Outsourcing Commences

[diogenes]

http://www.usairways.com/employment/


A few points.

Many of the CSM's in these stations try to sooth the rank & file prior to the vote by saying the company "may" outsource these stations, and it could take quite a while for outsourcing to occur. Sadly, many employees believed them.

More odious, the CWA and IAM said the same thing. One CWA official actually told the membership that the IAM had sold out their members to outsourcing, while the CWA membership had vital skills that U needed, and thus, were protected.

Apparently, the dues structure took precedence over fully informing the membership.

Considerable pressure was applied by the employees to the company and their unions for some sort of timeframe for outsourcing, to no avail.

For these stations, the answer is soon.

And so far, my cynicism regarding things U cannot keep pace with reality.

 

[700UW]

Neither IAM group came to an agreement with the company, the offers that were voted in were not tentative agreements, there were "Final Offers".

The main sticking point for the Mechanic and Related group was that the Negotiating Committee could not agree to something that gave up 50% of the jobs.

The company never wanted a deal with the M&R group, the company wanted what they wanted and how they wanted it, it is plain and simple and I am speaking from first hand experience.

And I find it ironic that a CWA member would tell its members that the IAM sold their members out to outsourcing, while the CWA Negotiating Committee agreed to outsource Reservations, Baggage Call Center and Dividend Miles, while niethet IAM group could reach a T/A since it involved so much outsourcing.

And how could the dues structure matter when it involved losing 50% of the membership?

I mean come on and realistically think about what you said.

 

[umech]

[quote=700UW,Feb 6 2005, 01:37 PM

700uw; the company took 50% of the membership and cut wages and benifits because the union refused to negociate the 50% job cuts GET IT.
THE UNION SHOULD HAVE NEGOCIATED THE ABOLISHMENT OF UTILITY CLASSIFICATION.

THE FARM OUT OF Q CKS

THE FARM OUT OF ALL SHOPS

BUT THE IAM REFUSE TO BARTER AND THE COMPANY TOOK IT ALL.

AND GUESS WHAT PAL , BECAUSE OF THE MESS THE IAM GOT US IN TO (SO THEY KEEP MORE DUES) ANOTHER ROUND OF CONCESSIONS IS COMING....

IAM :down:

 

[700UW]

The IAM met with company 4 days a week since 11/2/04 in order to reach a tentative agreement.

The company was never serious in reaching a deal, they stonewalled every information request and when the IAM gave them a package worth $282,000,000 a year the company refused. I was there, were you?

They the union represents all its members, a union does not negotiate to eliminate a classification in order to try and save others, it tries to spread the cuts evenly.

And when will you understand that laying off a utility person will not save a mechanic nor increase the pay.

The company did not take it all, 50% of the Q-checks are in-house as all the C-Checks and all the S-Checks on the A320 family.

And the membership gave it to the company by not having the gonads to vote it down.

But I guess you would rather lay blame at the IAM instead of yourself as you are the IAM along with the rest of your coworkers.

 

[livingontheedge]

Question.....the customer service agent and fleet services agent openings that are posted on the hub....are these the outsourced positions? Are they not outsourcing to an outside vendor?

 

[diogenes]

700UW,

You need to understand something about me. I support the concept of union with all of my heart, and I believe the working man needs one now more than any time since the 20's and 30's.

But I don't give blind faith to God or country, or anything else.

Sure, the IAM did not give a recommendation on the vote, and technically, it was a final offer. But while they may not have HAD to give a recommendation, there was nothing stopping them from doing so. If the final offer was so unpalatable, they could have recommended a 'NO' vote. If the membership voted 'YES' anyway, THEN it's all on the membership.

In point of fact, they straddled the fence, and thus are in part, culpable.

And anybody with an IQ north of room temperature, that went to any of the informational meetings, knew the IAM wanted this deal to pass - half a loaf is better than none. As one AGC put it, when asked how soon would the company come back for even more, "Until the membership decides the job is a piece of s&*t, and votes it down."


livingontheedge,

It left me scratching my head, too. For instance CHS is one of the cities the company and IAM-Fleet agreed could be outsourced.

And yet, U appears to be the company doing the hiring, according to the website, for fleet positions in CHS.

I'm guessing, at the end of the day, an affiliate like PSA will will do the ground handling in CHS. U will do all of the grunt work (hiring, training,background checks), and turn the employees over to PSA.

FWIW, I am reliably informed that U ran an ad for the fleet and c/s positions in the Wilmington (NC) paper.

 

[700UW]

Dio,

I can't speak for Fleet, but for M&R the GCs were told not to give a yea or nay by the District President, the decision to send the final offers to a vote was done at a higher level then the district.

But the membership are adults with a brain, they are certainly capable of making an educated decision and ask any questions of the AGCs or GCs or the rep in charge of the ratification at the respective stations.

The union has lost it fight and that is because the membership is weak and there is no support for the leadership, the leadership asked for a strike vote, you don't want to know the results of that vote.

As long as the company is succesful at divide and conquer the membership will always be on the losing side.

 

[diogenes]

700UW,

All true, and very sad.

I have no doubt that the decision to put the offer out for a vote was decided at the international level.

How transparent was that process to the membership? Does the average member care about local, district or international differences, issues or policies? All they know is IAM - the local, district and international is not broken out on his paycheck.

And, when he calls the local, he does not want to hear "that is a district issue." When he goes to a district function, he does not want to hear, "Oh, the local should handle that."

He wants, and the IAM owes him, a straight answer.

Now, I am no genius, but I catch on pretty good. And I have seen, and you have seen, the local/district/international tango many times. Not to mention the fleet service vs. M&R fiasco.

I will grant you the membership is no picnic. But which comes first, great membership or great leadership, is easy.

The first four letters in leadership is LEAD.

 

[700UW]

But in order to have great leadership, you need a strong membership, leadership does start at the top, but if they get no support they are just wasting their time.

But there is a difference, the local lodge is not responsible for contract adminstration, that is the district responsiblity, there are determinations of responsiblities, I dont want it to sound like a copout.

Trust me I experienced it first hand for the past few months.

 

[Phantom Fixer]

But in order to have great leadership, you need a strong membership, leadership does start at the top, but if they get no support they are just wasting their time.

But there is a difference, the local lodge is not responsible for contract adminstration, that is the district responsiblity, there are determinations of responsiblities, I dont want it to sound like a copout.

Trust me I experienced it first hand for the past few months.

[post="245919"][/post]​

What a bucnch of bunk this is.

There goes my people...I guess I should find out where they are going so I can lead them.

700...Face it dude , The IAM was interested in two things in this situation.

(1) Keeping as many dues rolling in as possible ( Primary Function)
(2) Saving as many M&R jobs as possible in PIT...so it would not align itself with those in PHL , which would have in turn jeopardized the primary concern in item 1.

BTW...regarding the "Strike Authorization" Yes, we wold like to see those numbers...and I for one feel like my dues has earned myself and my co-workers the right to know those results.

 

[700UW]

Phantom you are wrong,

The IAM was trying to keep as many jobs as possible, isn't that what a union is all about?

And as far as saving PIT you could not be more wrong. The makeup of the Negotiating Committee was

Four from CLT
Two from PIT
One from PHL
The district president and a grand lodge rep.

So with the committee having four reps from CLT, please explain to me how their goal was to save PIT?

GO ask your GC for the strike vote.

 

[Phantom Fixer]

Bunk again,

The IAM knew how they had to cater to things to get the vote that they needed to insure the dues coming in....and PIT was a major factor regardless if CLT had 100 negotiators and PIT had 1. It was an act of balance to insure their needs..not the majorities or what would have made the most long term sense for the companies actual survival.

..and I'm not asking anyone but you what the vote count was. You are the resident paper hanger for the IAM here...so lets see what you have for facts on the subject for a change. I'm well aware of the party line you spout...lets see some real numbers and this discussion can end here for my part.

 

[fanlube]

With leadership like this the membership never had a chance!! " I wish I could vote no" said Frank Schifano President of local lodge 1976 quoted from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette January 11, 2005>

 

[700UW]

The numbers will not be made public on a web site, you know how to contact me if you want to know.

 

[wrencher9]

Here is the question out there - Why did we receive all the information about anything from the media first? With denial from the Locals with the Locals following up with they misunderstood what was asked was correct and the media reported it correctly. The next big problem was the Transformation Document that is out there and the Locals stated that we are awaiting the media to put it out because it is a Company presentation. But hear is the catch : The Union states don't beleive what is stated until you receive it from the IAMAW. But the catch is we are always are a day late and a dollar short on being on top of information distubution in the correct form to the membership. I am a long time supporter of the IAMAW but during this fiasco I am stating I am ashamed of what the International, District and Local has represented to the membership. This is truely a sad day in Unionism by far. And the only Fighting Machinist in the IAMAW are amongst themselves. Why iis there so many ways of leaving the Company such as Voluntary Furlough, Retirement before March 1, 2005, Voluntary quit and Involuntary Furlough ; I hope that is all. But I am so misquided by what is what, because it is not clearly put to paper anywhere and the different ways of doing the different methods that one may choose to go out.Where is the paperwork that is needed to do some the method for the tme lines are short and around the corner. The time limits are established but where is the documentation spelling everthing out located.