company seems to be reasonably fair on the current proposal, so I'm willing to swallow the bitter pill and support it. The past is past and I'm hopeful and willing to work towards a future. We all deserve that.

The company is fair about your proposal as far as your concerned and thats
good news for your group.I suspect if UAL had said they wantto bring in
3 or 4 thousand non union scabs to work those trips the layed off f/a's
would have worked you would be singing a different tune.Why is it okay for
UAL to do that to us and not everybody else??People I work with are reasonable and will respond to a reasonable proposal.Not a suicide pact.
As far as principle is concerned you have been enjoying the fruits of our
principles everytime you fly a a/c we made damn sure was safe for you and others to ride in.My guiding principle here is would I put my mother or
grandaughter on this plane? If the answer is yes you get to fly if not no
one gets aboard till it is.
Sometimes principle is all you have in this world even if some maintenance
foreman (management) says its good to go.
I dont want to be out of a job either but like I said in a earlier post I'm
not going to accept that every bit of maint.is going to be farmed out.Its just that simple.
I think Pancho Villa said Thats its better to die on your feet than live on your knees.Yes we all deserve a bright future or is that only for some people? Have a great day
p.s.My gut feeling is that UAL may try to merge with U and have us pay for it through concessions,and with the help of a bankruptcy court.I believe
bankruptcy is coming anyway to achieve those goals they couldnt do a couple of years ago because of antitrust concerns.I also feel the mechanics are being setup for the blame if we dontgo along with the plan.Just a thought.

 

[wts54]

PineyBob,
Joining a union was a condition of employment here at UAL and this is
my first exposure to such a situation,but I learned quickly what they are about make no mistake about that.On the other hand there is a reason why
unions are on this property.If UAL was such a great and benevolent employer
we would have no need for them(unions) as was the case of my last employer.
I actually had as many benefits as I have at UAL plus some things money
cant buy.
Right now the company contractually can layoff the mechanics till 1994
seniority why dont they do that now and see after that is done what else is required?As to receive and dispatch that everybody else who is not in aircraft maintenance and know what it is best for the mechanics the company
has had years to come up with a plan to take that back from us gradually
station at a time so no big loss would be suffered.Now UAL wants a complete
blank check to do what they want when they want at the wage they want to pay
and to hell with the people who built this company and payed for it with the esop.Everytime UAL gives a contract to any group it seems as though they come up with some scheme to get what they couldnt get at the bargaining table.Right now our esop stock is practically worthless because
UAL,IAM,ALPA and others waited to exercise their so called fiduciary duty
to the esop stockholders after the stock was a $1.50 a share.Thats a quite a
interesting situation.I think UAL never had any intentions of letting us
enjoy our contract,or the esop stock which if they had exercised their
fiduciary responsibilities we might have had 70-90k in cash instead of just
worthless paper and two board seats that never did squat in the first place.
You think people are pizzed?You dont know the half of it my friend.
Like Ive said before even with all that considered and the daily crap
that goes on I think most people will support proposals that will result
in some losses but not farming out the whole department.If UAL insists on that blank check then they might as well file chapter 11 now because the
5000 or people they want to layoff will vote no what would you expect them
to do?

Alea iacta est-the die is cast

 

[Tim Thorpe]

WTS54 I am a mechanic at UAL. Relax man I am on your side. I read the proposal from last September. It was not a serious offer and was totally unacceptable. I was just telling that other person that we have no knowledge of the current discussions. I have seen nothing in writing from either the union or the company. I have heard all the same rumors that you have. If the offer has not changed since September then the company has made their choice and it is bankruptcy. I suspect however that the union is playing with our emotions to try and sell a different but still pretty rotten deal. We all know we are going to get screwed somehow. The union has to sell whatever they bring back and they will use that Sept. deal to say look how much better we did. Remember alot of what you hear is what the union wants you to hear. I am trying not to get to excited until I see it in writing. Don't let the people on this board goad you into ranting and raving like they have some of the others. It's not worth it.

 

[wts54]

Tim,we agree then if the first offer is what they
want then the die is cast.Remember the movie
'Outlaw Josie Wales'? I will never forget in the
end his discussion with 'Ten Bears'.Basically I am
here and UAL can choose life or the other they will
decide their fate.

 

[atabuy]

wts54, and the rest of our mechanic brothers,

I believe all of the proposals were part of a negotiation point from management.
All of the (open for discussion) points were in lieu of actual money out of pocket.

For some reason you all believe the company and union are out to screw mechanics. I don't see that at all.
With every union job we all live and die by seniority. First in is the last to go.
If Ual had not wanted to have more mechanics when things were going good, they would have never opened Indy up. What we have here now is a bad situation Ual has found itself in. Partly bad decisions by management and partly the recession and, the catylist for it, 9/11.
Now Ual needs to trim costs, and the easiest way has always been to cut employees. They are retiring aircraft to accomplish this. Without the heavy maint. being done on these airplanes they can lay off more mechanics.

From the bean counters point of view, 1,850 jobs could get Ual where we need to be, to attain the 185 million a year the mechanics would have to give up. This would be that many jobs we would lose for 5 years or more.
If you were on the bottom, how would you feel?
I think through other concessions we can attain the numbers we need to keep some of those jobs. Not all, but some.
It is really up to everyone how the group proceeds. Sacrifice a little for the good of all, or take what's yours by right and not worry about the junior guy.
That latter seems to be the sentiment about all other jobs. I think someone said we only need 5 groups to keep Ual running and the rest are negotiable.
I think saving yourself at the risk to others is the biggest problem Ual has. Our culture does not include all as equal partners. It is a me me me culture. Some of these attitudes are the same as what managements were, and the difference was; they had the last word on how they proceeded.
I see no difference.
What we don't know right now is what is being negotiated on our behalf. The unions try to save and create more jobs, and the company tries to work as efficenlty as possible. I imagine we will see the end product sometime this week. Time is running out.
Maybe we should all be thinking of ways to save as many jobs as possible by being an asset to the company instead of a liability.
Let's make Ual healthy again to bring back all the people who will be laid off.
You all have a choice of looking at the glass your own way, but half full has always worked way better for me.
Good luck to us all.

 

[UAL777flyer]

The whole union/senior mgmt relationship in this industry is the problem. It was the case here at UA, at least up until Tilton arrived. There was no leadership at UA. We all know the numerous reasons for that. But labor leadership is a problem too. They actively promote the adversarial relationship because that is the only way to get themselves leverage and push their own agenda. However, as we continue to see, union leadership is good at putting out disinformation and half-truths to their members to get support for their position. That's one reason I've always wondered why the IAM is so adamantly against members attending contract negotiations. The IAM is a corporation unto itself. As such, many times their goal is to do what's best for IAM National, and not necessarily the IAM members at any one airline. It's a shame because the ones who get screwed are the union members at that airline who probably don't trust their senior leaders AND their union membership. That is why the situation at UA is very dicey. The IAM members probably haven't seen enough from Tilton to throw their total trust/support behind him. And their are large pockets of members who have no trust in the IAM leadership. That creates the possibility for disaster when a T/A comes up for a vote because you don't know who to believe.

But let's face it, without an adversarial relationship, union leadership becomes largely irrelevant. So 9 times out of 10, union leaders are going to do whatever they can to promote and feed that relationship publicly. And that's fine, so long as the spirit of cooperation exists behind the scenes. That's the key. Let them posture all they want in the press to give the appearance of having leverage. But behind the scenes, hopefully everyone's on the same page. I think that's finally the case at UA.