New CS Rules?
- Thread starter Salty Dog
- Start date
Overspeed
Veteran
- Jun 27, 2011
- 3,245
- 1,065
Change of Shift - CS
I heard the same thing. Draft is being circulated with management and then will discuss with union. Supposed to be almost exactly like LUS/IAM policy and will be discussed with all TWU locals. Since AA CS isn't contractual company can implement without a vote by membership.
I heard the same thing. Draft is being circulated with management and then will discuss with union. Supposed to be almost exactly like LUS/IAM policy and will be discussed with all TWU locals. Since AA CS isn't contractual company can implement without a vote by membership.
enough already
Veteran
- Jan 8, 2003
- 659
- 249
Something we've gotten used to over the years.....Overspeed said:
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
Kinda like the TWU and IAM implementing the association without a vote by the membership. Oh, right, the NMB implemented it even though the TWU said there would be a vote.Overspeed said:
Anyways, the CS policy will be implemented and those who work endless back to back doubles will feel the pain the most.
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
SO why do you think the policy is changing? It is because there are those who abuse the system. But having said this, I blame those who allow the abuse by some instead of disciplining them individually.AANOTOK said:
Overspeed
Veteran
- Jun 27, 2011
- 3,245
- 1,065
MetalMover and 1AA,
Big stretch there. The Association was an NMB determination and governed under RLA rules. The CS policy has not historically ever been contractual at AA and never subject negotiations and membership vote. Any CS rules we voted on were for the purpose of having our locals negotiate a CS policy. Now could the locals grieve that the CS policy is an LOA and cannot be changed unless mutually agreed upon by the membership? Possibly. Could the locals argue that policy letters/agreements are to be treated as contractual would be another good argument. If local LOAs were not contractual - like CS policies - then why did AA specifically write a LOA in the current CBA to remove certain letters? The local has some work to do. Come on 591!!! Time to win one for the membership!!!
Big stretch there. The Association was an NMB determination and governed under RLA rules. The CS policy has not historically ever been contractual at AA and never subject negotiations and membership vote. Any CS rules we voted on were for the purpose of having our locals negotiate a CS policy. Now could the locals grieve that the CS policy is an LOA and cannot be changed unless mutually agreed upon by the membership? Possibly. Could the locals argue that policy letters/agreements are to be treated as contractual would be another good argument. If local LOAs were not contractual - like CS policies - then why did AA specifically write a LOA in the current CBA to remove certain letters? The local has some work to do. Come on 591!!! Time to win one for the membership!!!
Sorry but the union lied and led us to believe we had a choice. They knew we would not have a say but did not want to upset the fence sitters. I guess question #5 on the Q&A was a lie. More deception. The company is going to hold the new CS rules hostage until negotiations start. Watch the company agree to make changes in lieu of another giveback. TWU, so predictable.Overspeed said:
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
I find it funny that the pending CS policy change is creating quite a fuss on the floor. I am seeing more complaining and tears shed than I ever did when concessions were being forced down our throats.
